14 replies to this topic

[Photgog2]

This was taken Apr 15, 12.. about 40 miles east of Phoenix.

This is a Flycatcher, maybe a Cordilleran Flycatcher. The range of Pacific-sloped is challenged here and eye ring seems extended to the rear.

Confirmations or other ID's welcome.

Fraser


 Bird2.jpg   70.08K   56 downloads  Bird1.jpg   92.38K   49 downloads

[Parula]

i am not sure but i think gray flycatcher

[JimBob]

The first looks like a Gray Flycatcher to me. . . the second doesn't. Were these the same birds?

[Photgog2]

These are not the same birds, Well they may be the same but were photographed in the same general area (50 yards) and about 20 minutes apart or so.

Gray seemed a possibility but the first bird especially has an extended eyering to the rear, while my Sibley's shows a Gray with a consistent size eyering all around. Going to be a tough on to ID, I realize.

Fraser

[Photgog2]

i am not sure but i think gray flycatcher

We have Gray's around here frequently and you may be correct, just take another look at the eyering please.

Fraser

[Photgog2]

Here is a picture of a Gray from here last year, note the limited eyering. This ID was additionally confirmed by the tail bobbing observed on this bird.

Fraser

 Gray.jpg   161.67K   7 downloads

[guy_incognito]

Not sure I can give a positive ID on this one, but will just say that I do not think it is a Gray. The eyering, primary projection length, and overall head shape don't seem to match with Gray Flycatcher. Also, based on the few Gray's that I've seen, the downward tail wag tends to be a good field ID mark.

The eyering does look a bit elongated, favoring Cordilleran/Pacific-slope, but there is large amount of variability amongst the empids with such marks. Color reproduction in photos is tough, but Cordilleran (even more so than Pacific-slope) generally is more yellowish than the other empids, but this doesn't seem to show on your bird.

So unfortunately, I am unsure which empid you have, but I think the Gray is less likely than the other possibilities.

[guy_incognito]

Just for comparison sake, here are a few Gray's that I've photographed:





Note the even concentric eyering, short primary projection, relatively long bill, and a more rounded head shape.

[Photgog2]

Thanks Guy_incognito, your Gray's show the eye ring to have a consistent width as I expect in this bird.

As we are posting photo references, here is a Pacific-slope Flycatcher that is from Southern San Diego.

Pacific-slope Flycatcher because the Cordilleran is not an option because of range. Note the eye ring, not concentric.

Fraser

 PSFlycatcherm.jpg   165.73K   8 downloads

[guy_incognito]

Yeah, that is nice photo representation of a Pacific-slope.

The structure and eyering on yours most suggests Pacific-slope/Cordilleran (Cordilleran being more likely by location), but I just wish it was more colorful. I've never seen a Dusky, but based off of pictures I've seen I think it would be a good candidate as well. The proportions of this bird don't look right for a Hammond's, which has a small dark bill, and longer primary projection.

I'd love to hear others input on these empids. Many people will say that you need to have the bird vocalize to be sure on the ID, but I am not yet ready to abandon a reasoned attempt to photo ID a bird that seems to fit well.

For more comparison pics, here is a bird I called a Pacific-slope Flycatcher:



And here is one that I called a Hammond's, since it shows fairly classic field marks:

[Photgog]

Yeah, that is nice photo representation of a Pacific-slope.

The structure and eyering on yours most suggests Pacific-slope/Cordilleran (Cordilleran being more likely by location), but I just wish it was more colorful. I've never seen a Dusky, but based off of pictures I've seen I think it would be a good candidate as well. The proportions of this bird don't look right for a Hammond's, which has a small dark bill, and longer primary projection.

I'd love to hear others input on these empids. Many people will say that you need to have the bird vocalize to be sure on the ID, but I am not yet ready to abandon a reasoned attempt to photo ID a bird that seems to fit well.

For more comparison pics, here is a bird I called a Pacific-slope Flycatcher:



And here is one that I called a Hammond's, since it shows fairly classic field marks:

Ok... I don't quite understand... "suggests Pacific-slope/Cordilleran (Cordilleran being more likely by location),"

As this area in Southern San Diego seems to be out of the area for Cordilleran, at least from Sibley's range charts. Maybe there are other better charts. The exact area was Cabrillo National Monument at the water drip. You can't go any further west without getting in the water and you can go just a bit further south but you have to go east to go further south. I thought that was out of range for the Cordilleran.

And you are right... we would like additional input in this thread, because these are difficult birds to ID... any help will be appreciated.

Fraser

[guy_incognito]

Sorry for the confusion. In my mind I had moved on, and was then referring to your original bird, which should be Cordilleran by range.

[Photgog]

Ah... Yes I agree too... the First bird should be Cordilleran Flycatcher.

Fraser

[guy_incognito]

Ah... Yes I agree too... the First bird should be Cordilleran Flycatcher.

Fraser

Just to clarify since I noticed it could be confusing; on your original post I unfortunately still do not feel confident with an ID. What I meant to say in my last point is that IF it is Cordilleran/Pacific-slope, then it should be a Cordilleran by range.

Where is the flycatcher expert?

[Photgog]

Yes... we are understanding here. The first bird has not been confirmed as a Cordilleran although we agree that if it is a Pacific-slope/Cordilleran group... it is Cordilleran. But we can't get even a confirmation that this in not a Gray, even though the photos fairly well document that.

At least in my opinion.

Thanks Guy_I

Fraser