Willow Flycatcher – One Of The Aggravating Empids

A species deserving of more attention than it gets.

 

1/5000, f/6.3, ISO 800, Canon 7D Mark II, Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM + EF 1.4 III Extender, not baited, set up or called in

I photographed this Willow Flycatcher two days ago in a Wasatch Mountain valley. ‘He” wasn’t in a singing mood but he posed nicely for a few moments in a setting I like very much when I crop the photos vertically but not so much with horizontal compositions. The background color is sort of a homogenized mix of spring green and the ubiquitous tans and browns of dried vegetation so common around here and for this photo I think it’s just about perfect.

Empidonax flycatchers, ’empids’, often don’t get the attention they deserve. They tend to be somewhat drab little birds, some like this species are common and most tend to look very similar with their olive upperparts, pale throats and bellies and whitish wing-bars and eye-rings. Since they’re so similar physically birders must rely on voice, behavior, habitat and range to aid in identification. But their habitats and ranges often overlap and they have an uncanny knack for keeping their mouths shut just when it comes time to make an ID. Empids have been called “the toughest group of North American birds to identify in the field” and many amateur and even expert birders simply give up in frustration.

So how did I ID this particular flycatcher? I’m a rank amateur when it comes to flycatcher ID but the ‘fitz-bew ‘ call of the Willow Flycatcher is distinctive so I rely on it, on appropriate habitat and the fact that I know that Willow Flycatchers are common in the area where I photographed this bird.

However, this flycatcher wasn’t calling so I’m just playing the odds and hoping I’m right.

Ron

 

 

25 Comments

  1. A debonair little chap. The more I look at this bird, the more I enjoy looking at him. 🙂 I agree that the vertical crop makes for a pleasing composition.

  2. Just a glimpse of an Empid makes my day!

    Marvelous photograph, Ron!

  3. A classic LBJ. A bird ‘species’ which I find charming. Closer observation invariably shows subtle beauty – by the bucketload.
    Thank you.

  4. Beautiful photo. I hope you are right or I am wrong too!

  5. Pretty bird! I’m with Everett, call it a flycatcher and call it good! Actually, we have the Pacific-slope brand here that’s perhaps a little easier to ID by sight, and I realize now *that* must be the little guy I saw in my fountain yesterday! 😊

    • You’re lucky to have flycatchers in your yard, Chris. I only remember having one or two of them in my yard and they were only here for a few days. Haven’t seen any more for years now.

  6. What a lovely!! As we’ve discussed before, the subtle colorations are often more attractive to me than their flashier counterparts, but in truth, I’m drawn to both for different reasons. I’m also drawn to those tiny little legs. Yes, I know some species are even tinier but the idea that life courses through there has me gobsmacked regularly 😉 Yes, I’m easily gobsmacked 😉
    As for ID, I’m mostly hopeless at that. That’s mostly because I can’t see the details fast enough but I also almost never carry handy field guide when I’m out in The Great Out There. I need to learn how to record their songs and then how to pair that with the electronic ID guides. Thus far, that knowledge has flummoxed me–and yes, I’m easily flummoxed, too! 😉
    Forgive my tardy comment on yesterday’s cedar waxwings, but I’m dealing with stupid computer tricks along with very limited computer time because of RA body pain. ANYWAY, I saw many of the yellow-tipped wings while living in Dallas. I had a couple of laurel trees that drew a horde of waxwings with both red and yellow wing tips when the color of the berries was right (thank you Dan Gleason). They’d strip the trees of the berries then disappear again. I was also able to rehab (and release) several of both colors and I can tell you that those feathers look like individual feathers that has been dipped in high-gloss acrylic paint! Just amazing!!
    The why part goes back to Mother Nature holding her secrets close to her vest. She’s such a witch sometimes, isn’t she?

    • Laura, I don’t have a natural inclination for bird ID either. I’m more interested in other aspects of their natural history but for obvious reasons ID is important so I force myself to work at it.

      I wish it came easier for me.

  7. Nice to see one. I’ve only heard the “fitz-bew”. The translation of Empidonax –gnat master– is surely more fun, if I may so opine.

    • “The translation of Empidonax –gnat master– is surely more fun,”

      I had the exact same thought when I saw that last night, Lyle. Too bad scientific names have to be in Latin.

      That “fitz-bew” call is an almost constant companion as I travel down that mountain valley but the birds are far more often heard than seen.

  8. Thanks for sharing this one. I adore flycatchers. Despite their drab colouring, I find them extremely photogenic birds. Around here, I get mostly eastern phoebes. I never tire of taking their pictures!

  9. A cutie for sure….. 🙂 I would have NO idea.;) Little flycatchers ARE fund to watch. They’re “busy” this morning with an insect cloud over the creek.

    • Thanks, Judy. Wish I had a creek that close. I miss the one on the farm, even though it was always abuzz with skeeters in the late spring and summer.

      • As long as it’s a “swallow” year it’s not too bad – so-so this year……. 😉

  10. Great shot!!

    The only way I can ID these extremely difficult Flycatchers is their call. If they are not talking there is no way I can tell the difference! And, I am 84 and have been birding since I was 10!

  11. Everett F Sanborn

    First things first, that is an excellent photo Ron. And yes Flycatchers are difficult to ID. Was not familiar with the term “empids” so thanks for the education. Your post really got me interested in the Flycatchers I have photos of. I have many Ash-throated, but they are probably the easiest to ID. I have a couple that I ID’d using Sibleys and called them Hammond’s, but now reading our list of Prescott birds I believe that to be wrong. We don’t show those and we don’t show your Willow. We show Dusky-capped as “accidental” fewer than 5 sightings. Same for Brown-crested. Then we show Sulfur-bellied as rare, and Vermillion as transient. So now I have photos of two that I just called Flycatchers and will send to our local bird expert to be ID’d.

    • Empids are tough, Everett. When I was active in a bird photography critique site (NPN) whenever someone posted an empid there was nearly always discussion, sometimes arguments, on the ID of the bird.

  12. What a little cutie. Am I right that he has a two-tone beak?

    • Yes, you’re right Cathy. The color of the upper mandible is pretty consistent but the color of the lower mandible varies in individual birds.

Comments are closed