• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Melrose woods, New Mexico (1 Viewer)

logan3m

Well-known member
Found these and was wondering if I could get some help. Below are my suggestions:

1 - Ash-throated Flycatcher (based solely on National Geographic bird book map)
2 - Unknown
3 - Unknown

547.JPG

512.JPG

442.JPG
 
Agree on 1 but for different reasons: tertial edges not strongly contrasting, belly looks very pale

The other two are other flycatchers, I will lean back and wait for the experts

Niels
 
2nd bird is surely a Hammond's with that round head and overall appearance?

Birds like this drive me insane though.
 
2nd bird is surely a Hammond's with that round head and overall appearance?.

Dusky would be my guess (both bill and primary projection seem to me a better fit for that species than for Hammond's). Round-headedness BTW is said to be a Dusky trait rather than a Hammond's though I can't say that I've ever been able to do much with it.

Definitely not an easy ID, however
 
I agree that the PP is better for Dusky. Not sure about the bill, it seemed too short for Dusky but after consulting the books and photos I'm going to take back my argument of the bill being too small for Dusky.

Changing my vote to Dusky.

EDIT: I always associated round-headedness with Hammond's, but I don't think its a reliable feature regardless.
 
Agree with Ash-throated.

The second empid is not a Hammond's. Hammond's has a small two-toned bill. But I'm not familiar enough with the other western empids to hazard a guess otherwise (and it would just be a guess).
 
EDIT: I always associated round-headedness with Hammond's, but I don't think its a reliable feature regardless.

The big Sibley (p.328) depicts Hammond's with a "slight crest", Dusky with a "rounded head". Personally I've never noticed the distinction in the field, but then I'm no David Allen Sibley . . .. ;)
 
Agree with Ash-throated.

The second empid is not a Hammond's. Hammond's has a small two-toned bill. But I'm not familiar enough with the other western empids to hazard a guess otherwise (and it would just be a guess).

Small but not always two-toned, some have all-dark bills (Dusky has the same variation).
 
The big Sibley on the bills:
Dusky: "short, narrow, sometimes mostly dark. . .".
Hammond's: "very short, narrow, usually mostly dark. . .".

Not the easiest of criteria to apply!
 
Just because I'm getting a bit confused by this thread, are people discussing the bird in picture 3?

My initial reaction to the bird in picture 2 was that it might be a Bell's Vireo. It doesn't particularly look like an empid to me.
 
Just because I'm getting a bit confused by this thread, are people discussing the bird in picture 3?

My initial reaction to the bird in picture 2 was that it might be a Bell's Vireo. It doesn't particularly look like an empid to me.

I had exactly the same initial reaction but the complete eyering doesn't look good for Bell's. Any other pics?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top