Identification of

stints and peeps

Illustrations by Lars Jonsson
Text by P.J. Grant

T he precision and supreme artistry of Lars Jonsson's stint paintings

(plates 113 to 120) fully match the complexities of the subject. They
bear the closest inspection, and provide a further major advance in stint
identification, building especially on that made by Wallace (1974).
T h e first section of this accompanying text deals with general infor-
mation relevant to stint identification as a whole. T h e second section covers
detailed species-descriptions.

General information
Topography
Fig. 1 names the main feather groups and other features of a stint. The
feather groups on the wing and upper body are rather complex. Their
patterns often provide vital identification clues, so it is essential to be able to
locate and identify them accurately. They are the lesser coverts, median
coverts, greater coverts (these three groups together forming the

Fig. 1. Topography of a stint Calidris (Lars Jonsson)

[Brit. Birds 11: 293-315, July 1984] 293

294 Identification of stints and peeps
'innerwing-coverts'), tertials, scapulars, and mantle. It is useful ground-
work to practise locating these groups of feathers on stints and other small
waders, using the plates, photographs, and close field views. Fig. I shows a
juvenile, in which plumage the groups of feathers are pale-fringed and
better demarcated than on worn summer plumage or the comparatively
plain winter plumage.
For identification purposes, it is convenient to subdivide the scapulars
into two groups: two rows of 'lower scapulars', and three rows of 'upper
scapulars', but note that the tiny upper row of the latter is often at least
partly concealed by the overlapping outer row of mantle feathers. The
reason for this subdivision is that in juvenile and summer-plumaged stints
there is, on some species, a clear difference of feather pattern between the
upper and lower scapulars. Also, the pattern of the rear lower scapulars of
juvenile stints (plate 120) is often important in identification.
The strength of any mantle or scapular ' V is also often an important
identification clue in juvenile and summer plumages. The mantle V is
formed by the alignment of pale fringes between the outer two rows of
mantle feathers; the scapular V is formed by pale outer fringes on the lowest
row of upper scapulars. The prominence of the scapular V depends much
on how the scapulars are spread; the V is usually most apparent when
viewed from the rear.
It is important to note that the arrangement of the scapulars can vary
from closely folded to fully spread. When the scapulars are closely folded
(e.g. as in plate 113a), they lie in a compact group along the top of the wing,
revealing most of the innerwing-coverts. When they are fully spread (e.g. as
in plate 118c), most of the innerwing-coverts are concealed. The line of
demarcation between innerwing-coverts and lower scapulars is best
discerned by noting the small size of the former and the large size of the
latter.
Note, too, that the secondaries (except for the four innermost, which are
the tertials) and the whole of the outerwing (except for the tips of the outer
primaries) are not visible when the wing is closed, being folded beneath the
innerwing.
Ageing
When an unfamiliar stint is encountered, age diagnosis is an essential first

