8 replies to this topic

[TheBillyPilgrim]

All taken last week in Rocky Mountain National Park.

Dusky Flycatchers
1.
http://www.flickr.co...in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.co...in/photostream/

2.
http://www.flickr.co...in/photostream/

Virginia's Warbler
http://www.flickr.co...157631082149046
http://www.flickr.co...57631082149046/
http://www.flickr.co...57631082149046/

Female American Three-Toed Woodpecker
http://www.flickr.co...57631082149046/

Thanks! Hopefully these are simpler than my last post

[psweet]

Agree on the Warbler and the Woodpecker. The flycatcher has an awfully long bill with no dark color on the lower mandible -- doesn't fit a Dusky. Most likely Willow, I think.

[TheBillyPilgrim]

Agree on the Warbler and the Woodpecker. The flycatcher has an awfully long bill with no dark color on the lower mandible -- doesn't fit a Dusky. Most likely Willow, I think.

The bill was throwing me off on the flycatcher, but the eye-ring just seemed to prominent for a Trails-type. I definitely heard a few Dusky's vocalizing, but didn't actually see the individual I photographed call and may have jumped to conclusions.

[Clip]

You might consider the Hammonds flycatcher also.

[psweet]

A Hammond's should show an even shorter, darker bill than a Dusky.

[TheBillyPilgrim]

Hmm, I'm still leaning Dusky on these guys. Both show the lightish area around the lores (not diagnostic, but a good mark). Kaufman's Advanced Birding shows some of them with bottom mandibles that are almost completely light, too, and bill length comparable to Willow's. Willow's are also a pretty uncommon bird for that part of the park.

Anyone else have an opinion?

[guy_incognito]

Well, getting the easy ones out of the way, agree with Virginia's Warbler and the woodpecker.

The flycatcher does have a somewhat long appearing bill, however, that primary projection does look awfully short. I know it is not a great field mark, but the head looks more rounded, rather than the flatter appearing Willow head. This definitely doesn't look like a Hammond's or Cordilleran. Doesn't look quite right for a Willow to me. Dusky definitely is a good bet, but how about Gray Flycatcher? (I would check eBird for likelihood in your area, but it is down for maintenance right now). Any chance you saw it do any tail bobbing?

[TheBillyPilgrim]

Well, getting the easy ones out of the way, agree with Virginia's Warbler and the woodpecker.

The flycatcher does have a somewhat long appearing bill, however, that primary projection does look awfully short. I know it is not a great field mark, but the head looks more rounded, rather than the flatter appearing Willow head. This definitely doesn't look like a Hammond's or Cordilleran. Doesn't look quite right for a Willow to me. Dusky definitely is a good bet, but how about Gray Flycatcher? (I would check eBird for likelihood in your area, but it is down for maintenance right now). Any chance you saw it do any tail bobbing?

There aren't any reports for Gray Flycatcher in the park, according to ebird and that local birding guide. No tail bobbing, but it was fairly active in low trees/brush.

EDIT: Just talked to my sister, who was birding with me when we took the photos, and she said she's positive she saw the flycatcher tail bobbing. She's actually the one who located it and called me over to photograph it while I was distracted by the Three-Toed Woodpecker. I'm not familiar with that as a field mark. Does it suggest one species (other than E. Phoebe), Guy?

[steven_sumner]

I asked a few people about a similar bird also seen in RMNP last week. Here it is for comparison..

http://www.facebook....&type=3
http://www.facebook....&type=3