Sandpiper - Peru (1 Viewer)

[part_timer]

Hi - I'm working through photographs I took in Peru back in 2014 in the hope of identifying various birds and butterflies. This one from the beach at Paracas on the east coast, south of Lima, is fooling me slightly - size and leg colour suggest Least Sandpiper, but the bill looks rather long. Any opinions welcome.

 

[Andrew Whitehouse]

Stilt Sandpiper

 

[Butty]

Stilt Sandpiper

Legs and bill all look too short - but I don't have a better idea.

 

[THE_FERN]

Least sand for me. If you look closely you can see the bill ends about halfway along the apparent "bill' (check the lower edge). What we're seeing is something in the background. Agree legs too short for stilt sand

 

[Andrew Whitehouse]

I don't agree on the interpretation of the bill and I think the darker colouring mentioned is actually in the background. There looks to be a stronger, more consistent black colour going all the way to the bill tip (though more photos would be helpful with this).

On the legs, there are a couple of clear things. First, the bottom of the leg cannot be seen, as it's obscured. It's hard to be sure of the length but the tarsus could easily be quite a bit longer. There's quite a big lump of weed right in front, so it could be a few centimetres longer at least. Second, the belly feathers are quite fluffed, which is obscuring the top of the tibia and making it look shorter than if the feathers were tighter to the body.

 

[Butty]

There looks to be a stronger, more consistent black colour going all the way to the bill tip

Don't really understand this, I'm afraid. The consistency of black 'bill-tip' does differ slightly from the remainder. I'm not convinced that the bill-tip is in fact background as Fern suggests, but it is certainly a plausible possibility.

There's quite a big lump of weed right in front, so it could be a few centimetres longer at least

Not really. You can see the whole of the front of the weed-clump so we know its height. And we know that the beach is dead flat. So the eye/brain can calculate how much leg is hidden behind the clump (very little).

 

[THE_FERN]

I don't agree on the interpretation of the bill and I think the darker colouring mentioned is actually in the background. There looks to be a stronger, more consistent black colour going all the way to the bill tip (though more photos would be helpful with this).

On the legs, there are a couple of clear things. First, the bottom of the leg cannot be seen, as it's obscured. It's hard to be sure of the length but the tarsus could easily be quite a bit longer. There's quite a big lump of weed right in front, so it could be a few centimetres longer at least. Second, the belly feathers are quite fluffed, which is obscuring the top of the tibia and making it look shorter than if the feathers were tighter to the body.

One of the other reasons for thinking this isn't Stilt is the apparent collar. Here, the auricular area is distinctly darker and separated from the neck with a paler "collar" which arches back and up behind the ear area. Stilt sand's auriculars are barely darker than the surrounding feathers and it doesn't show this paler area (may show a paler throat; auriculars can be tinged orangy of course). I'd also suggest the supercilium is not bold enough or consistently thick enough for stilt. Here, it's noticeably thinner over the eye. Stilt shows an evenly thick supercilium.

Looking at the image even in thumbnail immediately suggests a Calidris to me. I find stilt looks v different—first impression more like a weird shank.

 

[part_timer]

Thanks for all your opinions so far and I attach a couple more photographs which may or may not help. I can't be 100% positive they are the same bird, but they were taken at the same location 11 minutes later.

 

[Butty]

Your additional photos are of least sandpiper (leg colour, bill length/shape).

 

[THE_FERN]

And plumage +/- identical to the first image (but without forensic examination)

 

[part_timer]

Least was my first thought, but I'm not familiar with the species, hence seeking confirmation. Thanks once again.