Paul Mollatt: Congratulations. I wish I had had this a couple of winters ago when I spent several months trying to ID a Dowitcher species wintering in Porto Lagos, in North-east Greece. - Fortunately, a friend of mine, Janne Aalto, digiscoped it and the image is on his website : - - http://koti.mbnet.fi/caligata/lajit2.html - - Could I please ask a favour of the authors or any other interested experts to have a look at the photo and give their opinion of its ID. - My e-mail address is paul_mollatt@hotmail.com
(28.10.2005, 12:03)

Nial Moores: An excellent analysis. One small observation..."it is now agreed that dowitchers can be divided into two species, the Long-billed (Limnodromus scolapaceus) and Short-billed Dowitchers (Limnodromus griseus)". In Asia at least there are records of three Dowitcher species...Best either to call Long-billed and Short-billed e.g American Dowitchers (as in "Shorebirds") or better instead refer somewhere in article also to Asian Dowitcher L. semipalmatus? - - Best wishes, - - Nial Moores - Birds Korea
(31.10.2005, 22:45)

Matt Kenne: Outstanding! A couple questions about your Texas experience with SBDO wing molt: Is Fig. 14 representative of many such observations, or is it a documentation of the previously unknown? Also, you categorize the birds in Fig. 14 as "the first fall migrants or fall arrivals on the Texas coast.", but, in the body of the piece, you state that SBDO can arrive in early July. Could wing molt be this advanced if the birds had been present in the area for three weeks and only begun molt upon arrival?
(02.11.2005, 18:23)

Greg Gillson: Another dowitcher ID article on the web with photo quiz: http://thebirdguide.com
(05.11.2005, 16:56)

Paul Prappas: Excellent site. However, based on the information concerning Dowitcher supercilium, I am certain you've mislabled Figure 2B. That has to be a Long-billed...? That is an acute angled supercilium.
(12.11.2005, 20:19)

Manuel Grosselet: I get a picture of a Dowicher, I am thinking that it's Long billed, but It's not recorded on this site.. can I send a picture somewhere to have confirmation?
(05.12.2005, 15:35)

Pim A. Wolf: though under 5. Voice you comment that: "The best field mark for distinguishing the two dowitcher species is voice." the treatment of voice is remarkably brief. It would be useful to have a link towards recordings of both these species, preferably adults and juveniles. Also, I guess that the last line of that section in somewhat incomplete: "The difference in voice is regarded as a nearly fail-proof field mark, and over the course of our studies.", how should it end?
(26.01.2006, 17:18)

Miguel Demeulemeester: Excellent article. - I understand that this is 'a draft version' so possibly my remark is already tackled?! - But in the text for Figure 6:"... first year Short-billed Dowitcher (B) in basic plumage (30 May 2004; Bolivar Flats, TX)..." - This bird is not a 'first year' because it is born the year before (your identification), so technically it is a 'second year' bird moulting to alternate plumage or 1st summer plumage (again your ID). - Miguel Demeulemeester
(27.01.2006, 06:25)

Anonym: Excellent article. - I understand that this is 'a draft version' so possibly my remark is already tackled?! - But in the text for Figure 6:"... first year Short-billed Dowitcher (B) in basic plumage (30 May 2004; Bolivar Flats, TX)..." - This bird is not a 'first year' because it is born the year before (your identification), so technically it is a 'second year' bird moulting to alternate plumage or 1st summer plumage (again your ID). - Miguel Demeulemeester
(27.01.2006, 07:26)

Miguel Demeulemeester: Sorry, my error, should have read the full article first! - Please note that further down the article you also use 1st year where you actually refer to 2nd year birds. - Miguel Demeulemeester
(27.01.2006, 07:31)

10 of 16 comments (part 1) [ » ] [ * ]

Script by Alex