8.1 [CSBirds] Re: [CSBirds] Tuolomne County
Birds
Lesser Nighthawks have been seen along
Rock River Rd. in TUO many times.
They nest in STA very near TUO.
Jim Gain
8.3 [SFBirds ] Re: [SFBirds] Northern Parula
kaetsdz@aol.com wrote:
>
> Although Parula-less during my weekend searching, I did
locate a very
> interesting nest in NOPA territory, and I'm hoping some
of you Parula-
> watchers will take a look at it and offer opinions. It is
located in
> the cypress adjacent to the two bottlebrush trees just north
of the
> first speed bump. From the path leading to the fishing beach
just
> below these trees, note the metal pole to the left of the
cypress
> trunk. The nest is approx. 4 feet behind that pole, and
almost
> perfectly level with the top of the pole. It is partially
suspended
> from branches above and also supported by a horizontal branch
below.
> It appeared to me to be contructed mainly of lichen/moss,
although
> the rather large bits of white paper on the outer layer
obscure that
> at first glance. Also included are some feathers and other
odds and
> ends. Although rather an odd shape, it could certainly fit
the
> description of "a basketlike cup with an opening near
the top" (Dunn
> & Garrett).
>
> Also, according to D&G, nests found in Calif. have been
constructed
> of lichen (Ramalina reticulata), and they indicate that
when
> preferred materials are absent, a variety of materials are
used.
> Peterson's Western Birds' Nests also notes that when preferred
lichen
> or Spanish moss is not available, nests are "extremely
varied".
>
Rich and I easily found Kathy's nest this
morning. After doing a little
research, I can think of no plausible alternative other than
this being the
nest of a Northern Parula. I'd love to hear alternative explanations...
8.3 [SFBirds] Nest and tail-less parula
I met Rich shortly after 7:00 this
morning and he had already refound
Kathy's nest, which Rich has described in some detail and I photographed
in
situ. The nest appears to have fallen from its original location
and is
clearly no longer in use. After Rich and I found the nest, Rich
left for
work and I more or less immediately found a heavily-molting parula
after the
male, probably the bird below, sang once.
"A small warbler-like bird notably missing
its entire tail. The upper parts
were slate gray and the back had a well-defined triangle of green
on it.
The face had two white crescents above and below the dark eye
eye, and the
mandible was substantially if not entirely yellow, with some
bleeding onto
the maxilla. The throat was fairly bright yellow, bordered below
by a slate
gray band running the width of the upper breast.
The breast was yellow and the belly and undertail
coverts were white,
possibly with a few chestnut features just below the gray breast
band. The
wing feathers were dark, possibly tinged slightly brown. The
wing feathers
had dark edges other than the tertials which were edged pale
and there were
two well-defined wing bars. While the body feathers appeared
to be in molt,
the wing feathers were crisp and showed little if any evidence
of wear or
molt."
The easiest way to find one or both of the
birds is to listen for their call
note. Unlike the middle of July when the pair of parulas were
the only
neotropical migrants in the area (and thus, any warbler-like
chip was almost
certainly originating from one of the birds), at least one Wilson's
Warbler
has moved into the area, thus complicating the matter a bit.
Fortunately,
the chip notes from a WIWA are quite a bit different from that
of a NOPA,
though this might be difficult to differentiate for some birders.
I will attempt to collect the nest tomorrow,
assuming that I can figure out
how to get into the tree to effect collection. :-| I would assume
that CAS
would be interested in the first nesting record for the county
and will
photograph the nest after collection before it is presented
8.7 [CVBirds] Lesser Nighthawks in TUO
In response to Mark Eaton's comment
about a possible first Tuolumne County
(TUO) record for Lesser Nighthawk, Jim Gain mentioned briefly
that such was not
the case. More specifically, Lesser Nighthawks are regularly
found in extreme
western TUO near the border with Stanislaus County (STA). They
have
historically nested (and probably still do) in TUO between Hwy
120 and the
Stanislaus River just east of Tulloch Rd. (the road from Hwy
120 to the south
shore of Tulloch Lake) and probably other nearby locations. They
should be
looked for along Rock River Rd. near where it enters TUO and
along Hwy 120
where it enters TUO just up slope from Knights Ferry. Lesser
Nighthawks are
quite common along Willms and Cooperstown roads in extreme eastern
STA where
they nest in dry washes associated with Dry Creek and its tributaries.
Were
public access available in nearby TUO they would almost certainly
be found
nesting along these same creek beds in that county as well.
The location Jon Winter mentioned in his 8/4
reply, Hwy 4 near Dunton Rd., is
in extreme northern STA and is actually much closer to Calaveras
County (CLV)
than to TUO. I would be interested if anyone knows of locations
where Lesser
Nighthawk is regularly found in CLV. There seems to be suitable
nesting habitat
in the Jenny Lind area and along the low elevation portions of
Hwy 26.
