Review: Shorebirds of North America, Europe, and Asia

Shorebirds are one of the most fascinating bird groups, but also one of the most difficult to learn. Birds in this group undertake some of the longest known bird migrations, with the Bar-tailed Godwit perhaps being the longest. In spring and fall, migration hotspots teem with dense flocks of shorebirds numbering in the thousands. These spectacular flocks can make it hard to pick out and identify individual birds. In addition, while some shorebirds are quite colorful, most have cryptic plumage with subtle variations from one species to another.

As such, birders can benefit studying detailed books devoted to shorebird species. Fortunately there are now several quality guides available. This spring, Princeton University Press added a new field guide for shorebirds: Shorebirds of North America, Europe, and Asia: A Photographic Guide, by Richard Chandler. This new guide expands and updates an older guide by the same author, North Atlantic Shorebirds.

The Chandler guide presents all shorebird species that have been recorded in the northern hemisphere. For the purposes of this guide, "northern hemisphere" excludes all of South America and Australia, as well as most of Africa and Oceania. A short introduction contains tips for studying and identifying shorebirds and notes on their behavior. Molt patterns, aberrant plumages, and typical shorebird behaviors are all well-illustrated with photographs. One thing that I learned from the introduction (though I should have guessed it previously) is that shorebirds often cough up pellets of bits of shells and other indigestible debris.

Each of the 134 species has its own 2-5 page account, with most species receiving 3 pages of text and photos. The photographs depict most significant plumage types for each species and include at least one photo of each species either in flight or with its wings stretched out. The text includes detailed notes for identifying juvenile, non-breeding, and breeding plumages, with attention to how first winter and first spring birds might differ from adults. If a species has identifiable subspecies, its account includes a comparison table of relevant field marks for each population. Each account also provides information about seasonal distribution and conservation status, as well as a range map.

I have two minor complaints about the Chandler guide. One is that the species accounts include few, if any, comparison shots of similar species. The text does include tips for separating similar species, but visual comparison is often more helpful for learning differences in shape and size. The second is that the binding on my examination copy became heavily creased after only light use. While the photographs and printing are of high quality, the cover ought to be more durable for field use.

North American birders will want to know how Shorebirds of North America, Europe, and Asia compares to another recently-published book, The Shorebird Guide by Michael O'Brien, Richard Crossley, and Kevin Karlson. On average, Chandler presents fewer photographs per species, with one exception being Dunlin. However, the Chandler guide has better coverage for species that are common on other continents but occur as vagrants in North America. One area in which the Chandler guide improves on O'Brien et al. is in its organization. I much prefer field guides that, like the Chandler guide, place the plates and species accounts together rather than in separate sections. O'Brien et al. place some text on the plates with full species accounts in the back of the book. Finally, this is a subjective impression, but I feel that the photography in the O'Brien guide is more dynamic in that it depicts both field marks and typical behaviors and includes more photos of mixed-species groups of shorebirds.

If your birding takes you to multiple continents in the northern hemisphere, Richard Chandler's Shorebirds of North America, Europe, and Asia will be quite useful. This guide combines excellent photography and a descriptive text to assist the reader in identifying shorebirds in all plumages. North American birders, especially those in coastal areas, should find it helpful for identifying vagrant species, especially ones that are rarely depicted in standard field guides. More than that, it provides the opportunity to study closely related species from across the hemisphere in a single guide. I would recommend this for any birder with a strong interest in shorebirds.

---

Richard Chandler, Shorebirds of North America, Europe, and Asia: A Photographic Guide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009. Pp. 448; color photographs, maps, tables, index. $35.00 paper.

More Moths: A Webworm and a Looper

Since I have been on a moth kick for the past few days, I'll add one more post on moths. These are not connected with moth night. Instead these are ones found at home or on walks.

The first is a Celery Looper Moth (Autographa or Anagrapha falcifera) from Willowwood Arboretum. I found this moth because it was fluttering around the edge of the meadow. I knew where it landed, but I had trouble finding it at first. I looked above, below, and behind the dead leaf, but I could not see it. Then I realized that the moth was one with the dead leaf.

From above:

This last image is not so good, but it shows the moth with its wings somewhat outstretched.

The second looks like it might be a firefly or wasp, but in fact it is a moth, probably a Virginia Ctenucha (Ctenucha virginica). I found it visiting goldenrod flowers at Willowwood. In this image the feathery antennae characteristic of moths are clearly visible.

The third moth is an Ailanthus Webworm Moth (Atteva punctella), found at home. According to the Kaufman guide, the larvae of this species gather on Ailanthus trees. I am happy to learn that something feeds on Ailanthus, as this plant has become an invasive pest in many areas. This adult, however, was on a lobelia plant.

I used my slide loupe to get some closer shots. Getting proper focus was a bit of a challenge.

The moth was surprisingly tolerant, but eventually it tired of my antics and flew away. I think I have some more caterpillar photos stashed somewhere on my hard drive, but those will make for a separate post.

