Although I did not see the interesting sandpiper found yesterday by Andy
Baldelli and Andrew Baksh, I have viewed the excellent photos by John
Shemilt and Andrew Baksh (via Hugh McGuinness) and concur with Hugh and Shai
that the bird is most likely a LEAST SANDPIPER in a more advanced plumage
than we typically see at this time of year.
Most adult or first-summer Least Sandpipers delay their molt until reaching
their wintering grounds in South America, but every summer individuals are
found in the northeast that seem to be well ahead of the game. It makes
sense that these would be first-summer birds rather than full adults. In
their shorebird book, O'Brien, Crossley and Karlson suggest that these
advanced birds spend the winter in North America but I don't know if there
is any firm evidence for this. Certainly any that do winter in North
America, will have molted into basic plumage by November at the latest.
Anyway, returning to the Dune Road bird, several features seem
contra-indicative of Temminck's Stint. First, the bird lacks the elongated
look I'd expect ('pointed behind'); in most Temminck's the tail project
fractionally beyond the wing tips whereas it is parallel or shorter in
Least. Because of Temminck's short legs, they kind of remind me of a
miniature Baird's Sandpiper, although of course in the latter the wings are
longer. The bill of the Dune Road bird also looks too chunky, especially the
deep base.
It is definitely not a juvenile bird, which have very distinctive patterning
in the scapulars and coverts, but is a first-year or adult. The breast has
irregular dark marks (blotches) rather than a more uniform gray wash,
perhaps with a hint of vertical lines. Importantly, the dark shaft streaks
on the scapulars and wing coverts are too broad; I would expect these to be
much narrower (pencil lines) and less fanned at the base. I don't know if
the sandpiper was heard to call, but that would also be informative. A
similar (perhaps slightly browner) bird is depicted on page 158 (fig 6) of
O'Brien et al. and Dennis Paulson's "Shorebirds of North America: The
Photographic Guide" (an unsung gem in my opinion) offers a helpful
description.
I will add that that this a reasonably tricky ID, relying on a combination
of features (many of them structural) rather than any one discrete field
mark. With this sort of challenge in mind, it pays to spend as much time as
possible carefully studying the regular species to soak up a 'feel' for them
in all their variation, and stints generally stand out not by one single
feature, but several. Carefully noting (sketching) the shapes of the
markings in the key feather groups is immensely useful. We are fortunate in
this internet age to have amazing access to photographs of the species we do
not see regularly, although one has to be careful because some are
incorrectly labeled. Looking through photographs before heading into the
field is a great way to prepare the eye and mind.
Although this seems to have been a false alarm, the observers are to be
commended for promptly getting word out, and for keeping on the bird until
'help' arrived (very, very important). Credit should also go to those who
selflessly spread word via phone or internet. This is not a species we'd
like to hear about the next day! It is also a marvelous blessing that
potentially exciting birds can be so well photographed nowadays, and a
digital camera should be considered as much a part of the shorebirder's kit
as a telescope!
Angus Wilson
New York City & The Springs, NY, USA
--
NYSbirds-L List Info:
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NYSbirdsWELCOME
http://www.NortheastBirding.com/NYSbirdsRULES
Temporary archive:
http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/NYSB.html
Please submit your observations to eBird:
http://ebird.org/content/ebird/
--