Fig. 2. Monthly incidence of plumages of typical stint Calidris. Arrows show sequence of
plumages. Diagonal lines show typical periods of head- and body-moult. Hatched lower line
shows typical period of partial wing- and tail-moult in first winter; solid lower line shows
typical periods of complete wing- and tail-moult
Identification of stints and peeps 295
step in the identification process, enabling relevant comparisons with other
stints of the same age. A stint may be in juvenile, first-winter, first-summer,
adult winter, or adult summer plumage, or at an intermediate stage of
moult between one plumage and the next. The time of year when each
plumage can be encountered is indicated in fig. 2, which also shows the
sequence of plumages and the typical moult periods. The timing and extent
of moults are variable, according to individual variation, timing of breeding
and migration, and species. General information on each plumage is given
below.
JUVENILE In stints, full juvenile plumage is normally retained during the first southward
migration and is usually much the commonest plumage amongst autumn migrants from mid
August onwards. Its appearance is distinct from other plumages encountered in autumn, the
upperparts and wings being uniformly fresh and unworn, with an orderly, regular pattern.
Juveniles are shown in plates 113, 114 and 115d. Any rufous tones become reduced through
wear and fading, so that juveniles average less rufous later in the autumn. The strength of any
rufous coloration also varies individually. The whitish fringes of upperparts feathers are also
prone to wear, so that the prominence of any mantle V or scapular V may be much reduced by
late autumn. The acquisition of only a few grey, first-winter mantle feathers or scapulars can
also reduce the strength of any mantle V or scapular V and give a greyer general appearance to
the upperparts. Little Stint Calidris minuta in this stage of moult can look superficially like
Semipalmated Sandpiper C. pusilla in these respects, emphasising the need for close views to
determine the precise state of plumage if a juvenile rare stint is suspected.
FIRST-WINTER Acquired by post-juvenile moult, typically during September to November,
involving head and body feathers (including scapulars) and some wing-coverts. The start of
the moult is apparently usually triggered by arrival on or near the wintering area.
Distinguishable from adult-winter plumage only if the distinctive pattern of retained juvenile
feathers (usually among the innerwing-coverts) can be discerned. Retained juvenile feathers
are prone to wear and fade, lessening the differences from adult winter, especially from mid
winter onwards.
FIRST-SUMMER Acquired by a moult involving a variable number—-usually not all—of the
primaries, secondaries and tail feathers (typically during December to April), and all of the
head and body feathers and wing-coverts (typically during February to May). First-summer
plumage is highly variable in appearance. At least a substantial proportion of first-summer
individuals of some species (Semipalmated Sandpiper, Western Sandpiper C. mauri, and
Red-necked Stint C. mficollis) apparently remain on or near their southern wintering areas
throughout their first summer and do not return north to the breeding areas with the adults:
the first-summer plumage of these individuals is often little—if at all—different from winter
plumage. At least the majority of other stints (Little, Temminck's C. temminckii, Long-toed C.
submimta and Least Sandpiper C. minutilla) apparently do return north with the adults, and
these individuals probably average closer in appearance to adult summer plumage. Bearing
these points in mind, individuals with a substantial proportion of winter-like plumage during
spring and summer (especially May and June) are probably first-summers.
ADULT WINTER (=SECOND-WINTER) Acquired by complete moult, which starts near the end of
breeding activity or (in the case of non-breeders and first-summers) from the end of June
onwards. Most of the moult is usually completed by the end of September, but moult of
primaries and tail feathers may be protracted and not completed until the end of February.
Typical winter plumages are illustrated in plates 115 and 116. Their comparatively plain
coloration provides fewer opportunities for specific plumage differences than for other ages, so
that structural and voice distinctions are often the best means of identification. Subde specific
differences in grey or brown tones are probably of little value on lone birds.
ADULT SUMMER Acquired by head-, body- and innerwing-covert-moult during January to
April. Fresh summer plumage of migrants in spring (e.g. May, plates 117a & e, 118b, c, e & g)
has whitish or greyish feather fringes. At a distance, these feathers may look little different
from winter plumage. The whitish or greyish fringes are rapidly lost, revealing more of any
underlying rufous tones and producing full summer plumage by the time of arrival on the
breeding grounds (e.g. in June and July, illustrated in plates 117c, d & f, 118a & d). Adults in
296 Identification of stints and peeps
late summer typically become highly worn, acquiring an often very dark general appearance
due to further loss of feather fringes. There appears to be no consistent plumage difference
between the sexes of stints.
Transition from summer to winter plumage produces a distinctive mixture of old, much-
worn summer feathers and fresh grey winter ones (plates 116a & c, 117b & g): Little Stint in
such plumage looks strikingly different from the usually much more numerous juveniles in
migrant autumn flocks, and has provided many false alarms because of its generally greyer
appearance and superficial resemblance to Semipalmated Sandpiper. Again, if a rare stint is
suspected, close views are needed to determine the precise state of its plumage.