Harold Reeve
8.10 [SFBirds] Parula (?) nest collected
With Debi's help, I collected the
putative parula nest today. I'll show it
at the SFFO meeting on the 24th. In the interim, one common nesting
species
in SF has been raised as a possibility; Bushtit. Do we have any
nest
experts out there?
8.15 [SFBirds] Re: [SFBirds] Not rare, but weird sighting
BeccaFreed@aol.com wrote:
>
> I just saw a kingfisher fly over Second and Bryant St. This
a first
> for my "office list."
>
I think they fish in the canal which runs
just south of PacBell park. It
might even be the same bird which is seen with some regularly
at Heron's
Head and fishes at the outflow of the power plant.
8.18 Re: [pen-bird] Tunitas Creek Mouth
Access
On Saturday, August 18, 2001, at 09:33
PM, Mark W. Eaton wrote:
> BTW, is it possible to get down from
the Hwy. 1 bridge and, if so,
> how does
> on accomplish this? Apologies if this is common knowledge...
Not common knowledge at all!
Park along the south side of Tunitas Creek
Road. Drop down the
embankment and head around the west side of the corral, and
then into a concrete culvert. You'll find a small trail here
that winds down under the bridge and out towards the creek mouth.
Rubber boots are strongly recommended. If
the water level's
right and nothing's backed up, you can hop out to the mouth
without getting wet, but that's not usually the case.
Cheers,
Adam Winer
San Mateo, CA
8.21 [SFBirds] GGRO observations
Prairie Falcon, Bald and Golden Eagle, all juveniles...
Not sure if any made it into SF...
8.22 [SFBirds] Re: [SFBirds] Sutro Heights
Park
myra ulvang wrote:
>
> Osprey flew north over park carrying plant
> matter-(nesting material?)
Osprey reuse and continue to enlarge their
nests over a period of years,
which is why some of them get as large as they do. In temperate
regions,
nesting is between April and June and apparently they don't double
clutch.
Also, both sexes build (enlarge?) the nest, although no reference
I have
indicates nest building/enlargement other than during the nesting
season.
Carry sticks for the heck of it? :-)
8.26 Sooty Tern, Cordell Bank, MRN
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Compare these images with a photo of a known Sooty Tern I photographed near the Dry Tortugas this April:
8.27 [pen-bird] San Mateo Coast sightings
My friend Steve Gerstle and I birded
the San Mateo coast without much
success finding shorebirds today. However, we did have five MARBLED
MURRELETS at the turnout immediately west of Pescadero Road,
just south of
the Pescadero Beach parking lot. Also, there was a BRANT at Pescadero
Marsh.
8.27 [SFBirds] Ocean Beach Late PM
My friend Steve Gerstle and I stopped
at Ocean Beach on the way back from
birding down south. Despite the late afternoon sun and terrible
glare, we
had no less than 53 SABINE'S GULLS, many just beyond the breakers.
Other
birds of interest were about 6-8 Sterna terns that I would have
called
ARCTIC TERNS were I on a boat farther from shore (head projecting
just
beyond the wrist on the wings and seemingly long-bodied and short-headed),
but couldn't get any detail on the wings in the glare. Also,
there were two
probable PARASITIC JAEGERS chasing terns of unidentified species.
Yes,
there were also at least a dozen ELEGANT TERNS as well for a
nice comparison
and reality check.
Given the glare out there, who knows what else there was?!
BTW, where are the Sooty Shearwaters?
8.31 Common Greenshank,
Mouth of the Mad River, HUM
Luke Cole, Gerry Weinberger, Eric
Preston and myself arose from our modest accommodations at 6:00
and departed promptly at 6:30 for the mouth of the Mad River,
where a COMMON GREENSHANK (Tringa nebularia) had been
found on the 27th of August. We headed immediately for the west
end of School Street in McKinleyville which had been the nexus
of the sightings over the previous few days. There were several
Tringa sandpipers about 200 yards upstream, but all appeared
to be Greater Yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca) or Lesser
Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes).
At 6:50, Luke noticed three Tringa sandpipers flying downstream and casually mentioned that we "should not let the bird fly past us". All of us scanned the three birds in flight and more or less immediately exclaimed "There's the bird!" as one of the three birds showed a prominent white vee heading from the white rump well up the back. Somewhat to our dismay, all three birds flew downstream around the bend and out of sight .
We immediately returned to the car and headed to the end of Ocean and Hiller and worked our way down to the east bank of the Mad River. We scanned at that point in both directions without success, and started heading back upstream along the east bank. Our pace quickened when we noticed Larry Sansone waving his arms. After about 400 yards, we arrived across from a sandbar with several Tringa sandpipers on it. The COMMON GREENSHANK was relatively easy to pick out from the melanoleuca and Lesser Yellowlegs and we were able to spend most of the next hour with sumptuous scope views of the bird.
