Posted by Phil Pickering (208.46.229.142) on September 03, 2001 at 19:44:46:
In Reply to: August posted by Phil Pickering on August 22, 2001 at 12:25:46:
Not specifically mentioned in my first post, but worth noting is the fact that this bird does show the patterning of an empid, although it is very faint. I see a barely detectable eye-ring, pale in the supralores, a pale outer edge to the outer retrice, a prominent pale tertial edge, and traces of wing-bars.
In fact, I think the (apparent) facial pattern is probably more consistent with Gray than Dusky. The pale area immediately in front of the eye appears fairly wide, but it quickly narrows and drops before appearing to extend in a narrow band across the base of the forehead where it meets the upper mandible. My inexperienced impression from photo study is that Dusky more typically shows a wider, somewhat more prominent pale area in the supralores, that extends out more horizontally onto the side edges of the forehead without narrowing as much. In other words the "spectacles" are more typically wider in Dusky (and broken at the central base of the forehead), narrower (but complete) in Gray. I suppose it's probably dangerous to try to judge this on a worn bird in a poor photo, but I'd have to say that what's visible here is at least a good supporting mark for Gray.
After another look, I'd have to agree completely with Dave Fix that the jizz is somewhat Solitaire-ish, almost bordering on that of a larger bird than an empid. The head is proportionately large, legs thick, and body and tail very long, seemingly a bit too long even for a Dusky. As far as I can tell, everything seems to point to Brown.... er, I mean Gray Flycatcher.
Cheers,
Phil