From south-bay-birds-bounces+south-bay-birds-archive=[[email protected]] Sun Aug 17 16:29:10 2003 Received: from www.plaidworks.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by plaidworks.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7HNRFkT015743 for <[[email protected]]>; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 16:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.198.35]) by plaidworks.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7HNQFVK015704 for <[[email protected]]>; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 16:26:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <[[email protected]]> Received: from rwcrwbc06 (unknown[204.127.197.116](misconfigured sender)) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <2003081723261301300ouonie>; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:26:13 +0000 Received: from [12.234.165.24] by rwcrwbc06; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:26:10 +0000 From: [[email protected]] To: [[email protected]] (SBB Chat Group) Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:26:10 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Jul 22 2003) X-Authenticated-Sender: YmlyZGVybW9tQGNvbWNhc3QubmV0 Subject: [SBB] Is this really a female RUFF? X-BeenThere: [[email protected]] X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2+ Precedence: list List-Id: South Bay Birding List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: south-bay-birds-bounces+south-bay-birds-archive=[[email protected]] Errors-To: south-bay-birds-bounces+south-bay-birds-archive=[[email protected]] Hi! On Saturday, Aug. 16, Norma Cabot and I headed out to look for the Ruff. We ran into Roland and Pat while there. Roland saw the RUFF fly away from the area and we were unable to find it again. After Norma left for home, I returned to try again and voila (sorry, Norma), there it was. Confirming my 2nd sighting with the picture on p.179 of National Geographic's Field Guide to the Birds of North America, I noted the similarity with the picture of the Summer Molting Female. I returned to my car and got my camera, taking many pictures, only a couple of which are half-way decent. When I got home, I compared the photos to those in "The Sibley Guide to Birds". Here is where the confusion started. "The Sibley Guide to Birds" (p.189) has two pictures that sort of look like our bird, the Adult Female Breeding (except our bird doesn't have a dark throat and has barring on the primaries) and the Adult Male Late Summer (except our bird's bill seems more black). The book also notes that, "the scapulars often stick up over round back" in Adult Male Nonbreeding, which they are prominently doing on the New Chicago Marsh bird, (but then says that "female similar but smaller; some have barred tertials". All in all, our bird looked more like the male in Sibley, so I began to do some research to clarify for myself. Peterson's "Advanced Birding" states (p.80-81) that the female is about the same size as a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, which is 8.5" (according to Sibley) and Sibley says that the male is about 20% larger than the female which means the male is 10.2" tall. Since Dowitchers are between 11 to 11 1/2" tall (according to Sibley), and our bird is about the same size as the Dowitchers in the area, size indicates male. Advanced Birding also states that the female has a longer neck and longer legs than the male. Our bird has a decidedly short neck. If I had to venture a guess, I'd guess Adult Male Late Summer (as pictured in Sibley), except for the bill color (which Peterson says is "variable"). If this is a female, how is the determination made? Can anyone help? Thanks very much, Jean Myers _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. south-bay-birds mailing list ([[email protected]]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://www.plaidworks.com/mailman/options/south-bay-birds/south-bay-birds-archive%40plaidworks.com This email sent to [[email protected]]