Date: 3/31/26 10:55 am From: Bill Vermillion via groups.io <bill.gcjv...> Subject: Re: [labird] Mystery bird
I’ve heard that term used for shorebirds by someone from SE LA, likely a corruption of “pluvier” French for plover. A holdover from LA’s French roots. Possibly describing Sanderlings in this instance
BV
> On Mar 30, 2026, at 10:55 AM, Jane Patterson via groups.io <seejanebird...> wrote:
> I know what poule d’eau and grobek are. Anyone have any guesses what a
> “peva” is? Apparently they land on rocks to mate and they turn from white
> to brown. See attached.
>
> —Jane.
>
>
>
>
>
Date: 3/30/26 7:19 pm From: Paul Conover via groups.io <zoiseaux...> Subject: [labird] the Vermilion Parish sapsucker
Labird,
Labird,
In reviewing eBird records this evening I came upon a record that
I've given a lot of thought to, the Red-naped--or more accurately until
LBRC review, red-naped--Sapsucker from Vermilion Parish this winter.
This record spawned a lot of confusion from the birders that looked for
it or saw it because of its varying appearance in the field and in
photographs.
The first batch of photos of the bird probably set the mental
image of the bird for many searchers. Some of those very nice photos
showed a vivid, fairly broad red nape patch and a similarly vivid red
throat patch overriding the enclosing black border on the side. The next
party that saw it likewise got nice looks and pics, but a study of their
pics shows that the field marks show variable looks in different light
angles and poses; in some, the nape patch looks broad and deeply tinted,
while in others the nape patch looks narrow and, well, patchy.
Some time after that I was with a party that got looks and
pictures of the bird. Looking at the photos, there was a question as to
whether this was the same red-naped bird. The nape patch was not
particularly broad or vivid in the views we got, nor in the photos.
However, a comparison of the different photo sets from different groups
showed verifiable proof that it was the same bird in all sightings.
The record I reviewed tonight was a checklist with a photo that
had been mulled over by other birders soon after the sighting and
assigned to the Yellow-bellied/Red-naped category. However, the observer
was kind enough to share the photo with me and I was able to see that it
was the same bird as in the other photo sets. The lighting was harsh and
the features not super easy to see, but it was definitely the same bird.
I marked the eBird sighting "Confirmed" pending LBRC review. Tonight I
noticed that the same record was back in the eBird review queue as it
had been pinged by a member of the eBird audience as having been
misidentified; the confusion over the record had reared its red-naped
head once again. In this case the audience member felt that the bird had
the markings of a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker instead, and mentioned the
reported presence of an adult male Yellow-bellied Sapsucker with a red
nape at this site this winter. However, I compared the photos again and
again came to the conclusion that it was same red-naped sapsucker
photographed by all other groups.
That raises the question of whether there was actually more
than one red-naped bird there. With due respect to other birders, I
haven't seen any proof that there was. I visited the site several times
and saw at least three adult male and one female Yellow-bellieds there,
all photographed or seen well and none showed any red tint to the nape.
I also saw the red-naped bird on four occasions and noted how its
appearance varied depending on light, angle, posture, and distance. I
would be forced to guess that the presumed presence of a red-naped
Yellow-bellied there resulted from sightings of the real red-naped bird
either seen poorly or simply not presenting according to the search
image expectations.
The fieldmarks really did vary in many ways. In some light, a
black throat border definitely seemed present, and a few seconds later
and at a different angle, the black border seemed magically gone,
replaced by red. I don't know if that was all lighting, or if the red
feathering was a "combover" that shifted position in different postures,
but the effect was notable. The dorsal stripes also seemed to broaden or
narrow due to posture, going from "Yellow-bellied-like" to
"Red-naped-like" in seconds. Given that these marking are what birders
look at to rule out hybrids or red-naped Yellow-bellieds, the
implications are pretty obvious.
Most interesting and highlighting the role that subjectivity
plays in the ID of this species pair was that one birder that
photographed the bird stated at that time that the supercilium was
narrow and ideal for Red-naped, but in connection to the disputed pic of
the same bird that I reviewed tonight, focused on features other than
the supercilium. That's probably pretty natural, as the width of this
white stripe is incredibly variable from bird to bird and even on the
same bird changes greatly due to posture, and molt and wear according to
season.
I've always felt that Red-naped Sapsucker is one of the most
misunderstood ID challenges out there, typically because birders have
way too narrow of an ID image of this species in which no two birds look
alike. Luckily that uniqueness was a plus this time in keeping track of
various sightings and sorting out confusion, and hopefully I won't have
to re-re-review the disputed pic! Let's leave that for the LBRC.
Date: 3/30/26 8:55 am From: Jane Patterson via groups.io <seejanebird...> Subject: [labird] Mystery bird
I know what poule d’eau and grobek are. Anyone have any guesses what a
“peva” is? Apparently they land on rocks to mate and they turn from white
to brown. See attached.
Date: 3/19/26 9:15 pm From: mdpethke via groups.io <mdpethke...> Subject: [labird] LOS Field Trip opportunity
LOS field trip to Nancy Ellington property, Pearl River, 28 March at 8:00 am.
