This one has me seriously stumped.

Ignoring coloration and feather-patterns, looks like and acts like a
Redbellied Woodpecker.

Walking posture the same, hangs from the side of the platform at times
the same, body shape and size (including head and beak) the same.

Combative demeanor the same -- chased Bluejays and a Redbelly.

All gray, black, and stark white. No red or yellow or green or blue or
orange or ..../

Eyes black--may have a black eye-ring.

Back (folded wings?) black with thin white lines forming a shallow "V".

Lower back stark white with black mottling.

Books and Cornell seem to say not female or juvenile Redbelly, but it
sure looks like ....

Pictures (sch as they are) at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara

Larry Sheldon wrote:
This one has me seriously stumped.

Ignoring coloration and feather-patterns, looks like and acts like a
Redbellied Woodpecker.

Walking posture the same, hangs from the side of the platform at times
the same, body shape and size (including head and beak) the same.

Combative demeanor the same -- chased Bluejays and a Redbelly.

All gray, black, and stark white. No red or yellow or green or blue
or orange or ..../

Eyes black--may have a black eye-ring.

Back (folded wings?) black with thin white lines forming a shallow "V".

Lower back stark white with black mottling.

Books and Cornell seem to say not female or juvenile Redbelly, but it
sure looks like ....

Pictures (sch as they are) at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara

What Aristotle would call an accident. Horses have four legs. A horse
with three legs is an accident. Redbellies have red feathers. A redbelly
without red feathers is an accident. Maybe?

Jerry Avins wrote:

Pictures (such as they are) at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara

What Aristotle would call an accident. Horses have four legs. A horse
with three legs is an accident. Redbellies have red feathers. A
redbelly without red feathers is an accident. Maybe?

I keep thinking just that, but then I look at details and conclude that
in morphology (by which I mean size and same of the parts and the whole,
but not the color or patterns of feathers) and behavior (posture,
combativeness, "tree-clinger" attributes) it is "obviously" a Redbelly.

But no part of the coloration (or the color patterns) including eye ring
(and excluding eye color) match anything I have ever seen, read abouit,
or heard of.

Jerry Avins wrote:

What Aristotle would call an accident. Horses have four legs. A horse
with three legs is an accident. Redbellies have red feathers. A
redbelly without red feathers is an accident. Maybe?

I keep thinking just that, but then I look at details and conclude that
in morphology[1] and behavior[2] it is "obviously" a Redbelly.

But no part of the coloration (or the color patterns) including eye ring
(and excluding eye color) match anything I have ever seen, read about,
or heard of.

Larry Sheldon sloppily, as usual, wrote:
Jerry Avins wrote:

What Aristotle would call an accident. Horses have four legs. A horse
with three legs is an accident. Redbellies have red feathers. A
redbelly without red feathers is an accident. Maybe?

Trying to clean up the prose a little, but not adding anything
intentionally.....

I keep thinking just that, but then I look at details and conclude
that in morphology[1] and behavior[2] it is "obviously" a Redbelly.

But no part of the coloration (or the color patterns) including eye
ring (and excluding eye color) match anything I have ever seen, read
about, or heard of.

[1] By which I mean size and shape of the parts and the whole, but not
the color or patterns of feathers.
[2] By which I mean posture, combativeness, "tree-clinger" attributes.

Larry Sheldon wrote:
Larry Sheldon sloppily, as usual, wrote:
Jerry Avins wrote:

What Aristotle would call an accident. Horses have four legs. A
horse with three legs is an accident. Redbellies have red feathers.
A redbelly without red feathers is an accident. Maybe?

Trying to clean up the prose a little, but not adding anything
intentionally.....

I keep thinking just that, but then I look at details and conclude
that in morphology[1] and behavior[2] it is "obviously" a Redbelly.

But no part of the coloration (or the color patterns) including eye
ring (and excluding eye color) match anything I have ever seen, read
about, or heard of.

[1] By which I mean size and shape of the parts and the whole, but
not the color or patterns of feathers.
[2] By which I mean posture, combativeness, "tree-clinger" attributes.


Size is hard to judge, but it looks like a young red-head to me:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1423383510010431878rgOpJu

The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
wrote:

Size is hard to judge, but it looks like a young red-head to me:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1423383510010431878rgOpJu

BoyHowdy, it sure does (size seemed identical to the Redbelly and
Bluejay--one of the pictures at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara show all
three--MB might be a little smaller.

