ML139187461

Age

Not specified

Sex

Not specified

Observation details

We heard this bird calling shortly after we arrived at the far northeastern end of the passable trail near marked #10, which is where others had been seeing it since December. The call given was a sharp, “chimp” call that was regularly doubled, harsher than the calls of Winter Wren, and maybe more like those of a Wilson’s Warbler. Over the course of our visit, we heard this bird call in several bouts from the dense vegetation and tangles. When calling, the wren often perched a short distance above the ground, but it was more often hopping on the ground when not calling. Also typical of this species, this bird spent most of its time obscured amid the dense vegetation, yet it came out in the open at least twice and some of us were able to get some reasonable photos. This was a notably small bird with a plump body, a slim bill of medium-length, a proportionately large head with a weakly sloping forehead and a gently rounded crown, a full-chested appearance and an upright posture, but I failed altogether to note the primary projection and the length of the wings, and I have only a superficial recollection that the tail was short and cocked upward. I also thought the legs were relatively long, but my recollection of them is again not very good. This bird’s plumage was a dark reddish-brown to rufous-chestnut almost throughout. I did note a short and somewhat diffuse supercilium that was deep cinnamon in color, and also that the throat, breast, and sides were about this same shade of cinnamon, but the crown and auriculars were about the same shade of reddish-brown as the upperparts. The wings did not appear to contrast conspicuously with the back, but the remiges were finely barred with black and the same shade of rufous-brown as the back. I cannot now recall the pattern on the tail, which I did not see all that well when I studied this bird through binoculars. Not only did I think the throat, breast, and sides were similar in color to the supercilium, but my impression was that they were unmarked. I was less sure about the belly and flanks, but my impression was that they were darker and possibly barred. I am not sure I ever clearly saw the undertail coverts or the underside of the tail, but even if I did, I have no recollection of them. I think the bill was at least mostly dark, and I am confident that the eyes were dark, but I am less sure about the legs and feet which I think may have been somewhere between a dark flesh and dusky, but seemingly not blackish.

Technical information

Model

Canon EOS 7D Mark II

Lens

EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM

ISO

1600

Focal length

400 mm

Flash

Flash did not fire, auto

f-stop

f/6.3

Shutter speed

1/200 sec

Dimensions

3786 pixels x 2473 pixels

Original file size

8.86 MB