Lance,

Sorry for the slow response but I was out for a few days. If you read from 
what I had written that I was confused about this bird, I am sorry to give 
you that impression. I was fairly certain at the time of my first reply that 
this was a solid Tufted Duck after seeing some of the images, and I am 
convinced now that I have seen some of the better images and have actually 
seen the bird. The point that I was trying to make at first was that I 
wasn't ready to stamp the hybrid label on this bird from just looking at 
Phil's images. I do not have Kaufman's Book, nor do I have the Audubon 
Guide, but Sibley and Nat. Geo. are dead on in regards to both of their 
illustrations. They both show a black tip and nail with a light border 
separating the gray. If Kaufman and Audubon fail to have these field marks, 
I would make notes in the books correcting this for future references and 
purchase other guides.

After seeing the Barrow's Goldeneye, I would say that both guides that I 
mentioned need some work in presenting better examples for reference. The 
female in Cambridge looked not like either guide's presentation and was much 
easier to separate from Common than the guides suggest; perhaps this is an 
extreme in the variations that this species can present, making it so?

Ed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "lance biechele" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [MDOSPREY] Tufted Duck Hybrid (?)


Hi Ed,
Looking at all the "pics' of the Tufted duck on the web - I'm just as
confused as you are.
However, then, the overall picture is that ALL of our field guides are
wrong!
Good Birding,
Lance

--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Edward Boyd <> wrote:

From: Edward Boyd <>
Subject: Re: [MDOSPREY] Tufted Duck Hybrid (?)
To: 
Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 6:15 PM

If you do a Google Image search, you might be surprised to see that every
image on the site shows not only a black tip to the bill on Tufted Duck,
but there also appears to be a vast difference in the amounts of white on 
the
bill and the shape of the black on the bill. In addition, the photos 
exhibited
by Phil are of such quality that I wouldn't jump to an identification
decision based on them. They have been enlarged and are very grainy. The 
flight
shots fail to show most of the field marks. This bird may indeed turn out to 
be
labeled a hybrid, but I'm just saying that I'm not making a hasty
identification decision based of the currently presented evidence. AND
PERSONALLY, the amount of white on the bill, and the bill shape itself, is 
less
consistent for Ring-necked on what can be seen in Phil's photos than in
comparisons to images of Tufted Duck available on the net.

You must remember, illustrations are examples composed by the eye of the
illustrator and are not always completely accurate, (and sometimes they are
completely inaccurate). Look at the sparrows in the Nat Geo Guide and you'll
understand about inaccuracies - I don't think there's an accurate
illustration in the entire section. Photos can be altered, yes, but most are
often better examples if you look at a large group of them to eliminate or
average out individual variations. That's why I often go to a site like
Google where there are usually dozens of examples to look at.
Edward Boyd
Westminster, MD




________________________________
From: lance biechele <>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 11:55:37 AM
Subject: [MDOSPREY] Tufted Duck Hybrid (?)

Hi Ryan & other birders,
Thank you for your kind respone.
However, if you look at Kauffman's book or even better, "The Audubon
Field Guide to NA Birds, Eastern Region," plates 121 and 122 [there
on the same page] you will clearly see the bill differences I mentioned.
My guess is that the little guy is a Tufted duck X Ring-neck hybrid.
Best wishes,
Lance