[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TAS BirdBoard ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Mark Faherty on 22:25:26 12/02/06
I was very frustrated with the way the discussion of this bird progressed on this list (and I'm not the only one), but I've come to a few conclusions about what I think went down.
While the primary cause of all the breathless posts claiming the bird had still not been adequately identified (which were insulting to the experienced birders who had already made the id) was probably just a lack of familiarity with these species among those questioning the id, in their defense I think there were some more specific causes as well.
First, I m guessing some folks got stuck on the 1st fall Horned Grebe picture in Sibley that shows a dusky cheeked bird, while ignoring the part where it says Aug-Oct, meaning the bird would not be in that plumage anymore. The number of Horned Grebes I ve seen is into the thousands, and I ve never seen a dusky cheeked bird like that pictured they have molted by late fall when the migrants and wintering birds start showing up in the northeast. If they retained that plumage longer, there would certainly be a lot of false reports of EAGR in the northeast, but that s not the case. There s no transition plumage this time of year for HOGR they re in their nice, crisp white-cheeked basic plumage now.
I think some other folks saw the apparent reddish hue on the neck in the first photos and assumed that meant it was an adult HOGR still showing some of the reddish from breeding plumage. Subsequent photos showed the reddish color to be a photographic artifact. It s never wise to put much weight on subtle shades of coloring like this when identifying birds on a computer screen. Even if the color was real, Sibley shows 1st fall EAGR to have reddish on the neck, so it wouldn t have been diagnostic either way.
Another problem is the poor treatment EAGR gets in the National Geographic Guide, where they only show the darkest end of the spectrum for winter EAGR, and falsely imply that EAGR lacks a white spot in front of the eye. A quick Google image search of EAGR photos and a glance at Sibley (as well as a glance at the original 3 photos of the Green Cay bird) show this to be incorrect. Sibley does a much better job, showing the dark and pale ends of the spectrum for winter EAGR. Our bird is the spitting image of the left-hand, paler cheeked bird, but maybe with a slightly duskier cheek and neck.
This really is a straighforward id, so I m still not sure how these things caused folks to overlook the steep forehead, peaked crown over the eye, slightly upturned bill shape, dark bill tip, and just the general identical-ness of this bird to readily available EAGR photos and illustrations, but I think they had something to do with the hysteria. I guess what bothered me the most was that while people were questioning the id, they never gave a single point in favor of HOGR not one - that would have explained their doubt. If you re going to question a generally accepted id (and thus the birders who made the id) in a public forum, have the courtesy to do some homework first, and back it up with something! I've been birding 26 years and on birding lists for ten, and this was one of the wackiest threads I've ever seen.
I apologize if this offends anyone - I just needed to vent. I think this was just a case of otherwise good and conscientious birders psyching themselves out and overcomplicating a simple id of an unfamiliar species, and in the process unintentionally disparaging the birders who positively id'ed it.
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TAS BirdBoard ] [ FAQ ]