Message Board Search Tool
Banding Code Translator | Recent Rare Bird Sightings
©2018 Christopher Taylor (Kiwifoto.com)
Help Support!
calbirds        search ebird rarities [plot]
filter rba/cbc

  35 result(s) found...Displaying messages 1 through 15, sorted by date descending.
  next page

 Month/Year Breakdown (Top 15):

 Mar, 2018 - 6 e-mail(s)...
 Oct, 2012 - 3 e-mail(s)...
 Jul, 2002 - 2 e-mail(s)...
 Nov, 2003 - 2 e-mail(s)...
 Jan, 2006 - 2 e-mail(s)...
 Sep, 2018 - 2 e-mail(s)...
 Mar, 2006 - 2 e-mail(s)...
 Jan, 2018 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 Dec, 2005 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 May, 2018 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 Apr, 2006 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 Sep, 2006 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 Sep, 2007 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 Nov, 2008 - 1 e-mail(s)...
 Jan, 2010 - 1 e-mail(s)...



   Broad-billed Hummingbird
Broad-billed Hummingbird
Cynanthus latirostris


   Broad-billed Hummingbird (Cynanthus latirostris) - BBIH (recent eBird sightings, view CBRC records, range map
)

  1. Broad-billed Hummer Marin Co LINK
    DATE: Sep 4, 2018 @ 11:54am, 49 day(s) ago
    The Broad-billed Hummingbird continues this morning in Bolinas at Keith Hansen's feeders at his gallery.
    
    John Luther
    Oakland
  2. -back to top-
  3. Broad-billed Hummingbird LINK
    DATE: Sep 2, 2018 @ 5:07pm, 51 day(s) ago
    Hi all,
    
    Keith Hansen has a HY male Broad-billed Hummingbird coming to a feeder this afternoon at his gallery in Bolinas (Marin Co).
    
    Good luck.
    
