How to distinguish warblers/vireos/flycatchers?

Factual Questions
1

It is April in Chicagoland, the trees haven’t leafed out yet, and many yellowish grey birds are flitting around in the trees in my backyard. I’m a somewhat casual birdwatcher - I try it enough to realize how hard it can be.

So yesterday I’m sitting out back with my binos, and my Sibley’s and Peterson’s, driving myself crazy trying to put names to the various birds I see flitting around.

I’ve realized that wingbars and eye rings/color are crucial, but even once I identify a darkeyed greyish bird with wingbars and some yellowish color on its throat/breast/sides, none of the pics in the books look exactly like what I’m seeing (plus, the damned things keep flitting around!). :smack:

I keep a half-hearted lifelist, but am hesitant to place anything on it short of a positive ID. My fallback is to assume it is whatever is most common wherever I am, but migration kinda throws a wrench in that system.

I’m pretty confident one was a yellow-throated vireo. But with a little variation, a yellow-throated vireo could look a lot like a pine warbler, or a willow or alder flycatcher. And many of the others could have been any of a number of vireos, warblers, or flycatchers

So how do you do it? Do you narrow it down as best you can, and then make your best guess?

I guess one thing to do is to really MEMORIZE the plates and descriptions, so I can check off the distinguishing features as I look thru the binos, rather than trying to remember features and then look at the book. But I was serious about the halfhearted part. :o

2

You need the combo of appearance, song and behaviour to be really sure, especially for LBJs (and LGJs in your case)…

3

Yeah, none of the LGJs (SOBs?) were singing, which took that off the table. Pretty sure I heard a black and white at one point, but didn’t see it. Of course, a blind person could spot one of those!

4

I’m a keen birdwatcher albeit at the other side of the world and none of those birds are even remotely familiar.

As MrDibble pointed out above, when faced with an unknown bird that is easily confused with other birds, calls are the best way to tell them apart, followed by behaviour or habitat. (are all those birds likely to pop up in a garden?)

If you have a halfway decent camera, take a picture. You can identify it at leisure and if that fails, I’m sure Colibri will be able to help. You don’t need a lens that costs as much as a hatchback to take a picture good enough to ID most garden birds.

Googling pictures of the birds shows that the vireo has a very stocky bill compared to warblers and flycatchers. Is that not an identifying feature?

5

Yeah, I’m aware of the resources available. (And have long been impressed w/ Colibri!) But I’ve never been much interested in photography. My wife has a nice 35 mm, but I’m never even interested in figuring out zoom, flash, focus, aperture, etc. IME, those are the kind of things that need to be practiced at least w/ some frequency in order to be done reliably. But maybe I’ll give it a try this weekend if the weather is nice.

And tho I’ve uploaded photos, it’s not my idea of a good time. My fault/limitation, I know. But one reason I like birdwatching is because it is an activity out in nature, not requiring a bunch of technology.

The stocky bill is significant - but most effective if I were to see a vireo and warbler next to each other. Took me the longest time to reliably distinguish downy from hairy woodpeckers. The reason I started thinking flycatchers was because one bird I was getting REALLY good looks at seemed plumper with a tiny little bill.

With one, I swear 2x I saw a little splotch of red on the crown. But they were fleeting glimpses, and it was in a maple tree w/ swelling red buds. So I figured ruby crowned kinglet, but the red I thought I saw didn’t look like any photos…

Just drives me nuts when I spot a feature you think should be readily determinative - like one bird had a definite mask - lighter lines above and below the eyes and (I think) even the crown of the head. But I couldn’t find a single LGJ that had such head markings - IN ADDITION to the wing bars, coloration… And, invariably, by the time I look at the book and narrow down possibilities and identify the characteristics to look for, that LGJ has flown, to be replaced by a subtly DIFFERENT LGJ! :smack:

This is IMO the probably best time of year to birdwatch in Chicago, because all of the migrants are moving through, and the trees haven’t leafed out yet. My neighbors used to have a black locust which was a magnet to these migrants. They cut it down last summer:mad:, but I was glad to see the birds flitting around, mainly in the trees in our and our neighbors’ yards.

6

There’s no easy answer to this. Basically distinguishing these groups is a matter of experience and familiarity. It can be tough for the novice (as you have discovered). And some female and immature warblers can be almost impossible to tell apart without a very good look or a photo, although that’s more of a problem in the fall when there are many dull-plumaged immatures. Don’t get discouraged. Even I can have trouble telling some of these apart. Sometimes even photos are not definitive.

Experienced birders often rely on"jizz" (no jokes) to identify species.