"An obvious Tringa sandpiper quite similar to the surrounding melanoleuca Yellowlegs, but with numerous differences on closer inspection. The bill was prominently two-toned, being grayish basally and one shade darker distally with a rather abrupt transition halfway in between. The base of the bill appeared to be slightly stouter that that of a Greater Yellowlegs. The eye had a fine white eye ring which appeared to be complete and there was relatively well-defined eye line between the eye and the bill. The supercilium was quite white and pronounced in front of the eye, but indistinct behind the eye. Both supercilia met at the culmen separated by just the finest of a dark vee.
The crown, nape and back were strongly streaked dark, with the dark becoming more brownish halfway down the back, evident when the bird was preening. Curiously, the back of the neck and the nape seemed to be split with somewhat indistinct median stripe, repeatedly visible during preening. The auriculars and side of the neck were also strongly streaked, with the center of the chin and throat pale. As the streaking on the side of the throat led to the upper breast, it appeared to become slightly browner. The throat appeared to have a the slightest of dingy bands in the region of the crop, though this was not visible in all postures.
The belly and undertail coverts were gleaming white. The legs of the bird were dingy yellowish green or just dingy green, depending on illumination, contrasting markedly with the bright yellow legs of Greater Yellowlegs and Lesser Yellowlegs, with black nails. The upper parts differed noticeably from the surrounding Greater Yellowlegs. Whereas the upper parts of the Greater Yellowlegs were grayish and noticeably spotted, the upper parts of this bird were distinctly browner, contrasting noticeably with the more grayish head and neck. Also, none of the feathering on the upper parts were spotted.
Rather, the mantle feathers were uniformly streaked, browner than the streaking on the nape of the bird. The patterning of the feathers on the scapulars was exquisite. The feather edges were pale buff and the centers were mostly brown, with the the subterminal regions of the outer webs one shade darker than the inner webs. Some scapular feathers showed one or two distinct buff bars on the outer webs, though this was not consistent from feather to feather in the same tract or even side to side.
The wing coverts were similarly covered but lacked the darker subterminal regions. Rather, the buffy edges were scalloped dark. The tertials were perhaps one shade lighter than the coverts and scapulars, and showed no darkening in the in the subterminal region. The pale edges of the tertials were marked by darker scalloping, more distinct than the wing coverts, contrasting markedly with the patterning on a Greater Yellowlegs. The primaries appeared uniformly dark. The underwing was gleaming white, with the underwing coverts delicately spotted.
The tail of the bird was mostly white, barred dark with four or five relatively thin dark bands. The rump was gleaming white, with a prominent white vee extending from the rump well up the back of the bird.
In flight, the bird appeared slightly bulkier that the other Greater Yellowlegs, but this was not nearly as evident during extended observations on the shore. In fact, there were little apparent size differences other than the aforementioned bill thickness when the bird was not in flight.
The bird fed often, appearing to catch and eat several small mollusks, which were consumed and the shells evacuated at some later point. The bird was also observed to feed in a manner reminiscent of an American Avocet, i.e. walking with its head in the water working its bill to and fro near the surface apparently trying to scoop up food of some sort. The bird vocalized once in conjunction with like vocalizations from Greater Yellowlegs; to my ear, there was little difference between the two."
No regularly occurring Tringa in the lower 48 has a white vee extending up the back, so we must go farther afield in order to identify this species. The only possible Tringa sandpipers are Common Redshank (Tringa totanus) and Spotted Redshank (Tringa erythropus), Common Greenshank, Marsh Sandpiper (Tringa stagnatilis) and Spotted Greenshank (Tringa guttifer). Both Redshanks can be eliminated by leg color. Marsh Sandpiper might be considered, but is sized as a Lesser Yellowlegs and appears even slighter and can be eliminated solely on size comparison with the immediate Greater Yellowlegs in the area.
Spotted Greenshank requires some discussion. Spotted Greenshank is slightly smaller than Common Greenshank, and implicitly, Greater Yellowlegs, so this is not particularly helpful. Spotted Greenshank has more yellowish legs with markedly short tibia rather than the dull greenish-yellow legs of a Common Greenshank, so leg color is better for Common Greenshank. Spotted Greenshank has a straighter bill in contrast with the heavier, slightly upturned bill of Common Greenshank, which favors Common Greenshank. The underwing coverts on Spotted Greenshank are pure white while they are barred faintly brown on Common Greenshank, which favors Common Greenshank. Finally, the voice of Spotted Greenshank is described as a piercing 'keyew', in marked contrast to the 'teu-teu-teu' of Common Greenshank, again favoring Common Greenshank. In short, all useful field marks favor COMMON GREENSHANK.
You can contact me via email.