    Dan Singer
    
    San Rafael
  4. -back to top-
  5. CBRC review and request for documentation LINK
    DATE: May 7, 2018 @ 12:09pm, 6 month(s) ago
    California birders,  The California Bird Records Committee (CBRC) will begin reviewing the following records in early June. If you have any documentation to submit for these records, please do so as soon as possible. Feel free to forward this request to local
    listservs as appropriate. Thank you.  Tom  Thomas A. Benson Secretary, California Bird Records Committee   Broad-billed Hummingbird 2017-166 15 Dec 2017 Bay Park SD  (single observer, documentation complete) Broad-billed Hummingbird 2017-172 16 Dec 2017-6 Mar 2018 Goleta SBA  (documentation from 5 observers, add値 doc. requested) Broad-billed Hummingbird 2018-025 27 Feb 2018 Mission Valley SD  (single observer, documentation complete) Broad-billed Hummingbird 2018-028 9-19 Mar 2018 San Francisco SF  (documentation from 6 observers, add値 doc. requested) Tricolored Heron 2017-111 13 Oct 2017-17 Apr 2018 San Diego R. & Famosa Slough SD (documentation from 8 observers, add値 doc. requested) Tricolored Heron 2017-136 1 Oct 2017-28 Apr 2018 San Diego Bay SD  (documentation from 3 observers, add値 doc. requested) Greater Pewee 2017-114 12-29 Oct 2017 Pacific Palisades LA  (documentation from 5 observers, add値 doc. requested) Greater Pewee 2017-151 5 Dec 2017-16 Apr 2018 Balboa Park SD  (documentation from 7 observers, add値 doc. requested) Dusky-capped Flycatcher 2017-145 29 Nov-1 Dec 2017 Crab Park HUM  (documentation from 3 observers, add値 doc. requested) Dusky-capped Flycatcher 2017-146 1 Dec 2017-3 Apr 2018 Ladera Park LA  (documentation from 1 observer, add値 doc. requested) Dusky-capped Flycatcher 2017-157 15 Dec 2017-12 Jan 2018 Berry Park SD  (documentation from 3 observers, add値 doc. requested) Dusky-capped Flycatcher 2017-163 16 Dec 2017-12 Jan 2018 CSU Channel Islands VEN  (documentation from 1 observer, add値 doc. requested) Dusky-capped Flycatcher 2017-164 16 Dec 2017-16 Mar 2018 Runnymede Rec. Center LA  (documentation from 1 observer, add値 doc. requested) Thick-billed Kingbird 2017-120 23 Oct 2017-8 Apr 2018 Poggi Canyon SD  (documentation from 3 observers, add値 doc. requested) Curve-billed Thrasher 2017-137 22-24 Nov 2017 Senator Wash Reservoir IMP  (single observer, documentation complete) White Wagtail 2017-167 21 Dec 2017-30 Jan 2018 Prado Reg. Park SBE  (documentation from 5 observers, add値 doc. requested) Common Redpoll 2018-005 8-13 Jan 2018 Aspendell INY  (documentation from 7 observers, add値 doc. requested) Rusty Blackbird 2017-153 10 Dec 2017-8 Apr 2018 Almansor Park LA  (documentation from 4 observers, add値 doc. requested) Rusty Blackbird 2017-161 17 Dec 2017-20 Jan 2018 Trancas Canyon LA  (documentation from 1 observer, add値 doc. requested) Rusty Blackbird 2017-162 17-19 Dec 2017 Mammoth MNO  (documentation from 2 observers, add値 doc. requested) Rusty Blackbird 2018-006 10 Jan 2018 Bette Davis Picnic Area LA  (single observer, documentation complete) Rusty Blackbird 2018-007 13 Jan-18 Feb 2018 Moonglow Dairy MTY  (documentation from 3 observers, add値 doc. requested) Rusty Blackbird 2018-020 8 Feb-8 Apr 2018 Waller Park SBA  (documentation from 7 observers, add値 doc. requested) Worm-eating Warbler 2018-003 6 Jan-17 Feb 2018 Reichmuth Park SAC  (documentation from 6 observers, add値 doc. requested) Cape May Warbler 2018-017 3 Feb 2018 Blythe RIV  (single observer, documentation complete) Grace痴 Warbler 2018-019 5 Feb-1 Apr 2018 Del Mar SD  (documentation from 6 observers, add値 doc. requested) Grace痴 Warbler 2018-030 7-8 Apr 2018 Claremont LA  (documentation from 2 observers, add値 doc. requested)  What kind of documentation should one submit to the CBRC Following are some guidelines for submitting media and written descriptions that will be useful for helping the CBRC evaluate records and archive documentation. Documentation may
    be submitted directly to the secretary via email ( secretary@... ) , or by using the online submission form ( http://www.californiabirds.org/report_sighting.html ).  Media: This includes photos, audio recordings, and video. Photographs are usually the most useful documentation for evaluating records. If you have reasonably good (=identifiable) photos, please submit them. If possible, please crop the
    photos before submission so that the bird fills most of the frame. Also, please send originals whenever possible, and not screenshots or back-of-camera photos. How many photos should you submit That really depends on the record. If it is a long-staying rarity
    that is easily identifiable and seen by dozens of people, then a few photos (1-3 per person) are sufficient. If it is a mega-rarity that is difficult to identify and only seen by a one or few people, then send as many photos as possible that show the bird
    at different angles, postures, lighting, etc. Sometimes it is also useful to submit audio and/or video recordings of the bird, as some birds are more easily identified by their vocalizations. If relatively short, most audio recordings are small enough to be
    submitted via email; please submit those along with a brief note indicating the date and location of the recording. Large audio files and video files can be submitted by using a file sharing service; please contact the secretary if you need to submit a file
    that is too large for email.  Written descriptions: Some written details should always be provided  even the best photos should be accompanied by the name of the observer, the date, and the location, at a minimum. Sometimes a photo can稚 be obtained or vocalizations
    can稚 be recorded. In some cases, behaviors might be noted in the field that aren稚 preserved well by photos. In these cases, it is helpful to submit a written description of the bird. Ideally, this description should be written as soon after observing the
    bird as possible; it is often helpful to make written notes in the field, or even dictate notes into the voice recorder on your smartphone while observing the bird, from which you can later generate a written description. The most important aspect of a written
    description is that you report only what you observed, and not a general description of the bird from a field guide. At a minimum, your description should include the date and location of the observation, and a description of the bird (size and structure,
    plumage, vocalizations, behavior). A brief discussion of how the bird was identified, and how similar species were eliminated is also helpful. Other useful information you might report includes optics used, distance from bird, lighting or weather conditions,
    length of time viewed, and other observers present. 
  6. -back to top-
  7. Re: [CALBIRDS] Broad-billed Hummingbird probable departure LINK
    DATE: Mar 20, 2018, 7 month(s) ago
    I had a private message last night that the bird was seen first thing yesterday morning in frigid weather for SF (40s :-).I致e notified the observers in case they want to update this list.
    
