Voting Comments
Record #: 6-B-90
Red-headed Woodpecker
ACCEPT
1st Round: (5-2)
2nd Round: (6-1)
|
1st Round |
2nd Round (6 Accept, 1 Reject) |
| 12-17-2006. Shirley Sturts -- Accept Easy to identify. Adequate field marks provided. I know Pat to be an experienced and reliable observer. |
04-24-2007. Shirley Sturts -- Accept I am staying with my vote to accept. The description could be in more detail, but the observer is an experienced birder and he is familiar with the species. I don't believe he would mix it up with the Red-breasted Sapsucker, the only other species with similar but very different plumage. |
| 12-18-2006. chuck trost -- Accept Good description, and well seen. |
05-06-2007. chuck trost -- Accept Even though a single observer, the wing patches and red head were seen well. I chased this bird, but failed to find it. |
| 12-21-2006. Carlisle -- Accept brief but sufficient description; easy ID |
05-05-2007. Carlisle -- Accept Again, a brief report but given the observer's experience with this easy to ID species and that he saw it for several minutes, I think there's little likihood that he would have confused it with a RB Sapsucker. |
| 12/27/06 Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established Although the observer may have seen a Red-headed Woodpecker the written description falls a bit short of being conclusive for me. Specifically the wing patches described as "patches" suggests that they are isolated white patches and do not connect with the white tail. As a result I think it's possible for Red-breasted Sapsucker to fit this description as well, despite being even less expected than Red-headed Woodpecker. |
4/25/07. Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established I'm going to stick with my vote to reject this record based on the description of the white wing patches and no mention of the white rump/tail or Tee like appearance of the white visible on the bird in flight. This mark is quite distinctive in flight and the fact that it is not mentioned raises doubt about the ID because it does not effectively rule out the possibility of Red-breasted Sapsucker. |
| 12-28-2006. Dave Trochlell -- Accept I accept this record with no reservations. |
04-27-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Accept Although brief, the description seemed adequate. |
| 01-05-2007. dumroese -- Reject, specific identification not established I feel this report lacks sufficient detail. Why not a Red-breasted Sapsucker? Red head, black & white on wings? |
15 May 2007. Hardy -- Accept I think it would be hard for an experienced birder to confuse this species with any other. I have a passing acquaintance with Pat Cole and have formed an impression of him as a careful and reliable observer. |
| 1/16/07. Charles Swift -- Accept Acceptable description and little to be confused with. |
5/10/2007. Charles Swift -- Accept The description is sufficient for this species. Additionally, the observer is familiar with the species and it is quite distinctive so would not be easily confused for a Red-breasted Sapsucker. Also the date and habitat should favor Red-headed Woodpecker. |