One example: The Chestnut-sided Warbler characteristically holds its tail up and wings slightly out, distinguishing it from the Bay-breasted Warblerand other similar species even in dull plumage. I can often pick out a Chestnut-sided even in the treetops just by the way it behaves.

In general, vireos as said differ from warblers in their thicker, heavier bills. They also tend to be more sluggish and slower moving than warblers, most of which are very active.

Flycatchers are easier. In your area, all flycatchers perch more uprightly than warblers or vireos, which have a more horizontal stance. They also mostly catch insects by sallying out from a perch, rather than picking them off leaves or branches like warblers (except American Redstart) or vireos.

Some of the flycatchers, like Willow or Alder, are essentially indistinguishable in the field unless they are calling. They just go on the list as "Empidonax species.

7

Good info, Colibri. I always appreciate your contributions.

I love to read, and have read quite a bit about bird song, behavior, birdwatching, etc. Just finished a collections of Peterson’s articles from ?Bird Watching? magazine. In one of them he apologized for the term jizz, ;), tho he later wrote it as GIS (I think) General appearance, Impression, Song.

8

It has been explained as coming from a term used in identifying aircraft in WWII, General Impression of Size and Shape. However, as the wiki article says, it was used by birders as early as 1922, and may derive from the German gestalt.

The problem is that illustrators and authors have to boil down a great deal of variation in many species, especially those with distinct male, female, and immature plumage. What you are going to see is an illustration of the “average” bird. Some at the extremes may not look much like the illustration. And there’s always that one outlier that may lack the field mark that most members of the species, or one that shows field marks of two different species.

This said, Sibley is extraordinarily good in the accuracy of his illustrations. Other artists may not be so accurate.

9

Yeah, that’s what he said. MAN, I wish I retained a fraction of what I read! :smack:

I recently got Sibley, because 2 of my kids moved W of the Rockies. When I visit them, it really throws me to not be able to identify the birds, trees, etc. At the time I looked, their E and W fieldguides had not been updated recently. I agree, Sibley seems good, but it is difficult, as I’m so familiar w/ Peterson.

10

Oh, warblers. So pretty to hear and so exasperating to identify.

There’s a mysterious bird in my neighborhood that emits a unique buzzy trill, and half a dozen times I’ve stalked close enough to get a distinct impression of warbler-ness (thanks for the “jizz” reference, Colibri) but not enough for field marks. Instead I am reduced to peering into a densely foliaged tree and muttering, “Sit still you little bugger, I just want to see you.”

11

Personally, I think Sibley is the best, but it is definitely designed for the more experienced birder. Peterson is much more accessible to the novice by pointing out the key field marks more simply and explicitly.

12

My main problem was, when I lived somewhere that I tried to do a bit more identification, I got familiar with where the various birds appeared in Peterson’s. When trying to identify a little brown bird, a duck, or a raptor, it is useful to be able to quickly flip to the appropriate sections. I just need to use Sibley more to get more familiar with it’s organization.

Also, as I said, the size of Peterson’s field guide is more convenient than the big Sibley.

I’ve said it before, but will repeat that the first thing I learned when trying to ID birds is how blessedly hard it is!

My biggest success occurred a couple of years ago,. I’d heard a certain vocalization, but had no idea what it was. Then I listened to some CDs, and was able to ID it as a nuthatch - which I see frequently.

The last 2 springs, I’ve noticed redstarts in one back corner of my yard. Eager to see if they come through again.

13

I hear you and I’m not saying photograph every bird you see - just the handful that pose ID problems.

You know whats not my idea of a fun time? Being unable to ID that bird I’ve been watching for the past 30 minutes!

14

Success! I’d bet I’ve been looking at Kinglets. Small, drab, greyish/olive, white eyering, wing bars, flitting. One of them raised a ruby crown! But is Sibley showing red on the Tennessee and Nashville Warblers? Odd that he doesn’t mention it.

Then, I saw one with a gold crown. So cool! I had recently been reading about those, and it said how common they were, but I hadn’t been aware of seeing them.

Confident enough that I’m gonna add those 2 to my list! An afternoon well spent! :cool:

Some are showing a lot more yellow underneath, w/ very faint wingbars. Still not sure about those…

15

Tennessee lacks any red on the crown, and my copy of Sibley doesn’t show any. If yours does, it’s a printing error.

Nashville Warbler male has a chestnut crown. Sibley probably doesn’t mention it because it is not a distinguishing feature from the Virginia’s, Lucy’s, and Colima Warblers on the same page spread. Sibley tends to focus on features that separate a species from the most closely similar ones and may not mention obvious ones that are shared with other species.