    Mark
    ---
    Mark Eaton,
    Photography: http://www.markeaton.org
    
    On Mar 20, 2018, at 18:15, Naturestoc@... [CALBIRDS] < CALBIRDS-noreply@yahoogroups.com > wrote:
    
    Hi All.
    Regarding the San Francisco City Broad-billed Hummingbird (36th and Geary). I have communicated with the home owner today and yesterday and she reports that the Hummingbird she has been hosting for at least 3 weeks has not been seen for two days. Spring has sprung, he probably split!
    Dan Brown, Sacramento, www.naturestoc.smugmug.com
  8. -back to top-
  9. Broad-billed Hummingbird probable departure LINK
    DATE: Mar 20, 2018, 7 month(s) ago
    Hi All.
    Regarding the San Francisco City Broad-billed Hummingbird (36th and Geary). I have communicated with the home owner today and yesterday and she reports that the Hummingbird she has been hosting for at least 3 weeks has not been seen for two days. Spring has sprung, he probably split!
    Dan Brown, Sacramento, www.naturestoc.smugmug.com
  10. -back to top-
  11. Broad-billed Hummingbird continues in SF, 3/16 LINK
    DATE: Mar 16, 2018 @ 9:30am, 7 month(s) ago
    ... at the aforementioned location on 36th Ave. We arrived at 9am with Bob Gunderson on site and the bird seen, and saw it after few more times over the next twenty minutes.
    
    -- Adam Winer
     SF, CA
  12. -back to top-
  13. Broad-billed Hummingbird San Francisco 3/15 LINK
    DATE: Mar 15, 2018 @ 8:00am, 7 month(s) ago
    Good Morning California birders,
    
    The BROAD-BILLED Hummingbird first reported publicly 3/9/18 on SFBirds by Logan Kahle, appeared once at 7:33 a.m. but wasn't seen again in the next 25 minutes.
    
    The nearest address is 494 36th Avenue, in the northwest part of the city. From that address walk up hill a few meters and look out on a line of backyards to the east. The bird has It's easily accessible from the Golden Gate Bridge or from 19th Avenue/HWY 1 if you're coming from the south. The weather is partly cloudy with rain forecast for this afternoon.
    
    According to third person reports this bird was here for "several" weeks before being reported but I suppose it could leave any time so take this into consideration if you decide to drive a long distance to try to see it.
    
    Good luck,
    
    Dominik Mosur
    
    San Francisco
    
    Sent from my iPhone
    
    Sent from my iPhone
  14. -back to top-
  15. New Bay Area bike-birding blog post and 5-Mile Radius (5MR) discussion LINK
    DATE: Mar 13, 2018 @ 8:12am, 7 month(s) ago
    Hi Everyone
    No eider news from me, just a new blogpost about my recent Bay Area bike-birding exploits (Broad-billed Hummingbird!). I also spend a bit of time discussing how I think cross-promoting green birding with the 5MR would be a fun approach for the birding community to take. I've thrown in a few new photos for the visually inclined. Take it or leave it. Thanks either way.....
    http://thespeckledhatchback.blogspot.com/
    
    Cheers
    Dorian
  16. -back to top-
  17. Broad-billed, not Broad-tailed! LINK
    DATE: Mar 12, 2018 @ 12:28pm, 8 month(s) ago
    Folks,
    
    I've now seen no fewer than FIVE eBird reports of Broad-tailed Hummingbird that were really the SF Broad-BILLED Hummingbird. If you're scanning eBird reports, bear that in mind, and if you're submitting them, please make sure you're reporting the species you think you are! It's all too easy to enter the wrong species in the eBird app. Save your eBird reviewer, whoever (s)he is, some work.
    