Larry Sheldon wrote:
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
wrote:

Size is hard to judge, but it looks like a young red-head to me:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1423383510010431878rgOpJu

BoyHowdy, it sure does (size seemed identical to the Redbelly and
Bluejay--one of the pictures at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara show all
three--MB might be a little smaller.

My wife points out that our bird doesn't (didn't) have the gray-to-tan
jester's collar that the pictures show, but the rest sure matches up.
Age difference, Local variation? I have no idea.

Larry Sheldon wrote:
Larry Sheldon wrote:
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
DiBoy' wrote:

Size is hard to judge, but it looks like a young red-head to me:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1423383510010431878rgOpJu

BoyHowdy, it sure does (size seemed identical to the Redbelly and
Bluejay--one of the pictures at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara show all
three--MB might be a little smaller.

My wife points out that our bird doesn't (didn't) have the gray-to-tan
jester's collar that the pictures show, but the rest sure matches up.
Age difference, Local variation? I have no idea.


How exciting to see one in your yard! Their conservation status
according to Cornell's all about birds is near-threatened.
http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Red-headed_Woodpecker/lifehistory

The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
wrote:
Larry Sheldon wrote:
Larry Sheldon wrote:
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
DiBoy' wrote:

Size is hard to judge, but it looks like a young red-head to me:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1423383510010431878rgOpJu

BoyHowdy, it sure does (size seemed identical to the Redbelly and
Bluejay--one of the pictures at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara show all
three--MB might be a little smaller.

My wife points out that our bird doesn't (didn't) have the
gray-to-tan jester's collar that the pictures show, but the rest sure
matches up. Age difference, Local variation? I have no idea.


How exciting to see one in your yard! Their conservation status
according to Cornell's all about birds is near-threatened.
http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Red-headed_Woodpecker/lifehistory

Peterson's says "uncommon" I didn't notice the Cornell flag.

First one I've ever seen.

"Birds of Nebraska" says "Nationwide populations are ion the decrease."

It also points out that they are closely related to the Red Belly (which
never has a red belly around here) which explains some of my
observations).

Larry Sheldon wrote:
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
wrote:
Larry Sheldon wrote:
Larry Sheldon wrote:
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
DiBoy' wrote:

Size is hard to judge, but it looks like a young red-head to me:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1423383510010431878rgOpJu

BoyHowdy, it sure does (size seemed identical to the Redbelly and
Bluejay--one of the pictures at http://tinyurl.com/yz7fara show all
three--MB might be a little smaller.

My wife points out that our bird doesn't (didn't) have the
gray-to-tan jester's collar that the pictures show, but the rest sure
matches up. Age difference, Local variation? I have no idea.


How exciting to see one in your yard! Their conservation status
according to Cornell's all about birds is near-threatened.
http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Red-headed_Woodpecker/lifehistory

Peterson's says "uncommon" I didn't notice the Cornell flag.

First one I've ever seen.

"Birds of Nebraska" says "Nationwide populations are ion the decrease."

It also points out that they are closely related to the Red Belly (which
never has a red belly around here) which explains some of my
observations).

The redbellies here in New Jersey don't have red bellies either. I have
wondered about that.

Jerry

The reason you don't see the red belly of a Red-bellied woodpecker is
that you don't often see the woodpecker's belly!

.
The redbellies here in New Jersey don't have red bellies either. I have
wondered about that.

Jerry

Juvenile Red-headed woodpecker.

The reason you don't see the red belly of a Red-bellied woodpecker is
that you don't often see the woodpecker's belly! Added to that is the
fact that even if you do see the belly the red is not always obvious
but it is there--sort of like the ruby crown on a Ruby-crowned
Kinglet. whoever named it must of had the bird in hand.

Mary Ann
Barnwell, SC

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:47:37 -0400, Jerry Avins <jya at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:

The redbellies here in New Jersey don't have red bellies either. I have
wondered about that.


Juvenile Red-headed woodpecker.

The reason you don't see the red belly of a Red-bellied woodpecker is
that you don't often see the woodpecker's belly! Added to that is the
fact that even if you do see the belly the red is not always obvious
but it is there--sort of like the ruby crown on a Ruby-crowned
Kinglet. whoever named it must of had the bird in hand.