16

Aw man, my memory is crap. Got Sibley open. Not Tennessee, but was looking at pp 476-77. The red marking on the top of the head for Nashville, Virginia’s and Coloma almost looked like crosshatching, and I thought it odd that there was no mention of it in the text. Getting a little better at finding the various birds.

So, whaddya think about my ID of the Kinglets? Not only was I recently reading a book about how they stay warm in the winter, but there were recently some stamps. 3 of the birds were really common to me, and the Kinglet. I looked it up, and saw its range was vast. So now I’ve seen one.

17

Got another one - Yellow Rumped Warbler. That’s 3 new birds for my backyard list in 2 days!

18

I understand your reluctance to jump into photography wholesale, but really, a point and shoot with digital zoom (or, better, a DSLR with a 250mm zoom), left on autofocus, is the easiest thing in the world to use. And then you can post your puzzlers and have smarties ID them in 2 minutes. And then you ask said smarties what diagnostic features led them to make the ID. Then you know! If you’re not going for ART, just record shots, then pah!

I quite like the Merlin bird ID app, but it takes up a bunch of space on your device.

Congrats on your kinglets! I see them a lot, but have NEVER seen a crown, ruby OR gold!

ETA: was your yellow-rumped an Audubon’s or a myrtle? We see both here in the SF Bay. Word on the street is that the splitters are going to win that particular taxonomic argument…

19

I’ve enjoyed reading some little bit on taxonony, evolution, as well as birdwatching, so I find the issue of lumpers vs splitters interesting! :smiley: Tho well above my involvement in this hobby.

Everything you say about tech is undeniably true, but you likely don’t appreciate what a Luddite I am. I have a whopping 1 app on my phone, so I’m not likely to be loading anything to help me out. And I’m the guy who still manages to cut off peoples’ heads and take fuzzy images - despite the assistance of autofocus and more.

What you describe as simple, sounds to me like this: :wink:

  1. Bring your camera/phone with you.
  2. Get as good at locating a bird through the camera as you are with binos.
  3. Take picture - or several.
  4. Review pics to decide which are best.
  5. Remember how to download photos to website. (Heck, at the moment I’m not even sure of the name. Is it Photobucket?)
  6. Try to remember password.
  7. Upload pics.
  8. Register for bird ID website. If already registered, try to remember password.
  9. Create post.
  10. Experiment to remember which of the file formats you need to link when posting to an ID website.
  11. Keep checking back…

Yeah - amazing resources. But not nearly as appealing to me as sitting in my back yard w/ my binos, thumbing through a book or 2… I mess with a computer all day long at work. I really try to minimize my use of tech otherwise. I really gravitate to activities I can participate in with as little tech as possible. Which I’m sure will limit my birdwatching somewhat.

A couple of years back when I started getting more into birdsong, I was researching whether they had an app that would ID birdcalls - similar to the ones they have for music. At the time, they said a couple were under development, but had not been perfected. Is there such a thing?

Meanwhile, up until a couple of days ago, I was not aware of having ever seen a kinglet. Now it seems they are EVERYWHERE! Yesterday we went to my sister’s house for dinner. As we walked along the side of their house to their backyard, there was a little greygreen bird flitting in the shrubs, so close I could almost have touched it. You got it - a kinglet! :smack:

20

Sibley also has a field guide, which is the same size as Peterson’s. You know that Peterson died and his latest edition is quite old. Sibley has just come out with a new edition of the field guide. This is important, not because birds change, but our names for them, and sometimes even the scientific name, changes. One obvious example, which you won’t encounter in Illinois is the tri-colored heron, which used to be called the Louisiana heron. The common morehen is now the common gallinule, another bird you won’t find in Illinois. Sometimes DNA studies will show that a bird that was thought to belong to one genus actually belongs to another. Sometimes birds that were thought to be different species actually are variations of the same species.

I have the large “the Sibley Guide to Birds” (not the field guide) and it shows that both the golden-crowned kinglet and the ruby-crowned kinglet are found where I live (in SC) only in the winter. The same is true for the golden-crowned where you live, and the ruby-crowned is found only in migration in Illinois. Although quite common here in the winter, they are rarely seen now.

I find quite useful is the iBird Pro app for iPhone. It plays the various variations of the songs and calls of the birds but also gives much useful additional info. AudubonBirds is another app. Sibley has an app too, but I downloaded Sibley Lite because it is free, and useless. It doesn’t even have many common birds.