    Ken Burton
    Crescent City
  18. -back to top-
  19. Re: [CALBIRDS] Are Regional/County Listservs Still Relevant? [a bit long] LINK
    DATE: Jan 13, 2018 @ 5:24pm, 9 month(s) ago
    Ken,
    
    Personal locations for rarities that are plotted by observers are often inaccurate, and one ends up with a cluster of observations that are not *more* accurate, but less accurate than a single hotspot would be. A mild example (as most are plotted very close to the yard) is the Broad-billed Hummingbird currently in a backyard in Santa Barbara. This bird rarely strays from one lemon tree/feeder in this very small yard, yet the personal locations are out front, across the street, etc. (some of this might be due to poor GPS accuracy). On a scale this small, it doesn't matter that these aren't perfectly accurate. I've seen other examples with rarities in Ventura Co. of birds that were known to have never strayed far and the personal locations are, forgive me, all over the map. If one wants to look at the record in eBird and see the date range and documentation in the mapping feature, then one would have to click each and every personal location (which can be challenging if not impossible when you have 10, 20, 75 personal locations in a giant cluster). It is simpler and very often more accurate in such cases to have a hotspot that all users submit to.
    
    If the rarity in question is moving more widely, e.g., the Ross's Gull in San Mateo and many other examples, then I agree-- a wide scattering of personal locations may be more appropriate than a couple of artificially exact hotspots. Additionally note that many eBird observations aren't accurate point localities and nor is that the intention--we're more often submitting traveling counts where almost none of the observations are plotted exactly.
    
    Adam Searcy
    
    On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Ken Burton shrikethree@... [CALBIRDS] < CALBIRDS-noreply@yahoogroups.com > wrote:
    
     Paul,
    
    You raise some good points (thanks for venting). Your eBird analysis raises a slightly off-topic issue with eBird that bothers me and this seems like a reasonable opportunity to share it.
    
    As you point out, eBird hotspots can be quite large. eBird reviewers, following eBird instructions, ask people who submit rarities at more-precise personal locations to move their observations to the hotspots or they create new "stakeout" hotspots for them and ask observers to move them there. For some reason, there's a desire within eBird to consolidate rarity sightings. I feel this consolidation often masks location precision that can elucidate valuable movement patterns of these birds, and I generally resist these requests (unless the existing hotspot is extremely small or my sighting was extremely close to its plotted location), at least until the bird is gone.
    
    Perhaps someone can explain why having rarity sightings clumped into single locations is worth erasing the precision of personal locations plotted exactly where sightings are made, which is especially easy and accurate to do on mobile devices.
    
    Thanks.
    
    Ken Burton
    Crescent City
    
    On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Paul Lehman lehman.paul@... [CALBIRDS] < CALBIRDS-noreply@yahoogroups. com > wrote:
    
