LOUISIANA BIRD RECORDS COMMITTEE

REPORT FORM

1. English and Scientific names: Bell’s Vireo

2. Number of individuals, sexes, ages, general plumage (e.g., 2 in alternate plumage): 1

3. Locality: Parish: ___EBR_________________________________________

Specific Locality: ____Richfield River Silt_______________________________

4. Date(s) when observed: 13 Nov. 2011

5. Time(s) of day when observed: mid morning

6. Reporting observer and address: Van Remsen, LSUMNS

7. Other observers accompanying reporter who also identified the bird(s):

8. Other observers who independently identified the bird(s):

9. Light conditions (position of bird in relation to shade and to direction and amount of light): good, bright

10. Optical equipment (type, power, condition): 10x40 Swarovski

11. Distance to bird(s): as close as 20 ft.

12. Duration of observation: 2+ mins

13. Habitat: scrubby thickets dominated by willow inside Miss. R levee

14. Behavior of bird / circumstances of observation (flying, feeding, resting; include and stress habits used in identification; relate events surrounding observation): silently moving through low tree. Responded to BEVI song playback by coming in closer, obviously curious, but did not call.

15. Description (include only what was actually seen, not what "should" have been seen; include if possible: total length/relative size compared to other familiar species, body bulk, shape, proportions, bill, eye, leg, and plumage characteristics. Stress features that separate it from similar species): [Transcribed from field notes]: “Studied for 2+ minutes in great light. Superficially like a chubby Ruby-crowned Kinglet, but obvious thick, vireo bill, and all the “features” of this species: blank face except for indistinct eyeline – otherwise no head-face markings; a single whitish wingbar, not conspicuous; whitish underparts blending to yellowish flanks and belly; relatively short tail; green back. …. Fairly bright bird – probably nominate bellii.” Iris obviously dark.

16. Voice: silent

17. Similar species (include how they were eliminated by your observation): vs. WEVI = no forehead-crown contrast, no yellow anywhere on head, eyebrow, wingbars not bold enough etc. Vs. RCKI: no eyering, wingbars not bold enough, bill too short and heavy, legs too heavy, too slow-moving etc.

18. Photographs or tape recordings obtained? (by whom? attached?):

19. Previous experience with this species: Several previous sightings in LA plus many sightings elsewhere.

20. Identification aids: (list books, illustrations, other birders, etc. used in identification):

a. at time of observation: none

b. after observation: none

21. This description is written from: _____ notes made during the observation (_____notes attached?);__XX__notes made after the observation (date:_13 Nov. 2011____); _____memory.

22. Are you positive of your identification if not, explain: Y

23. Date:_8 Sep 2013_________Time:_______