424 
THE WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY • Vol. 124. No. 2. June 2012 
(A. affinis), conveniently arranged on facing 
pages. There are four larger images at the bottom, 
which draws the eye first, then toward the top the 
birds are farther away, smaller, and engaged in 
different behaviors. What makes this pair of plates 
work so well is that the same ages and sexes of each 
species are shown in the same position on each 
plate, and in similar poses. This allows direct 
comparison of key characteristics. But not all plates 
work this well. The Cooper's (Accipiter cooperii) 
and Sharp-shinned (A. striatus) hawk pair of plates 
show many birds in night, which is good since that 
is how many of these are seen. But there is a nice 
head shot of a perched Sharp-shinned Hawk that 
shows the head shape, bill proportions, and lack of 
contrast between the cap and nape. There is no 
similar photograph for comparison on the Cooper’s 
Hawk plate. In fact, it is difficult to see the 
contrasting black cap and paler nape on any of the 
birds on this plate; an important field mark on 
perched birds that is missing. On some plates, the 
number of individuals included is impressive; but 
could this be overwhelming to beginners? Add to 
this the use of four-letter banding codes and you 
have a potentially steep learning curve for a 
beginner. It is good to challenge learners, but is it 
too much? Some beginners will simply resort to 
picture-matching, which can lead to errors and may 
not encourage learning. 
Experts will most likely dig into the traditional 
difficult identification challenges, including juve¬ 
nile jaegers, gulls, shorebirds, fall warblers, and 
Empidonax flycatchers to name a few, as well 
as checking the accuracy of the range maps and 
text. 
After spending many years learning and using 
taxonomic order in field guides, the book’s 
organization can be difficult to use for more 
experienced birders. Even after using the book for 
several months. I find it difficult to find a species, 
as the groupings arc at times ambiguous or 
overlapping. For example. Common Moorhen 
(Gallinula chloropus) (now the Common Galli- 
nule, G. galeata) and American Coot (Fulica 
americana) are not to be found among 'swimming 
waterbirds' but instead among ‘walking water- 
birds’ more than 100 pages farther along in the 
book. I see moorhens (gallinules) swimming more 
often than walking. And every one of the 65 + 
birds on the coot page is either swimming or 
flying! Apparently taxonomy was considered 
more important in these cases, as they follow 
the rails which are walking waterbirds. 
So, are there any groundbreaking innovations 
for difficult identifications in this guide? To me. it 
does not appear so. Having all three jaeger species 
on the same two-page ‘spread’ is helpful, hut 
reduces the coverage of Pomarine (Stercorarius 
pomarinus) and Long-tailed (5. longicaudus ) 
jaegers to a half-page. Juveniles are notoriously 
difficult to identify, but close images of all three 
species in similar poses and lighting are simply 
not provided. Two juveniles and one ‘first year' 
Parasitic (5. parasiticus ) are presented, one 
intermediate and one light juvenile Long-tailed 
arc shown, and one or two ‘first year' Pomarines 
are included. The shapes of the central tail 
feathers are important to identification of juvenile 
jaegers, but on the Pomarine and Long-tailed 
jaegers, these cannot be seen at all, and none is 
shown in similar poses and lighting. The author 
likes to refer to his approach as ‘reality hireling . 
These two plates provide a good idea of the chaos 
and confusion that can accompany watching 
jaegers at a sea (or lake), but unfortunately do 
not provide much clarity or learning opportunities. 
The use of photographs from other contributors 
tor these difficult identifications could undoubt¬ 
edly improve these plates by “making you a 
better birder" which they fall short of doing now. 
Experienced birders tend to look at range maps 
in minute detail, while beginners at times ignore 
them entirely! In my opinion the best range maps 
to date have been in the National Geographic 
Field Guide to the Birds of North America (Dunn 
and Alderfer 2006). A cursory look at the range 
maps in The Crossley ID Guide did not result in 
any glaring errors or significant differences from 
Dunn and Alderfer, but there were differences 
detectable around the edges of the ranges. In 
Michigan, where 1 have the most local knowledge, 
the ranges of 35 species are overstated and 17 are 
understated. Migration paths are not mapped, and 
the topic is only briefly mentioned in the 
Introduction. 
Not all species get a full page, but apparently 
for different reasons. The introduction states the 
more common and widespread species get full- 
page spreads. Relegating the Boreal Chickadee 
(Poecile hudsonicus) to only a half-page short¬ 
changes Canadian birders who will certainly 
consider this a widespread species in their large 
country. The half-page treatment and the resulting 
smaller map of such widespread species are 
difficult to read. This bias against treating 
steadfastly northern species, which are rather 