     It is pretty obvious that over the past few
    years that many
    of the local/county/regional/state listservs have become less
    and less relevant
    to a large number of birders, as many of these people have voted
    with their
    feet.er, fingertips.and moved over to other sites such as
    eBird. Not only
    that, but bird information dissemination appears to have become
    MORE fragmented
    as time goes on, rather than less fragmented. We now have the
    local listservs,
    eBird, WhatsApp/GroupMe text messaging groups, Facebook
    individual and group
    sites, personal Flickr sites, personal and private-group text
    messaging, and
    even a handful of old-school folks who actually still call their
    friends on the
    phone! Some of these services are SUPPPOSED to complement each
    other, e.g., a
    text-message group that is supposed to be used for immediate
    dissemination of high-end
    rarity information only, and folks are supposed to post to it
    AND to the local
    listserv in a timely manner, but instead the former is used
    almost exclusively
    and often for more standard bird fare, so the general listserv
    gets only some
    scraps, if anything. Using my home-county listserv here in San
    Diego as an
    example, the number of local birders who now rarely if ever post
    to
    SanDiegoRegionBirding has grown steadily. Most of these folks
    still happily get
    information from such sources, but rarely, if ever, post to it.
    But a good
    number of these people do submit eBird reports on a regular
    basis instead.  Why only
    to one Is it the ease of eBird
    submissions Is it the instantaneous reporting from the field
    (But that is
    also easy to do to a local listserv with any smartphone.) Is it
    that they can
    easily attach their photos to their eBird reports Is there a
    widespread belief
    that posting rarity news only to eBird is 兎nough  Or for some, are they timid
    to post publicly,
    or just lazy, or simply don稚 care to give back to a listserv
    from which they
    got information allowing them to see a rare bird Whatever the
    reason, recent
    checks on many days since mid-December of the number of posts to
    the San Diego listserv
    versus the number of county 途arity alerts coming through eBird
    is something
    on the magnitude of 1 to 20 or 30 (albeit somewhat skewed by the
    numbers of
    out-of-town Nazca Booby viewers and local-birder 2018 澱ig year
    kickoffs, and
    by the potential for multiple rarities mentioned per a single
    listserv post but
    only one species per eBird alert). A little of this dichotomy
    can be explained
    by the fact that some birds such as a semi-tame,
    multi-year-staying Greater
    White-fronted Goose at a local lake still appears daily on the
    eBird rare-bird
    alert揚iven that it is a flagged species傭ut that virtually
    nobody would dream
    of posting its continued existence on a regular basis on the
    county listserv.
    Or, over the past few weeks, the continued presence of Nazca
    Boobies, a
    wintering Red-throated Pipit, and many other regional and
    state-level rarities
    locally, has drawn an especially large number of California
    birders from out of
    town as well as many out-of-state birders庸ew of whom have
    posting privileges
    to the San Diego listserv, but almost all of them can post to
    eBird. In most areas, eBird has become the best way
    to keep track,
    on an almost daily basis, of the continued presence of existing
    rarities. (With
    the caveat that some such reports are erroneous, as they are
    through any
    source, and folks should be careful following up on some such
    reports,
    especially when made many days after anyone else has reported
    seeing the bird.
    Even when some folks are chasing known birds at known locations,
    they can mess
    it up. Posted photos of misidentified stakeouts are not overly
    rare, and the
    number of such erroneous reports without photos are likely even
    greater. Just recently,
    for example, a friend of mine from out-of-state, after seeing
    Nazca Booby here,
    drove up to Santa Maria to see the tame Garganey. He was greeted
    there by a birding
    couple, also from out of state and chasing the same birds, who
    proudly pointed
    out the bird to him: a female Northern Pintail. He quickly
    showed them the real
    Garganey. But, the bottom line is, don稚 underestimate the
    ability of some
    observers to misidentify even known stakeouts. 
