Received: from npsmtp04la.mail2world.com (mw252.mail2world.com [66.28.189.252]) by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g72CEdV20831 for <[[email protected]]>; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 05:14:39 -0700 Received: from npweb08la (unverified [10.1.203.114]) by npsmtp04la.mail2world.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.6) with ESMTP id <[[email protected]]>; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 05:10:23 -0700 thread-index: AcI6HZRAi3+CK1K1SGSR10l1gUNHog== Thread-Topic: [SBB] Sex of Ruff at CCFS waterbird pond From: "miguel demeulemeester" <[[email protected]]> To: <[[email protected]]> Subject: Re: [SBB] Sex of Ruff at CCFS waterbird pond Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 05:10:23 -0700 Message-ID: <00d901c23a1d$9440ea20$[[email protected]]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Exchange 2000 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Priority: normal X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/alternative by demime 0.98b X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain Sender: [[email protected]] Errors-To: [[email protected]] X-BeenThere: [[email protected]] X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: I agree, but you seem to overlook the fact that a bird is measured (like in all fieldguides, from skins), from tip of the bill to tip of the tail. And, since a Dowitcher has a bill twice or more the lenght of any Ruff or Reeve... that was what I was pointing out. Anyway, I think you're probably right, afterall, it's been too long since I've seen them where they are supposed to be, just wanted to point out that one can't sex them this time of the year on plumage. I hope you agree on that. Regards, Miguel <-----Original Message-----> > >From: [[email protected]] >Sent: 7/31/2002 1:04:02 PM >To: [[email protected]] >Subject: Re: [SBB] Sex of Ruff at CCFS waterbird pond > >All, > >In my opinion the Ruff in the Waterbird Pond was a female. The bird was >clearly smaller than Dowitchers near it (one has to consider the whole length >of the bird not just the body) and was much smaller than Greater Yellowlegs >(Greater Yellowlegs being on average 30 percent larger than Dowitchers). >Lesser Yellowlegs are on average only 5 percent smaller than Dowitchers but >are much more slightly built (Lesser Yellowlegs were not available in the >pond for direct size comparison but several have been recently seen at the >EEC and I believe that the Ruff in question would be heavier bodied than a >Lesser Yellowlegs but much shorter than in length). My reference books state >that the Reeve can be anywhere from 20 to 25 cm in length and the Dowitcher >23 to 26 cm (male Ruffs are 26 to 30 cm). Since we all seem to agree that >the Ruff was smaller than the Dowitchers near it then the it was surely a >female. (It's important to note that a large Reeve could be larger than some >Dowitchers near it!) Lesser Yellowlegs are 23 to 25 cm and Greater >Yellowlegs are 29 to 33 cm in length. > >Take care, >Bob Reiling, 10 AM, 7/31/02 >_______________________________________________ >south-bay-birds mailing list | [[email protected]] >Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.plaidworks.com/mailman/listinfo/south-bay-birds >Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g72MvMV30087 for <[[email protected]]>; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 15:57:22 -0700 Received: from [[email protected]] by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v33.5.) id t.a5.2b3fe6ad (16335) for <[[email protected]]>; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 18:57:13 -0400 (EDT) From: [[email protected]] Message-ID: <[[email protected]]> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 18:57:13 EDT To: [[email protected]] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/alternative by demime 0.98b X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain Subject: [SBB] More Semipalmated Sandpipers Sender: [[email protected]] Errors-To: [[email protected]] X-BeenThere: [[email protected]] X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: All, This morning Frank Vanslager and I decided to check out the Sunnyvale Water Treatment Facility (correctly identified as the Donald M. Somers Water Pollution Control Plant). A preliminary check of the ponds from the hill west of the facility showed lots of Tern and Gull activity in Salt Pond A4, Phalarope and duck activity in the pond north of the Radar Site (the small pond) and very little activity in the large pond west of the Radar Site. Inexplicably we decided to check out the larger pond to the west. Our first surprise was a nice variety of shorebirds in a pond on the northern edge of the Lockheed-Martin property. Included in the pond, in addition to the "Usual Suspects," were a 2 SEMIPALMATED PLOVERS, 4-5 LESSER YELLOWLEGS, GREATER YELLOWLEGS, 20-30 WILSON'S PHALAROPES and a couple hundred DOWITCHERS (all those Identified were LONG-BILLED). A checkout of the nearly empty Salt Pond A3W, to the west, yielded a few FORSTER'S TERNS, at least one each CLARK'S and WESTERN GREBE as well as a number of GREATER & SNOWY EGRETS. The most interesting birds (ducks) in the southwest corner of the larger evapor ation pond were 12 LESSER SCAUP (including two female/juveniles), one possible GREATER SCAUP (nice rounded head shape but a distant look) and one male NORTHERN PINTAIL. While checking out the rest of the pond Frank noted lots of small birds in the northeastern corner so we decided to continue on around the pond. In the northwestern corner Frank suggested that we walk the inside dike so as to be closer (75-100 ft closer) to the birds when we reached the far corner (we would normally walk the dike adjacent to Guadalupe Slough). Note: this closer view also resulted in better air, visually, as we did not have to look across alternately hot and cool areas and through the resultant heat waves. Near the northeast corner of the pond we able to get excellent views of many hundreds of peeps feeding, sleeping, flying away and returning to once again fly away etc. We were fortunate in having the wind at our back and essentially all of the birds were facing us. Almost instantly Frank and I both saw a juvenile SEMIPALMATED SANDPIPER and ultimately, following a return from one of their massed flights, we were able to find at least three juvenile Semipalmated Sandpipers. There were, of course, hundreds of LEAST SANDPIPERS, lots of WESTERN SANDPIPERS and a minimum of thirty SEMIPALMATED PLOVERS. Unidentified, larger birds seen earlier had departed before we arrived. On our way out we noted that there were 1000 plus RED-NECKED PHALAROPES in the smaller evaporation pond north of the Radar Site. Take care, Bob Reiling, 4:00 PM, 8/2/02