To be, or not to be a Harlan's

[OATS]

Harlans are not a separate species or even subspecies they are a dark morph (melanistic) redtailed hawk.

[forestfalcon]

Harlans are not a separate species or even subspecies they are a dark morph (melanistic) redtailed hawk.

I'm pretty sure that a Harlans is a recognized subspecies: B.j. harlani

[frootdog]

Wendy is not a Harlans, she is a dark morph.

She is molting out beautifully!

Actually she is neither. She is a Rufus Morph as has been stated previously in the thread.

[Eagle Owl]

Actually she is neither. She is a Rufus Morph as has been stated previously in the thread.

Oops...my bad. She is a rufous. These pain meds are messing with my head.

[conorhawk]

if you want to get technical wendy is actually a rufous integrate a true rufous looks like this

a rufous integrate looks like this

a melanistic looks like this

and i don't know what you would call this but i call it a melanistic X2

[Eagle Owl]

if you want to get technical wendy is actually a rufous integrate a true rufous looks like this

a rufous integrate looks like this

a melanistic looks like this

and i don't know what you would call this but i call it a melanistic X2

Scientifically speaking, there is no such thing as an integrate. And many scientists have also conceded that there are not really 14 something RT subspecies either, there are around 3-4. All my ornithology books and studies are at my dad's in storage, so I can't give you all the scientific data. The first 2 pictures you posted are simply a rufous morph. RTs have a very wide range of colors, even within the morphs. The last 2 birds that you said are melanistic are Harlan's hawks. Even Harlan's hawks have a wide variety of coloration. There is a light phase Harlan's hawk that the majority of people would call a Krider's. Here is a picture of that bird: http://www.azfo.org/gallery/2009/htm..._20091213.html

I would go into it more, but I gotta get to the DR. Have a great day!

[FredFogg]

There is a light phase Harlan's hawk that the majority of people would call a Krider's. Here is a picture of that bird: http://www.azfo.org/gallery/2009/htm..._20091213.html

I see nothing in those pictures that would make me identify that bird as a light phase Harlan's hawk! Sorry, just don't see it! Looks like a typical light phase red-tail.

[FredFogg]

Harlans are not a separate species or even subspecies they are a dark morph (melanistic) redtailed hawk.

A true Harlans doesn't have a red-tail!

[frootdog]

A true Harlans doesn't have a red-tail!

Good catch Fred. White/cream

[frootdog]

Dark Morph pics

[outhawkn]

Harlans are not a separate species or even subspecies they are a dark morph (melanistic) redtailed hawk.

You may very well be right, currently science would disagree with you.

[tony123abc]

They are all redtails. I do not recognize sub species. IMO, great distances are used by taxonomists/classificationophiles that are to lazy to find a new species. But I will admit the Harlans is a dandy looking bird even if there is no redtail.

[OATS]

I knew I shouldn't have hit the send button. Sorry Conor for sparking this off in your thread. Good move relocating it to a new one.

Birders, naturalists, and ornithologists have been unsuccessfully debating this very topic for 150 years so there is no reason for us to agree on it either. This topic has been near and dear to me for some time since I have spent my whole life in the primary breeding region of Harlans and where the large majority of our redtails are Harlans phase. Yep I said phase. When one examines the scientific definition of a species or subspecies there is no biological justification for Harlan's hawks to be considered a separate subspecies let alone a separate species which they were considered for a long time. Many differing opinions amongst the experts out there. For every paper supporting a subspecies designation there is a study contradicting it. I, for one have seen hundreds if not thousands of Harlans, handled more than I can count, and have hunted them for many seasons (even have one in the mews as we speak). Many falconers in Alaska currently have Harlans and western phase RTs they hunt with. Around here, anybody who has hunted RTs for any amount of time and has experience with both phases can tell you that they are absolutely just redtails of a different hue and no two Harlans are colored the same. Every year we find a new nest or two where one of the parents is a traditional western phase and one is a Harlans. What does that make the offspring? Certainly not a different subspecies? Just like a litter of rabbits, dogs, etc. may have different color offspring, birds with diverse visual characteristics like redtails do the same.

I don't want this thread to turn into a debate with people's personalities clashing over the inability to agree so let's be nice. I'm not big on arguing over something that really doesn't matter so we may have to agree to disagree. A redtail is a redtail. They are great falconry birds no matter what color they are.

[Eagle Owl]

I knew I shouldn't have hit the send button. Sorry Conor for sparking this off in your thread. Good move relocating it to a new one.