Variation in feather patterns

Summer plumage of some stints often contains greyish, winter-like feathers
among the lower scapulars, innerwing-coverts, and tertials. These are not
retained winter feathers, but new feathers grown at the initial stages of the
moult to summer plumage, before the individual has started its assumption
of breeding condition. Feathers grown later in the moult, as the individual
comes into full breeding condition, are increasingly richly coloured. While
there are some distinct specific differences in the extent to which adult
summer plumage contains winter-like innerwing-coverts and tertials (for
example, Red-necked Stint consistently has more than Little Stint, plate
117), it may be useful to be aware of this source of individual variation. As
previously explained, first-summer individuals in any case often have a
more winter-like appearance than adults.
The reverse of this may also occur in the moult from summer to winter
plumage, when it is possible that the first-grown feathers may have more
extensive dark centres (reflecting remnants of breeding condition) than
those grown later in the moult. Again, while there are some distinct specific
differences in the patterns of winter-plumage feathers (e.g. the diag-
nostically sharply blackish-centred feathers of Long-toed Stint, plate 115c),
supposed specific differences for other species may in practice require some
caution. Not only is there possible variation arising from the timing of
feather growth, but there also seems to be a degree of individual variation in
the extent and strength of dark feather centres or shaft-streaks. It has also
been suggested that feather centres of winter plumage darken and increase
in extent with age, so that the upperparts of stints may average paler and
plainer in early winter. Different light conditions and angles of view can
also make general plumage tones appear greyer or browner, and affect the
apparent strength of dark feather centres.

Size
Measurements (from BWP 3) of length (the conventional one of a dead bird
or skin on its back measured from bill-tip to tail-tip) and of approximate
wing-span are included in the detailed descriptions. These give an
indication of relative sizes, but judging size in the field can be difficult.
Several points need to be borne in mind when attempting to estimate the
size of a stint. These are size-illusion (Grant 1983), in which farther birds
may appear proportionately larger than they really are in comparison with
nearer ones when viewed through binoculars or telescope; the problems of
judging size in itself (Grant 1980, 1983); individual variation in size (female
stints average larger than males: according to measurements in table 1, the
Identification of stints and peeps 297

Fig. 3. Juvenile Little Stint Calidris minuta showing how shape and apparent proportions can be
changed by varying posture. A: plumage sleek (perhaps due to warm temperature or alertness)
showing full length of thigh and tibia, legs relatively unflexed (perhaps due to lightness of
wind), and neck extended, together giving attenuated, small-bodied and long-legged outline.
B: same individual with plumage expanded or 'fluffed-up' (perhaps due to cold temperature)
concealing thigh and most of tibia, legs flexed and neck hunched (perhaps to counteract strong
wind), together giving crouched posture and large-bodied, short-legged outline (Larsjonsson)
longest female Little Stint wing length is 104mm, nearly 12% longer than
the 9 3 m m of the shortest male); and the fact that a stint can expand or
fluff-up its plumage and look larger and bulkier (see also 'Structure' and fig.
3). T h e difficulties are such that specific size differences are not reliably
discernible on a lone stint, and careful side-by-side comparison with other
stints or small waders is necessary before any significant size-judgments
may be possible.

Structure, behaviour andfeeding action

Differences in structure—bill length, bill shape, middle-toe length, hind-
toe length, length of 'primary projection' beyond the longest tertial
(including the number of primary-tips involved and their spacing, but
beware of individuals with moulted, growing or worn longest tertial or
outer primaries), and presence or absence of foot webbing—can be
important identification features. Size, leg length and head- and body-
shape can also be useful, but it is important to note that these may appear to
alter significantly through varying posture, as illustrated and described in

