OT - what species of bird is this please.

On Sun, 8 Oct 2006 13:40:27 -0400, "Rudy Benner"
wrote:

I would like to know what kind of duck I am looking at , the little one, not
the Mallard.

http://rudybenner.com/album/DSC_0691.jpg



Rudy:

What you've got there is an immature Ring-neccked duck (Aythya
collaris)

The young ones often are missing the signature ring on the beak.

Here's a picture of an older female:
http://www.mangoverde.com/wbg/picpages/pic27-123-2.html

Immature birds are perhaps the most difficult challenge in birding.

John Hufnagel

"Go-dot" nospam@comcastnospamnet wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006 13:40:27 -0400, "Rudy Benner"
wrote:

I would like to know what kind of duck I am looking at , the little one,
not
the Mallard.

http://rudybenner.com/album/DSC_0691.jpg



Rudy:

What you've got there is an immature Ring-neccked duck (Aythya
collaris)

The young ones often are missing the signature ring on the beak.

Here's a picture of an older female:
http://www.mangoverde.com/wbg/picpages/pic27-123-2.html

Immature birds are perhaps the most difficult challenge in birding.

John Hufnagel

You could well be right. I ran across that name several times today in my
attempt to identify this creature. He is one heck of a good diver, makes the
Mallards look poor. Not as good a diver as the Common Loons. We had two
pairs of adults on the lake this summer, only one pair of young ones.
Beautiful creatures. I have a couple of pictures of the juveniles
somewhere.... lets see ....

http://rudybenner.com/album/Timmins%.../DSC_8770.html

and

http://rudybenner.com/album/Timmins%.../DSC_8776.html

and here is an adult with one of the chicks.

http://rudybenner.com/album/Timmins%.../DSC_7555.html

They will carry the chicks around on their back. Hard to get close enough
for a good shot. I am limited to 300 mm.

Rudy Benner wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..
Sheldon wrote:
Rudy Benner wrote:
I would like to know what kind of duck I am looking at , the little one,
not
the Mallard.

http://rudybenner.com/album/DSC_0691.jpg

The lower duck, with green neck, is definitely a male mallard. The
upper duck, the one without the green neck is *definitely* a female or
immature mallard (it's near impssible by visual alone to differentiate
an immature mallard from a female mallard.

Whew! [see my post a bit before yours chronologically and rudy's reply] I
thought my memory banks had been blown out. Our replies are virtually
identical.

--
john mcwilliams

I am putting together a short pdf file which shows the Mallard drake, the
Mallard hen (or immature mallard), and the bird in question.

http://www.rudybenner.com/album/Birds.pdf

The first page shows one drake and 3 hens (or immature), all Mallards. All
the Mallards
have orange feet. The mystery bird does not. It is considerably smaller than
the Mallards. The bird in question is not a Mallard. All the Mallards I have
seen have a dark eye, the bird in question has a golden eye. Note the
difference in body structure.

This is not the same as your first picture... the lone duck appears to
be a scaup. Whether a lesser scaup or greater scaup is not clear....
it would help to know where and when.

"Sheldon" wrote in message
ups.com...

Rudy Benner wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..
Sheldon wrote:
Rudy Benner wrote:
I would like to know what kind of duck I am looking at , the little
one,
not
the Mallard.

http://rudybenner.com/album/DSC_0691.jpg

The lower duck, with green neck, is definitely a male mallard. The
upper duck, the one without the green neck is *definitely* a female or
immature mallard (it's near impssible by visual alone to differentiate
an immature mallard from a female mallard.

Whew! [see my post a bit before yours chronologically and rudy's reply]
I
thought my memory banks had been blown out. Our replies are virtually
identical.

--
john mcwilliams

I am putting together a short pdf file which shows the Mallard drake, the
Mallard hen (or immature mallard), and the bird in question.

http://www.rudybenner.com/album/Birds.pdf

The first page shows one drake and 3 hens (or immature), all Mallards.
All
the Mallards
have orange feet. The mystery bird does not. It is considerably smaller
than
the Mallards. The bird in question is not a Mallard. All the Mallards I
have
seen have a dark eye, the bird in question has a golden eye. Note the
difference in body structure.

This is not the same as your first picture... the lone duck appears to
be a scaup. Whether a lesser scaup or greater scaup is not clear....
it would help to know where and when.


All shot the same place on the same day within minutes.

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 00:30:20 -0400, "Rudy Benner"
wrote:



Rudy:

What you've got there is an immature Ring-neccked duck (Aythya
collaris)

The young ones often are missing the signature ring on the beak.

Here's a picture of an older female:
http://www.mangoverde.com/wbg/picpages/pic27-123-2.html

Immature birds are perhaps the most difficult challenge in birding.

John Hufnagel


and here is an adult with one of the chicks.

http://rudybenner.com/album/Timmins%.../DSC_7555.html

They will carry the chicks around on their back. Hard to get close enough
for a good shot. I am limited to 300 mm.

Rudy:

We spend several weeks on a lake in New Hampshire each summer. This
year, we saw several loons that came pretty close, but not close
enough for the photo equipment I had on hand, my Canon 350D and 135mm
lens, Next year I'll be bringing along 300mm, 500mm, and 600mm
lenses. (Tamrons and Perkin-Elmer). Hopefully, the loons will be
back, and come close enough for photos like yours (I love your shot of
the two loons).

Unfortunately, none of my longer lenses have IS technology, so
technique is critical in getting a sharp image. I use my largest
tripod (Bogen 3051) with a fluid head (3063) and emote release. I
have to shoot from th shore, as the docks, which sit on rock piles,
induce to much shake if I move!

BTW, what kind of 300 did you use for the aforementioned shot?