Moth Night: Other Moths

Yesterday I posted a few pictures of zales from East Brunswick's Moth Night. Zales, of course, were not the only moths that we saw. Plenty of moths came to the light and sugar traps, including various underwings, webworms, and other types.

The first two photos appear to be the same species, possibly Armyworm (Mythimna unipuncta). 

You can see how the syrupy lure fills the groves in the tree trunk.

  

I think this may be a geometer moth (family Geometridae).

I took fewer photos than I would have liked at the sheet, partly because space in front of the sheet was crowded and partly because my camera and batteries were not cooperating at times. Moths from several families were attracted to the sheet. Micromoths included an Ailanthus Webworm and Sod Webworm. Some underwing and geometer moths were present as well.

The moth below looks like one of the arches species, perhaps Explicit Arches (Lacinipolia explicata).

The moth below also appears to be a geometer moth, as in the third photo above.

The moth below is an underwing moth, possibly a Mouse Moth (Amphipyra tragopoginis). When closed, the forewings have a greenish metallic sheen.

If you know the identities of any of these moths, please do leave a comment. In the course of preparing this post and yesterday's, I found myself wishing for a moth guide. BugGuide.net is a great resource, but a book with plates makes it much easier to compare species and figure out what markings are most important.

Moth Night: Zales

Last Wednesday I went with Patrick to Moth Night at East Brunswick's Butterfly Park. The event was well attended, with a core set of moth enthusiasts joined by families with children. The arrangement was fairly simple. Near the edge of the meadow and woods, the organizers had set up a white sheet with a halogen bulb shining on one side. Moths attracted to the light would land on the sheet, where they would be easy to see and photograph. A trail would through the woods, and trees on either side of the trail were painted with an addicting mix of beer, bananas, rum, and other sugary substances.

Moths were already flying at dusk when Patrick and I arrived, and more gathered at the lamp as the evening grew darker. Participants had the option of staying at the sheet or walking the trail. The first group to walk the trail was huge; the second one was much smaller as most of the families left as soon as the first one was done. The two types of lures attracted different sets of species, so it was best to check both at least once to get the most out of the event. Patrick and I walked the trail at least twice and spent plenty of time at the sheet. In the course of the evening, I saw several moth types I had not seen (or at least identified) previously.

Below are three pictures of zales. All three seem to be the same species, Lunate Zale. One of the organizers mentioned it as a possibility, and after reviewing what is most likely to be flying in early September, I think it is the best fit.

One thing that I found interesting was how different the moths' wing patterns appear under different lighting conditions. In the photo above, the colors appear very muted. With different lighting (and different exposure settings on my camera), the dark colors appear much darker and parts of the moth's wing appear metallic green.

One benefit of using a sugary substance as a lure was that we got to watch the zale stick out its probiscis.

I am very new to moths, so if you have any other ideas about their identification, please leave a comment. There will be underwings and other moths in a future post.

Oops! I thought I had scheduled this to publish this morning, but I guess I accidentally clicked "save now" instead of "publish post" when I scheduled it.

Click through for Moth Night Part 2: Other Moths.

Tasty Morsels

Since the weekend's blogging so far has been devoted to dead things and the birds that eat them, I decided to carry on the theme for another day. Someone on another site described me as morbid on Friday simply because I posted links to a leopard seal catching a pintail and this strange creation. To me, those are not morbid at all. Predation is an important part of the natural world, and the remains of dead animals can be interesting for a variety of reasons. Occasionally I find dead animals on my walks, and when I do, I usually try to figure out what they were and how they might have died.

Here a few images from dead things that I found recently. The first is a dragonfly at Buck Gardens in Far Hills, NJ. I am not sure how it ended up in the water, or why it stayed there for so long without something eating it. (The ponds are well-stocked with frogs and other potential dragonfly predators.) I am not entirely sure of the species, either. The best match I have found so far is Autumn Meadowhawk.

The thriving mosquito population in Lord Stirling Park made it very difficult to concentrate on warblers flitting in the treetops. One bird, at least, made itself easier to watch by lying in pieces on the ground.

It may not be entirely evident from this photo, but in the field I could recognize this as the wing of a Blue Jay. There does not seem to be much meat left on this wing; it has been picked clean except for bones and feathers. Of the predators likely to be in the park, Cooper's Hawk seems the most likely to have killed and plucked this jay. Sharp-shinned Hawks prefer smaller birds, and the other possible hawks prefer mammals, reptiles, or amphibians. Owls tend to swallow their prey whole rather than leave a mess like this. A mammalian predator is possible, but the spatial distribution of body parts suggested that they were torn off and dropped from high in a tree over the boardwalk.

There were other leftover body parts. Feathers were scattered here and there, and next to the boardwalk was the jay's head. Feathers were still stuck to the face and crown, but they had been ripped off the back of the head, so that the skull and spinal cord were visible.

Sadly, there seemed to be little left for a vulture to snack on.