Birders, naturalists, and ornithologists have been unsuccessfully debating this very topic for 150 years so there is no reason for us to agree on it either. This topic has been near and dear to me for some time since I have spent my whole life in the primary breeding region of Harlans and where the large majority of our redtails are Harlans phase. Yep I said phase. When one examines the scientific definition of a species or subspecies there is no biological justification for Harlan's hawks to be considered a separate subspecies let alone a separate species which they were considered for a long time. Many differing opinions amongst the experts out there. For every paper supporting a subspecies designation there is a study contradicting it. I, for one have seen hundreds if not thousands of Harlans, handled more than I can count, and have hunted them for many seasons (even have one in the mews as we speak). Many falconers in Alaska currently have Harlans and western phase RTs they hunt with. Around here, anybody who has hunted RTs for any amount of time and has experience with both phases can tell you that they are absolutely just redtails of a different hue and no two Harlans are colored the same. Every year we find a new nest or two where one of the parents is a traditional western phase and one is a Harlans. What does that make the offspring? Certainly not a different subspecies? Just like a litter of rabbits, dogs, etc. may have different color offspring, birds with diverse visual characteristics like redtails do the same.

I don't want this thread to turn into a debate with people's personalities clashing over the inability to agree so let's be nice. I'm not big on arguing over something that really doesn't matter so we may have to agree to disagree. A redtail is a redtail. They are great falconry birds no matter what color they are.

Eric, if you go back and reread my posts, I have basically said the same things you just said. I do not believe that every color morph (or phase as you call it) is a separate subspecies. If there are true RT subspecies, it is only a few. I also said that the Harlan's have a variety of tail colors, including rufous. The only thing we do disagree on is which phase Wendy is.

[OATS]

They are all redtails. I do not recognize sub species. IMO, great distances are used by taxonomists/classificationophiles that are to lazy to find a new species. But I will admit the Harlans is a dandy looking bird even if there is no redtail.

Amen Tony. BTW, that bird in my title pic is a Harlans. Guess what it is finishing up it's first moult and has grown a tail of many different colors including RED. That bird is getting released tomorrow. =)

[forestfalcon]

They are all redtails. I do not recognize sub species. IMO, great distances are used by taxonomists/classificationophiles that are to lazy to find a new species. But I will admit the Harlans is a dandy looking bird even if there is no redtail.

So, do you not recognize Peregrines as peales, anatum, tundrius, etc? Those are all subspecies...

[outhawkn]

So, do you not recognize Peregrines as peales, anatum, tundrius, etc? Those are all subspecies...

[borderhawk]

This bird was at Nafa in Amarillo. Never found out whose it was but I'm sure someone here would recognize it...

[OATS]

So, do you not recognize Peregrines as peales, anatum, tundrius, etc? Those are all subspecies...

I recognize those as peregrine subspecies. We have all three here in Alaska. They're breeding ranges are regionally separated which generally precludes interbreedings although this occurs at the fringes of their ranges. A requirement of being a subspecies is that the species can physically interbreed but are generally prohibited from doing so be some sort of real or perceived barrier.

[rri32701]

Anyone know how to tell the other sub-species apart,Calurus,Borealis and Umbrinus?

[Eagle Owl]

Anyone know how to tell the other sub-species apart,Calurus,Borealis and Umbrinus?

There is not really a specific look that separates them apart as there is a great color variation among RTs. Hence the reason I am in the taxonomic group that does not recognize them as subspecies. But those 3 RTs are defined by where they breed.

Buteo jamaicensis borealis --- eastern red-tailed hawk
Buteo jamaicensis calurus --- western red-tailed hawk
Buteo jamaicensis umbrinus --- Florida red-tailed hawk

[kimmerar]

Here are the pics of my friends RT. Cash has only dropped one tail feather so far and he says it's red with a black band and spotted.





I will post a picture of him when he's done with the molt.

And I can't leave this out

[tony123abc]

Nope. Peregrine is a peregrine. A gyr is a gyr. A coopie a coopie a Red shoulder is a red shoulder. A ferruge is a ferruge. My Nevada ferruges are just the same as the S. Dakota ferruges. But then, I like to keep it simple. Put em in a box if healthy breeding babies pop out 9 months later, bingo! The same thing. Regardless of distance separation, migration and so on. My opinion.

[forestfalcon]

Nope. Peregrine is a peregrine. A gyr is a gyr. A coopie a coopie a Red shoulder is a red shoulder. A ferruge is a ferruge. My Nevada ferruges are just the same as the S. Dakota ferruges. But then, I like to keep it simple. Put em in a box if healthy breeding babies pop out 9 months later, bingo! The same thing. Regardless of distance separation, migration and so on. My opinion.

I understand your thought on this, but many subspecies aren't just labeled that simply because of separation/migration. Many of these subspecies have very obvious morphological differences, for instance, a Harlans redtail has shorter wings than other subspecies of redtail...

[PeteJ]

Here are the pics of my friends RT. Cash has only dropped one tail feather so far and he says it's red with a black band and spotted.

That's a good looking Buteo right there! If you're gonna have one, you might as well have on that looks as good as that one. It'll be interesting to see what it looks like after it molts.

[kimmerar]

That's a good looking Buteo right there! If you're gonna have one, you might as well have on that looks as good as that one. It'll be interesting to see what it looks like after it molts.

Yes Pete - I agree. Murphy is hanging out with my friend this year. You know - just can't wait to see the new feathers I will update when I get a molted picture. It's going real slow. Even body feathers.