Bill length is best assessed by comparing its length (measured from the
tip of the bill to the feathering on the culmen) with the 'loral distance'
(which is the distance, across the lores, from the feathering on the culmen to
the front edge of the eye). Comparison of bill length with total head length is
less satisfactory because posture can alter head length, whereas the loral
distance is constant. Accurate assessment of bill length/loral distance is
difficult in the field, however, so sharp photographs (which obviously must
be in full profile to avoid the effects of foreshortening) are the best source.
Bill length of females averages longer than that of males (see table 1).
T h e degree of bill-tip expansion (the lateral broadening at the tip) may
be important, and can be assessed when the bill is viewed head-on with the
bill held slightly downwards (e.g. as in plates 119a-f). Bill-tip expansion has
nothing to do with the degree of bluntness of the bill tip when viewed in
298 Identification of stints and peeps
Table 1. Measurements (in mm) of stints Calidris (from 'BWP")
Little Stint C. minuta
Difference between sexes significant for wing, tail, and bill
MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range

Wing ad 96.4 1.90 16 93-100 99.5 2.70 15 96-104

Wingjuv 96.3 1.64 10 94-98 100.2 2.15 10 95-103
Tail ad 39.2 1.38 17 37-42 40.5 1.62 17 37-44
Bill 18.1 0.82 17 16.7-19.2 18.5 0.66 16 17.5-19.9
Tarsus 21.2 0.90 17 19.8-23.2 21.7 0.88 16 19.7-23.6
Toe 18.7 0.98 15 17.5-20.8 19.1 0.64 16 17.5-20.1

Red-necked Stint C. rujkallis

Sex differences significant for wing and bill. Juvenile wing significantly shorter than adult;
difference in other measurements not significant

Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range

Wing ad 103.5 2.36 37 98-107 106.2 2.09 39 102-112

Wingjuv 101.1 3.07 27 94-107 102.6 3.00 22 100-108
Tail ad 42.7 1.87 17 38-46 43.8 2.25 16 40-48
Tail juv 42.7 2.18 16 39-46 42.5 1.92 11 39-45
Bill 17.5 0.68 20 16.1-18.9 18.7 0.89 18 17.5-20.9
Tarsus 19.7 0.64 20 17.9-20.8 19,9 0.58 20 18.9-21.1
Toe 18.3 0.55 19 17.3-19.3 18.5 0.73 20 17.3-19.8

Semipalmated Sandpiper C. pusilla

Sex differences significant, except tail. Juvenile wing ( 9) and tail (both sexes) significantly
shorter than adult, but not wing; juvenile bill, tarsus, and toe similar to adult, combined
MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range
o
Wing ad 1.48 13 94-98 100.1 1.31 13 98-102
95.9
Wingjuv 96.1 2.09 17 93-100 98.3 1.71 14 96-101
Tail ad 39.3 2.02 16 37-43 40.6 2.46 13 37-45
Tail juv 36.6 1.65 10 35-39 37.2 1.19 10 36-40
Bill 18.6 1.17 29 16.6-20.2 20.2 1.25 26 18.4-22.8
Tarsus 21.3 0.70 29 19.8-22.8 22.1 0.58 27 21.0-23.5
Toe 18.5 0.59 23 17.0-19.5 18.9 0.64 26 17.3-20.1

Slight geographical variation in wing and bill length: breeding adults from (1) Alaska, (2)
central Canada (Banks Island, Mackenzie and Keewatin Districts), and (3) eastern Canada
(Baffin Island and eastern Hudson Bay area):
WING BILL
MALES FEMALES MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample Sample Sample
Mean SD size Mean SD size Mean SD size Mean SD size

(1) 93.2 1.93 23 96.3 1,80 9 17.3 0.73 23 18.9 0.41 9

(2) 95.1 1.68 21 97.1 4.20 9 18.0 0.72 33 19.5 0.72 14
(3) 95,8 2.23 34 98.9 2.09 15 19.6 0.95 42 21.3 0.91 18

