ID this warbler

[Steve Foss]

OK, you birding ID assassins.

Here's one I shot Sunday. It's clearly an immature warbler, one of what could only be a couple species. It looks recently fledged. It was shot in a blowdown area near the BWCAW, and didn't want to come out of the low brushy growth it was in. It responded very well to the "pishing" noise some warbler birding aficionados make. Some species don't respond well at all to pishing, and of those that do, some individuals within species respond more than others. White-throated sparrows, for example, almost always resond well, while chestnut-sided warblers usually don't.

Here's the bird. Recently fledged immature sparrows and warblers of many species offer tantalizing field mark clues that point to what they'll look like as adults, and identification can be tricky. But anyone with a good guide that includes detailed field marks of immatures and adults should be able to do it, and the habitat gives a good clue as well.

What's your determination?

Canon 20D, Canon IS 100-400 mm, Secret-Blackstone Lake Trail off the Fernberg Road outside Ely

[buzzsaw]

Also, what the heck is this???

[Steve Foss]

Geez, buzz, where'd you find that, the Minnesota Zoo?

[buzzsaw]

YES!!!! Ha HA... I should have known you'd peg it!! FULL CREDIT ISSUED!!! I'm still laughing!

[MARINERMAGNUM]

i am torn between the nashville and the mourning warblers. am i close? nice picture!

[M.T. Bucket]

I was thinking Nashville...EXCEPT for 2 field marks:

The legs are kind of pink. Nashville Warblers have dark legs, Mourning Warblers have pink ones.

The throat and belly are pretty bright. Immature Nashvilles have pale underparts while the underparts of an immature Mourning are fairly bright.

When you also factor in the gray-brown rather than straight gray head color and the faint eye ring compared to a bold one, I strongly believe we have an immature Mourning Warbler.

I'm not sure how the habitat helps. I would personally think either species would be likely in the blowdown.

Do I win a beer??

[jonny_redhorse]

Looks like a "kukabura" to me

[Steve Foss]

M.T.:

I agree with you on species. That's what I had in mind (and there was a male adult mourning right in that spot that I noticed several times earlier in the season, so likely there was a nest right nearby). The habitat hint wouldn't separate between the two species, but only would help someone a bit more of a novice narrow it down to those species, both of which like their brushy habitats.

The other diagnostic field mark I had in mind comes from the Sibley guide, which shows immature mournings have a "yellowish supraloral," or, in normal words, a yellow patch above the bill in the eye area, and this bird has that. The immature Nashville does not.

Yes, you win the beer, but since I'm just a poor nature photographer marooned in a newspaper job, you'll be choosing it and buying it yourself. Until, of course, we meet some day. Then it's on me.

[Tom Wilson]

Morning guys,

First of all if you guys have ever read any of my other posts...I love a good argument, well debate really, so let me start one here. I don't know whether or not I agree with the ID of mourning warbler. I think it is a Nashville. The pink legs are a little bit of a deterent, but that could have something to do with diet. Body color not so much. According to both Cornell university, and my audobon guides, the Mourning warblers never have yellow throats even when immature. The female mourning has a solid gray throat. The Nashville does have a yellow throat. The other thing I found is that the Nashville also has what is listed as an "inconspicous rust colored spot on the head above the eye" I believe I can see this to some degree in the photo above.

It is odd, and I know most of you will agree that if you had 5 different field guides a person can get confused. As a matter of fact--the photos that accompany the mourning warbler on the cornell HSOforum would lead you to believe the mourning could be right--however even that bird does not have yellow on the neck. My audobon guide shows a photo that looks more like the bird you have posted here as a nashville.

With all of that being said, my only hang up is if you were right SF about the existence of the male mourning warbler, however this doesn't mean that you don't have both species in the area. I just keep going back to the color on the neck. Either way, it is a treat to get a nice photo of a warbler. I have never gotten a photo of a warbler, so I would be tickled about that, no matter what species it was.