    But I digress) Are eBird reports also good at giving the
    needed background
    information on how to FIND these stakeout rarities Sometimes
    yes, sometimes
    no. A dropped pin at a hotspot may or may not signify a specific
    spot or may
    just denote the location of a large park or marsh where the bird
    is. Some
    observers add in exact lat/long information, but many do not.
    Also, because
    many human beings (including many birders) are geographically
    challenged, many
    locations they give in their eBird submissions are MIS-STATED or
    MIS-PLOTTED,
    which is one potentially serious problem with using eBird data
    in a number of
    ways in general. But even if the general location is indeed
    correct, the included
    comments (if any) may say little about the specific tree(s) a
    bird is
    frequenting, or the best time of day it might be seen there,
    origin
    questionable issues, or information about possible legal access
    issues, etc. These
    specifics, which can be very important, are often best imparted
    through posts
    to the local listservs. Just in the past couple weeks, such was
    the case here
    in San Diego County with a couple good posts to the listserv
    dealing with
    private property issues and homeowner and birder behavior
    involving the Ramona
    Harris痴 Hawk. Does one need to post an update on every
    continuing rarity
    every single day on a local listserv No, although regular
    updates on high-end
    and just-recently-found rarities are very helpful, and then
    periodic (weekly) updates
    that such-and-such long-staying or returning rarity is still
    present is also
    helpful to other birders. But few local birders supply that
    information.
    Recently here in San Diego, there have been MULTIPLE DAILY eBird
    updates on
    Nazca Booby, Red-throated Pipit, Greater Pewee, Thick-billed
    Kingbird and
    Scissor-tailed Flycatcher, Harris痴 Hawk, Tricolored Herons,
    Nestor Park birds,
    etc. etc. etc., and almost nothing on these birds for well over
    a week or more on
    SanDiegoRegionBirding. Nothing. The question then becomes: 泥oes
    it matter Looking at the broad birding community, some
    birders spend
    almost their entire birding lives chasing stakeouts found by
    other people. If
    that痴 what they like doing, then great. Some (but far fewer)
    birders hate
    chasing 登ther people痴 birds, very rarely do it, but spend
    almost all their
    time doing 鍍heir own birding. That痴 great, too!  And most of us birders are
    at some point in
    the continuum between these two extremes. But the bottom line
    is, a relatively
    small number of birders find a relatively large percentage of
    the rare birds.
    And many birders do spend much of their birding time chasing
    previously found
    birds. So, what can this large group of chasers contribute
    Perhaps
    rarity-status update information (BOTH positive and negative) if
    they see that such
    updates have not been made in 殿 reasonable time period, or
    perhaps any news
    on changes in a bird痴 preferred exact site or timing of
    appearance during the
    day .
    M aybe include a bit more information
    than the
    standard "continuing bird"Include maybe where and when the
    continuing bird was seen if possibly different from 砥sual.
    And if the report
    substantially extends the date-span, then ideally including
    some comment about
    how it was identified, or a photo. Some eBird reviewers
    avoid confirming
    late reports of continuing rarities without at least some
    documentation, given
    that some birds are reported long after they actually
    departed. If folks use only eBird for their rare-bird
    chasing bird
    info, and then submit only to eBird, then fine. If they do
    likewise only via
    some texting or Facebook group, fine! But if they routinely use
    a local
    listserv to get their 田hase information, see the bird, and
    then rarely or
    never return the favor to birders following behind them傭e it
    for reasons of
    laziness, cluelessness, or simply self-centeredness葉hen this
    does seem just a
    wee bit galling to those birders who are finding and sharing. Perhaps most birders are perfectly happy with
    the quality
    and speed (i.e., efficiency) of the rare-bird information they
    receive and
    think that my concerns are unfounded and mostly merely tilting
    at windmills.
    Others may sympathize fully. In any case, at least I got to
    vent! --Paul Lehman, 
    San
    Diego 
    