John.

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 07:28:51 -0400
"Rudy Benner" wrote:

This is not the same as your first picture... the lone duck appears
to be a scaup. Whether a lesser scaup or greater scaup is not
clear.... it would help to know where and when.


All shot the same place on the same day within minutes.

Hmmm... Didn't answer the question. Could be because you're not
a birder and don't know why the question matters. Or, you could
be trolling. I'll assume the former and see where it goes.

According to Sibley, the greater and lesser scaup have fairly
dramatically different geographic distributions. The location
and time of year of a siting helps to assign a probability to
an identification.

Actually, the best thing you could do is to go back out into the
field and get some more images of the bird.

Paul Allen

"Go-dot" nospam@comcastnospamnet wrote in message
...
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 00:30:20 -0400, "Rudy Benner"
wrote:



Rudy:

What you've got there is an immature Ring-neccked duck (Aythya
collaris)

The young ones often are missing the signature ring on the beak.

Here's a picture of an older female:
http://www.mangoverde.com/wbg/picpages/pic27-123-2.html

Immature birds are perhaps the most difficult challenge in birding.

John Hufnagel


and here is an adult with one of the chicks.

http://rudybenner.com/album/Timmins%.../DSC_7555.html

They will carry the chicks around on their back. Hard to get close enough
for a good shot. I am limited to 300 mm.

Rudy:

We spend several weeks on a lake in New Hampshire each summer. This
year, we saw several loons that came pretty close, but not close
enough for the photo equipment I had on hand, my Canon 350D and 135mm
lens, Next year I'll be bringing along 300mm, 500mm, and 600mm
lenses. (Tamrons and Perkin-Elmer). Hopefully, the loons will be
back, and come close enough for photos like yours (I love your shot of
the two loons).

Unfortunately, none of my longer lenses have IS technology, so
technique is critical in getting a sharp image. I use my largest
tripod (Bogen 3051) with a fluid head (3063) and emote release. I
have to shoot from th shore, as the docks, which sit on rock piles,
induce to much shake if I move!

BTW, what kind of 300 did you use for the aforementioned shot?

John.


The loons were about 30 feet from shore. That was a 70-300mm Nikkor.

"Paul Allen" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 07:28:51 -0400
"Rudy Benner" wrote:

This is not the same as your first picture... the lone duck appears
to be a scaup. Whether a lesser scaup or greater scaup is not
clear.... it would help to know where and when.


All shot the same place on the same day within minutes.

Hmmm... Didn't answer the question. Could be because you're not
a birder and don't know why the question matters. Or, you could
be trolling. I'll assume the former and see where it goes.

According to Sibley, the greater and lesser scaup have fairly
dramatically different geographic distributions. The location
and time of year of a siting helps to assign a probability to
an identification.

Actually, the best thing you could do is to go back out into the
field and get some more images of the bird.

Paul Allen

I have plenty of images of the bird in question.

The date and time are established by the EXIF data. The location is
Northeastern Ontario.

Rudy Benner wrote:
I would like to know what kind of duck I am looking at , the little one, not
the Mallard.

http://rudybenner.com/album/DSC_0691.jpg

Searching Google for "duck identification", the first hit I got was

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/b...dist/index.htm

which has images of the American ducks. There are other sites
that look good too.

Incidentally, as others have said, when inquiring about the
identification of any plant or animal, it's best to give every
piece of information you have - geographical location,
setting (e.g., lake, river, salt water bay, etc.) date, time,
approximate size (often not at all obvious from the photo,
but I understand that you can't always estimate when
you're shooting at a distance as in this case.)

If you see any interesting behavior, report that too. For
example, some ducks dive for food and may stay under for
quite a while. Others just, well, "duck" their heads in the
water, wiggling their feet and tails in the air.

It's true, as you say, that the date and time may be available
from the EXIF info, but why make each viewer hunt for info
that you already have, and why exclude good naturalists who
happen to be technically unsophisticated photographers?

Alan

Rudy Benner wrote:
"Sheldon" wrote in message
ups.com...

Rudy Benner wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..
Sheldon wrote:
Rudy Benner wrote:
I would like to know what kind of duck I am looking at , the little
one,
not
the Mallard.

http://rudybenner.com/album/DSC_0691.jpg

The lower duck, with green neck, is definitely a male mallard. The
upper duck, the one without the green neck is *definitely* a female or
immature mallard (it's near impssible by visual alone to differentiate
an immature mallard from a female mallard.

Whew! [see my post a bit before yours chronologically and rudy's reply]
I
thought my memory banks had been blown out. Our replies are virtually
identical.

--
john mcwilliams

I am putting together a short pdf file which shows the Mallard drake, the
Mallard hen (or immature mallard), and the bird in question.

http://www.rudybenner.com/album/Birds.pdf

The first page shows one drake and 3 hens (or immature), all Mallards.
All
the Mallards
have orange feet. The mystery bird does not. It is considerably smaller
than
the Mallards. The bird in question is not a Mallard. All the Mallards I
have
seen have a dark eye, the bird in question has a golden eye. Note the
difference in body structure.

This is not the same as your first picture... the lone duck appears to
be a scaup. Whether a lesser scaup or greater scaup is not clear....
it would help to know where and when.


All shot the same place on the same day within minutes.

Oh, geeze... yer kidding, I hope. Not asking for your actual address
(not even interested in your address, only the duc'ks addy... may be
you shot that pic during a trip to Bonner County Idaho and you live in
Noo Joisey), within 150 miles is good-n-nuff... and I can't imagine the
season is too private to share... within minutes is only important
flight data if yer tawkin' a goober bellied NASA... I mean like knowing
the month would be super.