I’m looking at a Little Gull at the moment. it’s near the dam on the south side at 42.79516, -112.87283 on a spit of land with other gulls, terns, and pelicans. Very small, especially compared to nearby Bonaparte’s. Small bill, very dark underwings, tiny legs, white primaries.
Also, Kathy Eklund, a local birder, has good photos of a promising Red Phalarope along the same shoreline but west. It’s a juvenile looking bird. Bigger and thicker billed than nearby Red necked Phalarope.
Austin Young
Pocatello
—
Austin Young younaust@… Undergraduate Student Ecology and Conservation Biology Club President Idaho State University Pocatello, Idaho
The more upright sandpiper looks like it could be a Baird’s given the bill size, shape; the primary projection; and the dark spots on the wings as folded.
I looked at these photos the other night but didn’t have time to
write a response. I don’t think there’s any doubt the first photo
is of a Least Sandpiper for reasons already mentioned. However the
ID of the bird in the second photo is not straight forward.
The posture makes it difficult to assess structure and I can see
why it suggests Pectoral but the breast is nowhere near streaked
enough for Pec. All plumages have heavily marked upper breast with
sharp lower edge bordering on the white belly while the center of
the breast on this individual is unmarked. The bill is heavier,
especially at the base, than the Least in photo one but has a
similar decurved appearance. Also the primary projection and
extension beyond the tail are longer which suggests
Western/Semipalmated. The rufous upper scapulars contrasting with
the dull lower scaps, longish fine tipped bill, and streaks
confined to the side of the breast do suggest Western to me. Is
there any chance there are other photos of this individual? Maybe
in a more relaxed posture?
Cliff
On 8/23/21 9:22 PM, Scott Tuthill
wrote:
Ron — there are two photographs. The second one is clearly not a
“peep” so could not be a Western. The bill on the first one, which
is a “peep”, looks too short and not decurved at the tip enough to
be a Western. There is certainly some variation, as I relearn
every year, but what are you seeing that suggests Western? So,
similar to Dave Pace’s question.
Lower dam 8 PM this not a good photo for identification on my camera you can clearly see red orbital ring red gape & plain yellow bill light color legs like maybe a mew gull
8 a.m.first time seeing fuzzy juvenile looks like about to be fed .two Baird’s peeps along steps of lower dam far south end birds finally making use of mud flats 12 Caspian tern 3 avocets 3 great egrets
Dave & Brenda — for both your (and everyone’s) challenges with Peeps and Flycatchers I recommend Ken Kaufman’s books on Advanced Birding. They have chapters on both. He has two different books with similar titles which are slightly different — but both cover these two challenges.
Ron — there are two photographs. The second one is clearly not a “peep” so could not be a Western. The bill on the first one, which is a “peep”, looks too short and not decurved at the tip enough to be a Western. There is certainly some variation, as I relearn every year, but what are you seeing that suggests Western? So, similar to Dave Pace’s question.
The first one looks like a Least Sandpiper — they have yellow legs which I don’t see here but it could be because of the lighting. But the bill shape and chest plumage say Least to me. And ithas the overall compact “peep” profile. The second I believe is a Pectoral Sandpiper. That upright long neck posture with a relatively long decurved bill with again the chest markings suggest Pectoral.
Can you help some of us less learned Piper folks to understand what keys help you identify the bird(s). There were two photos in Linda’s request, do you consider them both Western Sandpipers and why.
Always looking to learn more and I find the Sandpipers hard, not quite as hard as the fly catchers but hard none the less.