'Wing' is maximum length (flattened and straightened) from carpal joint to tip of longest primary; 'tail' is
from feathering on culmen to tip; 'tarsus' is length from middle point ofjoint between tarsus and tibia at
tarsus to tip of claw. SD = standard deviation. Range = shortest-longest in sample.
 Identification of stints and peeps 299
Western Sandpiper C. mauri
Sex differences significant, except for tail. Juvenile wing averages 1.1 shorter than adult,
juvenile tail 4.4 shorter; bill, tarsus, and toe similar to adult from about October
MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range

Wing ad 97.1 2.38 9 94-101 101 1.38 15 99-103

Tail ad 41.8 1.65 10 39-45 42.2 1.87 19 38-45
Bill 23.1 1.00 14 21.7-25.3 26.7 0.67 20 23.8-27.8
Tarsus 21.8 0.68 15 20.8-23.0 23.4 0.71 21 22.1-25.0
Toe 13.1 0.84 12 16.8-19.5 19.4 0.90 20 17.3-21.3

Least Sandpiper C. minutilla

Sex differences significant for bill, tarsus, and toe. Bill best character for sexing, as only 3 out of
23 S 6 had bill over 18.9 and 4 out of 21 2 2 below this. Juvenile tail significantly shorter
than adult; other juvenile measurements similar
MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range

Wing ad 89.8 2.10 11 86-93 91.6 2.52 15 88-96

Wingjuv 89.8 2.18 25 86-94 90.6 1.71 12 88-93
Tail ad 37.9 1.93 12 36-40 37.4 1.68 14 35-40
Tailjuv 35.4 1.36 9 33-37 35.5 1.58 5 33-38
Bill 18.2 0.91 23 16.7-19.2 19.5 0.84 21 18.3-21.2
Tarsus 18.6 0.73 23 16.7-19.5 19.1 0.46 22 18.4-19.8
Toe 18.7 0.62 21 17.5-19.7 19.6 0.83 20 18.0-20.6

Long-toed Stint C. subminuta

Sex differences significant for bill only. Juvenile wing not significantly shorter than adult,
juvenile tail on average 1-6 shorter; juvenile bill, tarsus, and toe similar to adult from
September onwards
MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range

Wing ad 93.1 1.78 16 88-95 95.0 2.08 14 91-99

Wingjuv 93.0 1.86 18 89-97 93.7 2.11 21 88-97
Tail ad 37.4 1.37 22 35-40 38.5 1.52 11 36-41
Bill 17.8 0.73 35 16.2-19.2 18.8 0.78 34 17.4-20.4
Tarsus 21.8 0.89 31 19.4-23.4 22.0 0.96 31 20.2-23.8
Toe 23.2 0.88 31 21.0-24.9 23.3 1.13 29 21.2-25.5

Temminck's Stint C. temminckii

Sex difference significant for tarsus
MALES FEMALES
Sample Sample
Mean SD size Range Mean SD size Range

Wing 98.2 2.27 21 95-103 99.3 2.13 19 97-105

Tail 46.2 1.97 16 42-49 47.1 1.88 15 44-51
Bill 16.9 0.49 24 15.8-17.6 17.2 0.74 18 15.7-18.2
Tarsus 17.6 0.44 17 16.8-18.2 17.9 0.47 16 17.3-18.7
Toe 18.2 0.59 16 17.4-19.1 18.1 0.54 18 17.3-19.4

from skin between bases of central pair of feathers to tip of longest feather when tail closed; 'bill' is length
rear of leg, to joint between tarsus and middle toe at front of leg; 'toe' is length of middle toe from joint with
300 Identification of stints and peeps

profile, which can be equally important. Close views are essential to

determine the precise structure of a stint's bill, because features such as
bill-tip expansion or the bluntness of the bill tip in profile are often not
reliably discernible at long range.
Apparently consistent behavioural and feeding-action traits are
mentioned in the detailed descriptions, but note that feeding action in
particular is prone to vary individually, depending on such external factors
as type of terrain (e.g. dry ground, soft mud, water), position of prey (on or
below mud surface), and wind speed (affecting the more- or less-hunched
attitude of a feeding stint, fig. 3). The possible variations render feeding
action of only slight identification value without back-up from more
tangible differences of plumage, structure and voice.
Structural and behavioural differences undoubtedly combine to give
some species a distinctive 'jizz', which can be learned with experience.
Assessment of these on a lone individual of an unfamiliar species, however,
requires caution and very careful observation. For European observers,
total familiarity with the structure, behaviour and plumages of Little Stint
is an essential base for assessing the possibility of a rare stint.