Tom W

[Steve Foss]

Tom:

You're right about the adult mourning in the immediate area not being definitive. It was simply one more piece to the puzzle. Certainly, once fledged, a warbler will wander to some degree before migration. Nothing to prevent this one from being a Nashville from somewhere nearby.

On the ID, I'm going by Sibley's guide and the Peterson guide to warblers. I believe the leg color is too subtle to be diagnositc, but Sibley points out a field mark for the immature mourning as "usually yellow throat." Peterson's guide to warblers shows yellow on the throat as well, adding that "In females and immatures the hood is less distinctor lacking, the throat varies from dull whitish to yellowish, and there is a vraiable thin broken eye-ring or eye-arcs." It goes on to say "Individual variation within age and sex classes is considerable."

Sibley also shows the Nashville immature as a bird much grayer than the mourning overall, and shows a prominent full eye ring, even on the immature birds. By the close-up of the head I've added, you'll see this bird has the broken eye ring of the mourning.

So let the debate continue . . .

[Tom Wilson]

SF,

That's the reason I made the reference to having different guide books. It very well could be a mourning--but like I said I do like a good debate. Debating when done properly not only solves confusion, it teaches us things if we are open and willing to learn. Did I mention by the way--Nice Photo.

[Steve Foss]

Yuh, bubba, you'd think all these darn field guide folks would get together and keep their stories straight! But then where would the debate be? I respect the heck out of Cornell U. Came very near to entering there for an ornithology major, but ended up staying at the hometown University of North Dakota, where they had one measly semester O class. But heck, you can learn a ton by looking at guides, listening to the veterans and wearing out the bottoms of your boots.

Regardless of who likes what guides, I can't recommend the two Sibley works more strongly. Their birding field guide is simply rich with detail and is tremendously comprehensive, and the companion guide to bird life and behavior taught me far more about the development and lives and habits of birds, from their roots in the dinosaur era to the present day, than an ornithology class.

[Tom Wilson]

SF

Really good points you're making here man. After review of the close up I see two things that make me lean even farther your direction. One the nashville typically has a dark gray to black bill--this bird has more of a pinkish colored bill like the mourning. I also see some degree of gray around the middle portion of the neck.

I am still not ready to concede completely because of the yellow throat, I don't own the sibley guide to argue that with myself, but I trust you aren't misquoting it. The other thing is I distinctly see the rust colored area around and above the eye--that is a trait known only to the nashville. Is it possible that these two species might intermingle?

All in all though I am close to giving you this one.

[Steve Foss]

You are a stubborn man, my friend.

Hard to say about the intermingling.

What you see as a vague rusty patch I see as the yellow line above the bill and in the eye area I pointed out from the Sibley guide. And hey, it's not as though getting the Sibley guide is like a Nikon man defecting to Canon or anything.

I've always distrusted photo guides like the Audubon Society ones (though the A.S. does produce the Sibley guide.) Even though the editors of photo-based field guides seek photos that are representative of the species/plumage/gender/age in question, an illustration can, in the end, be better than a photo at stressing field marks.

Get thee to a bookstore and pick up the Sibley, man! Then we can argue, uh, I mean debate, on the same playing field.

Also, the Peterson series guides that are specific to hawks, hummingbirds and warblers are good things to have. They go into way more detail than most general field guides.

[Tom Wilson]

Alright I surrender.

I looked it up in the peterson--I have an old one. and I'm gonna give you this one. I do really like the Audobon guide however. I think the bill color finally did me in.

Great debate, and as I said, I learned something.

And don't worry, I won't hold the fact that you're a Canonite against you.

Tom W

[buzzsaw]

You guys sure your not long lost brothers? I was just going to say to send that picture into the Audobon society or whomever would be able to give it a positive ID and call it a day.

[Steve Foss]

Shoot man, there's no fun in that! What would we have left to discuss??

[buzzsaw]

Politics? Religion? No wait, those are subjects to stay away from.

[buzzsaw]

ID this Finch.....