    --
    Adam Searcy serpophaga@...
    Camarillo, CA
  20. -back to top-
  21. Documentation for CBRC review species LINK
    DATE: Oct 15, 2015 @ 2:05pm, 3 year(s) ago
    California birders,
    
    This fall is already shaping up to be an exciting one, with many rare birds found in September and through the first half of October. Some of these birds are not only unusual locally, but are quite rare throughout the state of California.
    As such, the California Bird Records Committee (CBRC) requests documentation of these birds for evaluation and archiving. I have summarized below some recent records for which the CBRC solicits documentation; if you have photos, written descriptions, or other
    documentation for any of these birds, please consider taking the time to send them to the secretary at the email address below. I do realize that some of these birds were found very recently, so perhaps documentation is still forthcoming. Feel free to forward
    this message to local listservs as appropriate. The CBRC website has a complete
    list of review species as well as an
    optional form for submitting written documentation.
    
    Birds for which the CBRC has received no documentation:
    
    Black-bellied Whistling Duck, Roberts Lake, Sonoma County (documentation has been received for the bird at Howarth Park in August (CBRC #2015-076))
    Emperor Goose, Del Norte County
    Bulwer’s (or whatever) Petrel, Santa Cruz County
    White-chinned Petrel, San Mateo County
    Wedge-tailed Shearwater, Monterey County
    Bar-tailed Godwit, San Francisco County
    Blue-headed Vireo (possible), Los Angeles County
    Blue-headed Vireo (possible), Santa Barbara County
    Dusky Warbler, Marin County
    Common Grackle, San Bernardino County
    Common Grackle, Del Norte County
    
    Birds for which the CBRC has received minimal documentation:
    
    Red-footed Booby, Platform Eureka, Orange County (1 report)
    Glossy Ibis, Yolo County (1 report)
    Curlew Sandpiper (juvenile), Santa Clara County (2 reports)
    Curlew Sandpiper (adult), Santa Clara County (1 report)
    Broad-billed Hummingbird, Riverside County (2 reports)
    Blue-headed Vireo, Marin County (2 reports)
    Gray-cheeked Thrush, Kern County (3 reports)
    Worm-eating Warbler, Mojave Narrows Regional Park, San Bernardino County (2 reports)
    Worm-eating Warbler, Primm Valley Golf Club, San Bernardino County (2 reports)
    Mourning Warbler, San Francisco County (2 reports)
    Cerulean Warbler, Humboldt County (2 reports)
    
    Thank you,
    Tom
    
    Thomas A. Benson
    Secretary, California Bird Records Committee
    secretary@...
    
    
  22. -back to top-
  23. Broad-billed Hummingbird at Chiriaco Summit, Riverside County, Sep 9 LINK
    DATE: Sep 9, 2015 @ 1:02pm, 3 year(s) ago
    Within the last hour, Jon Dunn and his Wings tour found a female-type BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD at Chiriaco Summit in eastern Riverside County. The bird was frequenting the area around the religious shrine between the residence and the cafe. Broad-billed Hummingbird is a CBRC review species; documentation to the secretary from anyone who observes this bird is greatly appreciated.
    Tom Benson
    San Bernardino, CA
    
    
  24. -back to top-
  25. Barbara Carlson record San Diego year: 387 species LINK
    DATE: Dec 31, 2013 @ 2:57pm, 5 year(s) ago
    Barbara Carlson has ended 2013 with a phenomenal 387 species in San
    Diego County. This is not only a new record for this county (former
    record was ca. 370), but it is undoubtedly a single-year record for any
    county in the U.S./Canada. Barbara was aided by an excellent
    rarity-winter of 2012-2013, good shorebirds in late summer, LOTS of time
    spent offshore throughout the year racking up a long list of tough
    pelagic species, a reasonably productive autumn filling in holes,
    and--most of all--pure diligence! A testament to her long list was the
    fact that very recent findings of species such as a new Blue-headed
    Vireo, Bay-breasted and Black-throated Green Warblers, Painted Redstart,
    Orchard Orioles, and even a Masked/Nazca Booby added no new
    species.....she'd seen them all already earlier in the year! Her only
    new bird since Thanksgiving was the Oceanside Glaucous Gull.
    
    In the near future, Barbara will make a list of all the rarities she saw
    in the county this year, with the date, location, and other observers
    who saw them with her, and will make that document available to anyone
    interested. When ready, she will post news of its existence on this
    listserve.
    
    The list of high-quality rarities she saw in San Diego County in 2013 is
    too long to give here in its entirety, but here are some of the best of
    the best:
    Red-necked Grebe
    Flesh-footed Shearwater
    Great Shearwater
    Manx Shearwater
    Masked/Nazca Booby
    Blue-footed Booby
    Lesser Sand-Plover
    Wilson's Plover
    Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
    Franklin's Gull
    Glaucous Gull
    Guadalupe and Craveri's Murrelets
    Inca Dove
    Black Swift
    Broad-billed Hummingbird
    Great Crested Flycatcher
    Thick-billed Kingbird
    Blue-headed Vireo
    Yellow-green Vireo
    Gray Catbird
    Grace's, Pine, Bay-breasted, Black-thr Green, Prairie, Mourning Warblers
    Painted Redstart
    Nelson's Sparrow
    Harris's Sparrow
    Scarlet Tanager
    Bronzed Cowbird
    Orchard Oriole
    
    And what were her biggest "misses" Long-eared Owl, Ancient
    Murrelet....the Le Conte's Sparrow, Sandwich Tern, and multiple 'dips'
    on Yellow-billed Cuckoo and Scissor-tailed Flycatcher.
    