Join LOS life member Nancy Ellington and graduate student in Renewable Resources at LSU, Olivia Butler, at Nancy's residence exploring 30 acres in Pearl River. The property is a mixture of treed wetlands and pine forest. To date, 179 species have been documented at this location including Swallow-tailed Kites, migratory birds, and Louisiana's usual summer residents. Rubber boots are recommended as the trails could be slightly flooded and/or muddy depending on weather conditions in the days prior to event. There is limited parking by a metal shop at the end of the driveway at 35368 Pine St. Ext., Pearl River. Bring binoculars and spotting scopes.
Nancy may be reached by email at <katiebug1490...> or by phone at 985-503-0528.
Maximum participants: 10. Feel free to contact with any questions.
Sign-up by emailing Melissa Weaver at <melissaweaverbird...>
Date: 3/16/26 5:40 pm From: Michael Cavanaugh via groups.io <michaelcav...> Subject: [labird] Black-headed grosbeak
Friends, I have been reluctant to post this because I thought it was so transitory, but we've had a black-headed grosbeak for about a month. He comes sporadically, but usually we see him in the mornings about breakfast and shortly before lunch. I am pretty sure he is elsewhere in the neighborhood (University Acres of Baton Rouge, about a mile south of LSU) because he's showed up on Merlin during our walks. As far as I can tell he is all by himself.
If anyone wants to try to sit on our back porch and see him please contact me off-list. Thanks,Michael Cavanaugh
In a message dated 3/16/2026 7:28:45 PM Central Daylight Time, <budogmacm...> writes:
I apologize for posting this admittedly commercial message. I have nointerest in this and make no commission from any sales. However, I postthis just to let people know of a good deal on spotting scopes. I own oneof these, and I am quite satisfied with it. I also know a good friend andprominent Louisiana ornithologist who likes his purchase. And Vortex has avery good service guarantee.Anyway, here it is https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2420626118Mac Myers <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>Virus-free.www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail><#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
Date: 3/16/26 5:28 pm From: Mac Myers via groups.io <budogmacm...> Subject: [labird] scopes
I apologize for posting this admittedly commercial message. I have no interest in this and make no commission from any sales. However, I post this just to let people know of a good deal on spotting scopes. I own one of these, and I am quite satisfied with it. I also know a good friend and prominent Louisiana ornithologist who likes his purchase. And Vortex has a very good service guarantee. Anyway, here it is https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2420626118
Date: 3/8/26 10:40 am From: Mac Myers via groups.io <budogmacm...> Subject: Re: [labird] Study reveals new technique to identify individual night-flying birds for the first time
Thanks, David, very interesting. Note that a co-author of the study is
Cameron Rutt, recently of LSU.
On Sun, Mar 8, 2026 at 12:28 PM David P. Muth via groups.io <muthdp=
<gmail.com...> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: David P. Muth <muthdp...>
> Date: Sat, Mar 7, 2026 at 8:11 PM
> Subject: Study reveals new technique to identify individual night-flying
> birds for the first time
> To: David Muth <muthdp...>
>
>
> Study reveals new technique to identify individual night-flying birds for
> the first time https://share.google/OV31yB0fSetR07s2M >
>
>
> David P. Muth
>
>
> --
> David P. Muth
>
>
>
>
>
>
Date: 3/8/26 10:28 am From: David P. Muth via groups.io <muthdp...> Subject: [labird] Study reveals new technique to identify individual night-flying birds for the first time
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: David P. Muth <muthdp...>
Date: Sat, Mar 7, 2026 at 8:11 PM
Subject: Study reveals new technique to identify individual night-flying
birds for the first time
To: David Muth <muthdp...>
Date: 3/3/26 4:14 pm From: Paul Conover via groups.io <zoiseaux...> Subject: [labird] eBird photo suggestions from Van
Labird,
Posting the following note for Van:
---------------------
Some notes on eBird photo uploads from official eBird guidelines:
EBird photographers -- it's pretty obvious that many of you have not
read through eBird's well-written, succinct guidelines, or forgotten
them, so here are some reminders, with quotes indicating material taken
directly from those guidelines.
Multiple images of the same species
“We encourage you to add multiple photos that show different
individuals, parts, angles, or behaviors of the species as well as
photos illustrating different individuals seen while you are out
birding. However, multiple images should illustrate differences and *not
be nearly identical frames from the same burst of shots.”*
Time/date stamps
“Similarly, if your camera puts a time and date stamp onto the image
automatically, consider disabling this function. The time and date are
already stored in the metadata of the image and do not need to be
displayed on the image itself.”
Back-of-camera images
“When you’ve photographed a rare bird, it can be tempting to take a shot
of your camera’s LCD screen and upload it to your eBird list for quick
documentation purposes. While this can be a reasonable method of getting
the word out in a hurry, please *remember to go back and replace the
placeholder images*. Back-of-camera images may not be high enough
resolution to show critical details, lack important metadata such as
date and time, and are not useful for projects like MerlinVision.”
Photo ratings (in my view, which is shared with many people), is that
many eBird photos are drastically over-rated, especially if the bird is
colorful or rare; eBird guidelines make it clear that ratings should be
independent of how pretty or rare the bird is. Before rating photos,
please skim through eBird’s short guidelines on this – see link at end.
Some of the salient points are:
*“ *Watermarks: *Lower rating by 1-4 stars* depending on the size and
obtrusiveness of the watermark.
“1 Star:**Very poor quality. Very low resolution or very poor focus;
bird may be very small or obscured in the frame or have extremely bad
exposure. *In general should only be uploaded as record shots,* if still
identifiable.
