Date: 7/19/25 2:11 pm From: Andrew Birch <0000171b9d979956-dmarc-request...> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Pipit sp in California
The British Birds article was intended as a guideline foridentification of Siberian solely in a vagrancy context and the scoring chart providinga framework to try to help weed out difficult Americans. Especially, thosemonochromatic, paler, grayer birds that tend to have white tips to the covertsand very pale underparts which highlight the bold underpart streaking and malarpatches that American can often show.
As already mentioned in this thread, fall and winterin-range Siberians show a decent amount of variability just as their Americancounterparts do and some are best left unidentified in a vagrancy context egthis Dec’ bird from China would struggle to gain acceptance. It’s got pale pinklegs and extensively streaked below, so I don’t think there’s a reason toquestion whether it’s actually a vagrant American. However, it’s very buffbelow as are the spade-shaped median covert tips https://www.shanghaibirding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/pipit-buff-bellied018.jpg American in fall and winter is perhaps one of the mostvariably-plumaged North American passerines and there is no single diagnosticfeature to separate the two as there is overlap on all features. The paler,more contrasting American types were found with a higher incidence from TX andNM. Plate 190 in the article from TX is an example of such a bird and below area few links of birds from TX and NM that approach Siberian in various respects.The first link, I feel is a “look” that is not far off the San Diego bird andis a “look” that other candidate japonicus have had from Texas and Illinois.All could score around 20-21 (just in Siberian territory) and interestingly,all have paler grayish upperparts (rather than brown), thin grayishflank streaking and rather dark legs which is a poor combination for a vagrantSiberian.https://flic.kr/s/aHsjPSd986https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/614494189 (also note the extensive back streaking and reddish-brownlegs)https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/629840750https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/612020404 (heavy malars and necklace)https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/611192616https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/519131511plus a couple of recent birds from my local CA flock bothwith white underparts, bold underpart streaking, necklaces and moderately largemalar patches:https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/625980063https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/614001275
However, in general, most Siberians are safely IDable in avagrancy context (even with fairly average photos) such as these birds:https://ebird.org/checklist/S32705221https://ebird.org/checklist/S60892194
https://ebird.org/checklist/S60856489Or even birdsthat are less well-streaked below. This one has muddy but pinkish legs and thephotos need some color correction but note the spade-shaped white tips to themedian coverts and the dark outer web to the distal end of R6 (see Fig. 11).Despite being quite white below, the upperparts are brown rather than gray: https://ebird.org/checklist/S4249237.
The San Diego bird I could also score between 20-21. At 21,it could well be a Siberian but per the article “Anycandidate vagrant Siberian Pipit that falls at the lower end of the scale(20–21) should be scrutinised carefully in the field and the identificationsupported by multiple photographs in a variety of postures. Assessment of legcolor, size of malar patch, extent of upper-breast streaking and necklaceshould be scored conservatively and with care.”
I agree its underpart color, malar, upper breast streaking, streakingon sides of upper breast and color and definition (from what we can see) ofmedian covert tips can all work for Siberian. However, for a bird at the lowend of the scale that requires extra scrutiny, I think there are a few additionalfeatures that personally make me pause. It’s darker legs does mean it’s goingto need to be quite typical on other features.
* Perhaps, it’s the dulllate afternoon lighting being misleading but the upperparts convey a paler, grayishtone. To my eye, it’s closer in tone and color to the TX bird https://flic.kr/s/aHsjPSd986 or plate 190) than it is to the cooler brown of an “average”Siberian https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/629139865 (also including the Turkish bird that is in the SDchecklist). Compared to many Americans, Siberian has a cooler brown tone andbecomes colder and grayer by late autumn but the SD bird seems a bit too paleand gray to my eye (vs plate 176 and 177).
* I also think thepaler upperparts of the SD bird are making the mantle streaking seem strongertoo and it’s not more strongly streaked than a couple of the example Americanslinked to above eg https://flic.kr/s/aHsjPSd986orhttps://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/614494189. Backstreaking can be hard to assess in the field and is also variable between bothspecies but it can be quite extensive on many Siberians (plate 177) and theyoften exhibit “paler tramlines” between the dark streaking. This Jan’ Siberian has“paler tramlines” contrasting with the brown back (https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/629139870) or this different individual https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/628704704 and also the Turkish bird (in the SD checklist).
* Aside from the large dark malar and streaking around the upper breast, the rest of the underpartstreaking is quite weak and seems contrastingly thinner, grayerand spottier not just on the flanks.
* And lastly, theshape of the distal end of the median covert tips aren’t spade-shaped on the SDbird as they are on all the Siberian examples linked in this email eg theTurkish and the Japanese bird https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/629139865 plus all of the North American vagrants linked to above.
Of course, the SD bird could absolutelybe a Siberian but based on the available photos, I personally think there’s sufficientroom for uncertainty in a vagrancy context.
Best, Andy BirchLos Angeles
