ML520140191

Age

Not specified

Sex

Not specified

Observation details

When we first spotted this bird it was approximately 500 yards off of Coquille Point just to the south of Table Rock. At first glance I knew it was an immature male eider transitioning towards adult plumage The bird was noticeably larger than a nearby Surf Scoter. It had a conspicuous white breast and at least some white up onto the back. Although photos taken in subsequent days and videos taken by Shawneen Finnegan when we first found it showed extensive white all the way down onto the lower back, we were not noticing that as we watched the bird in the field. It had a fairly long looking orange sloped bill. We did not notice a wedge of feathering extended well down the bill, which is usually pretty obvious on Common Eider. While my initial impression was Common Eider, I was skeptical about that tentative ID due to the relative rarity of Common vs King Eider along the Pacific Coast of the U.S. As the two of us studied the bird we focused most of our attention on the head shape and pattern and the bill. We understood that males of both species can show white on the mantle, but didn't initially appreciate that the white on the upper parts was much too extensive for King Eider and we did not have field guides at hand to reference in the field. The general shape and pattern of the head seemed to be a better fit for King, thus the bird was first reported as this species. In our efforts to get others who came to meet us on the bird and capture some sort of photo of video documentation, we did not study this bird as critically as we should have. Once Shawneen's video began circulating and others were able to view it on full-size computer monitors (we had only our phones) folks started openly and rightfully questioning our identification, with opinions of those who viewed the video weighing heavily in favor of Common Eider. The quality of the video (taken via cell phone digi-scoping from 650 yards) was such that it was hard to make out meaningful detail on the bird, especially on small screens and even larger ones. However, once we got home and were able to do frame by frame analysis and actually screen grab some of the better single frames (see attached) it became abundantly obvious that the bird was indeed a young male Common Eider. Several observers have relocated and observed the bird over the two days following our discovery. Alan Contreras, who had agreed with our initial ID when he saw the bird on 1-1-2023, relocated the bird closer to shore on 1-2-2023 and others saw it that day as well. Contreras confidently concluded that it was a Common. The video and screen grabs of individual frames confirm the following field marks, many of which we saw while looking at the bird in life. Entirely white breast. Extensive white panel extended from the base of the hind neck, down across the mantle and well down onto the lower back. The flanks are solidly black from below the shoulder to the tail. When the bird dove it had a black tail. the hind crown and nape are somewhat grayish, with the middle of the crown being blackish, which we did not notice some much in the field. There was a mix of black and gray around the eye dipping down onto the auriculars. The lower face was mostly white. The bill looks stout and fairly deep at the base is long and wedge-shaped. In the field the bill did look long and was bright orange, which to some degree could match either species. In the field the fore crown seemed somewhat steeper than it looks in photos and video clips. The bill slope and profile shown by photos and video clips is a better fit for Common. After having done research once we got home and reviewing Shawneen's videos frame by frame any confusion about the identification of this bird has been eliminated. We wholeheartedly concur with all of those who are now calling this bird a Common Eider. To my knowledge, no one who has seen this bird subsequent to our first finding it is expression any ambiguity about what species it is. All concur that it is a Common Eider.

Technical information

Dimensions

423 pixels x 252 pixels

Original file size

23.86 KB