    Again, congratulations!
    
    Who's next to try!
    
    --Paul Lehman, San Diego
    
    
  26. -back to top-
  27. Rufous-backed Robin and Broad-billed Hummingbird update/photos LINK
    DATE: Oct 30, 2012 @ 12:50am, 6 year(s) ago
    Doug Karalun, Curtis Marantz, and I went out this morning (Oct 29) to chase the
    female Broad-billed Hummingbird found by Oscar Johnson and Adam Searcy yesterday
    at Chiriaco Summit. As reported previously, we were able to refind this bird
    this morning between 7 and 8 AM. We (Doug, actually) also found a Rufous-backed
    Robin and two White-throated Sparrows, as well as the continuing Varied Thrush.
    
    Afterwards we headed out to Lake Tamarisk Golf Club (Desert Center) from about
    8:30 AM to noon where our luck continued. There we found two more White-throated
    Sparrows, a Swamp Sparrow, a Brown Thrasher, a Cassin's Finch, a Townsend's
    Solitaire, and a flock of about 15-20 Pine Siskins.
    
    On the return trip we stopped off again at Chiriaco Summit (12:30-1:30 PM) and
    saw everything except the Broad-billed Hummingbird, which was last seen to my
    knowledge around 11:30 AM.
    
    I have posted several photos from today on my Flick page; the link is below.
    
    Tom Benson
    San Bernardino, CA
    
    PS. The residential area at Chiriaco Summit is private property. Bird from the
    sidewalk or perimeter only.
    
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/40928097@N07/
    
    
  28. -back to top-
  29. FW: [inlandcountybirds] Rufous-backed Robin LINK
    DATE: Oct 29, 2012 @ 5:45pm, 6 year(s) ago
    -----Original Message-----
    From: inlandcountybirds@yahoogroups.com
    [mailto:inlandcountybirds@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chet McGaugh
    Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 6:22 AM
    To: inlandcountybirds@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [inlandcountybirds] Rufous-backed Robin
    
    I don't know how smart their phones are, so I'll pass along a phone call
    from Curtis Marantz. He, Tom Benson, and Doug Karalun found a Rufous-backed
    Robin early this morning at Chiraco Summit. As of 7AM they had not yet found
    the Broad-billed Hummingbird found by Oscar Johnson yesterday. The robin is
    missing its tail, likely a result of the herd of cats around the caf;
    probably accounting for the dead Varied Thrush reported by Oscar.
    Chet McGaugh
  30. -back to top-


-revision history-
v1.30 - 01/05/16 - Revamped cloud logic, optimized database queries, linked to eBird rarities.
v1.23 - 12/08/11 - Added direct link to CBRC records.
v1.22 - 12/03/11 - Corrected GMT offsets on dates. Added last 5 posts at top.
v1.21 - 11/24/11 - Added direct link to range map for NA birds.
v1.2  - 11/23/11 - Greatly improved graphing technology - separates month vs. year by posts. Added species auto-complete functionality.
v1.14 - 11/22/11 - Added cloud bubble for common thread topics.
v1.13 - 11/22/11 - Added integrated photos where available.
v1.12 - 11/22/11 - Added multiple input boxes for additional refinement, negative search criteria (eg. -keyword).
v1.11 - 11/22/11 - Added banding code, species look-up. Also direct link to recent eBird observations.
 v1.1 - 11/22/11 - Added 'date' functionality. Shows top 'month/year' combinations for a query. Restrict results to that 'month/year'.
 v1.0 - 11/21/11 - Initial version coded. Currently archiving 'lacobirds' and 'calbirds'.