[Birdtalk] Cooper's or Sharpie?

[Mark Stackhouse]

O.K., I've had these photos up on my computer all night, and since my 
son is bugging me for breakfast, I'd better write my comment and get 
going on our waffles.

These images are a bit confusing, and unfortunately, we can't see 
everything that might be helpful with this identification (such as the 
tail, as Larry suggests). The "fluffed" posture of the bird (must be 
cold in Cache Valley!), also confuses the issue and exposes the white 
feather bases as Kris points out, especially in the first photo. It 
also makes the head look relatively smaller, again especially in the 
first photo. I find it hard to judge the size of the eye, I think due 
to lighting, but Larry is correct about the position of the eye. The 
second photo, I think, shows the bird most "accurately."

My first impression with this bird was that it was a Cooper's, and I 
still think that's what it is. For a while I thought the head looked a 
bit small, but again I think this is due to posture. The head shape, 
especially in the second photo, eye position, (I think) eye size 
(smaller in Cooper's) and the rather dark cap all say Cooper's to me. 
The bird also looks long-tailed in the second photo, another good 
feature for Cooper's. Larry is also correct about the legs - the tarsus 
looks too thick to be a Sharpie.

If Jim is correct about the size (and those who know me know how much I 
trust that), then the bird is clearly in the size range for a Cooper's, 
probably a large male or small female, and outside the range for 
Sharp-shinned.

Now, off to those waffles . . .

Happy holidays and best wishes for a New Year filled with great birds!

Mark

Mark Stackhouse
mark at westwings.com
801-487-9453 (Salt Lake City, Utah, USA)
011-52-323-285-1243 (San Blas, Nayarit, Mexico)

On Dec 24, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Milt Moody wrote:

> The bird looks like a sharpie to me mostly because of the head shape
> and propotions. (...and, of course, because Kris Purdy thinks so).
>
> I'm very interested in the spots on the "back":  I know it's supposed
> to be present in both speicies but it seem to me from my experience
> that it's more likely to be there on sharpies -- (actually I don't
> remember seeing it in Cooper's).  I'm not sure if this is a local thing
> or a figment of my imagination or a lack of enough experience to make a
> good generalization (probably the latter).
>
> They probably don't show it in the books because it's not a good field
> mark for one or the other, but I'm wondering if there's any information
> on whether it's seen more in one species or the other or if there are
> any local trends. (I've wondered, for years, what's going on with this
> spotted thing with sharpies and Cooper's).  Does anyone know anything
> about that?
>
> Thanks,
> Milt
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Birdtalk mailing list
> Birdtalk at utahbirds.org
> http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/birdtalk
>