The first ABA Area record of Crowned Slaty-Flycatcher Empidonomus aurantioatrocristatus was photographed and collected in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, on 3 June 2008 by Paul Conover and Buford Myers. The specimen now resides in the collection of the Louisiana State Museum of Natural Science. An account of the sighting, collection, and identification can be found in North American Birds, Vol. 62, No. 4.
Crowned Slay-Flycatcher breeds in southern South American and is a common austral migrant to Ecuador, and seen less commonly in Venezuela, and recorded as rare in the Guianas and Venezuela (Birds of Northern South America, Vol. 1,Restall et. al.). As a migrant, Crowned Slaty-Flycatcher is found in the eastern Amazonian lowlands , particularly in open areas below 2,500 m. The most frequently recorded South American austral migrant is Fork-tailed Flycatcher and last year's White-crested Elaenia is another southern South American species making it into the U.S.
Not only is Crowned Slaty-Flycatcher a new record for the U.S., there is only one record of this austral migrant from Central America, one from central Panama in December 2007 (NAB, Vol. 62, No. 4.). Drawings of this species can be found on Plate 39 in Birds of Columbia, Hilty and Brown, very well illustrated on Plate 206 of Birds of Northern South America, Vol. 2., Restall et. al, and in Birds of Ecuador, Vol. 2, Ridgely and Greenfield, among other South American field guides.
Collected?
Posted by: C Johnson | April 13, 2009 at 05:50 AM
"photographed and collected"
I thought that practice died out with the Victorians, seriously though what was the need to kill, sorry, collect this bird, seems such a waste.
Posted by: Tony | April 13, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Yes, thought we were in the 21st century - my mistake, obviously. Can someone enlighten me as to the scientific value of 'collecting' this particular specimen - a vagrant of an already well-described species? As an ornithologist and scientist working in global bird conservation I have to say I'm struggling here...
Posted by: Andy | April 13, 2009 at 12:02 PM
The collecting of the "specimen" basically cheated the birding and conservation from this bird. It is unfortunate that the initial observers were more interested in a lifeless study skin than real conservation of the bird.
Posted by: Radd Icenoggle | April 21, 2009 at 05:01 PM
I guess a shotgun is standard birding equipment for good ol' boy redneck Louisiana bird surveys.
Posted by: Dan | April 29, 2009 at 09:08 AM
In the long run collecting the bird probably did more for conservation (it kept people from burning fossil fuels and possibly killing a bird or two with their car en route, in order to look for the bird) than not collecting it. How likely is it that this bird would have survived and have found its way back anyway?
Posted by: phil | July 17, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Is there anyway to see if the shooter had a permit to collect this bird? If not, he should be prosecuted to the fullest.
Posted by: Doug Aguillard | September 03, 2009 at 02:22 PM