Voice
Transcriptions of calls are notoriously variable, and this is especially true
for stints. It is possible that different ears are more attuned to either the low-
or high-pitched elements of the same call, leading to different transcriptions
from different observers. Also, coarser elements of the same call seem more
obvious at close range than at a distance, and careful listening to stints can
produce a confusing array of variations. Nonetheless, carefully noted call
transcriptions can help identification. All species utter a variety of short
notes or 'chatter' when feeding or in short flights: in this paper, however, an
attempt has been made to isolate the most distinctive full-flight calls. A
wider range of calls can be found, especially in Wallace (1974) and BWP,

Photographs
Whenever possible (with due regard for bird, habitat and other observers,
and after thorough field notes have been taken), every attempt should be
made to obtain good photographs when a rare stint is suspected. Their
value cannot be overestimated, not only as confirmation of identification,
but also as research material. Many recent advances in stint identification
have come from prolonged study of photographs. Good photographs of any
stints would be welcomed by the author for further studies.
Assessment of photographs requires special considerations which take
into account such factors as sharpness of focus, foreshortening (which can
affect features such as apparent bill length), and illusory photographic
effects. Changing light conditions and different angles at which the bird is
photographed can also cause apparent changes in the patterns of individual
feathers and in the strength of colour tones. Different makes of film or
copying can enhance or diminish colour tones. These problems become
apparent with experience, when studying a lot of photographic series of
particular individuals. In the absence of such experience, it is sufficient just
Identification of stints and peeps 301
to be aware that these possibly misleading effects can occur, and that the
most reliable material is a long series of photographs, taken at close range,
in diffuse light rather than bright, direct sun.
Trapping
Examination of a large number of museum specimens may be essential in
difficult cases, and, wherever possible, any unusual stint should be trapped
and photographed in the hand. Full biometrics should be taken, using the
precise methods described in table 1. Prater etal. (1977) is a useful further
reference. Additional criteria for distinguishing juvenile and other Little
and Red-necked Stints are described in an appendix (p. 307).
Caution
Stint identification is still evolving, and it should be borne in mind that
some characters described here are valid only for typical or average indi-
viduals, or are of a tentative nature. Safe identification will, therefore,
always be based on careful assessment of the fullest possible range of
plumage, structural and voice distinctions. This is important not only to
avoid misidentification, but also because acceptance ofgood records will be
eased if notes contain relevant discussion of such factors. Prolonged study
at close range is more likely to succeed than brief views or prolonged,
distant ones. While identification of a rare stint is possible in most cases,
and some will be easy, it probably has to be accepted that some individuals
will always evade certain identification.

Detailed descriptions
Six species are described in two separate groups of similar species (Group
One: Little/Red-necked/Semipalmated/Western; and Group Two: Least/
Long-toed), with the distinctive seventh species—Temminck's Stint—
treated separately.
It is unlikely that there will be lasting confusion between species from the
different groups: the main differences are evident in the plates and are
described in the group introductions. Italics indicate those marks which in
combination provide the most useful identification features.
Group One: Little and Red-necked Stints, Semipalmated and Western Sandpipers
In all plumages, this group is distinguished from other stints at least by a
combination of black legs (which, however, at close range when viewed
against a dark background can show a slight grey, greenish or brownish
tone, or can look pale when coated with mud); and comparatively stout,
thick-based bill. Semipalmated and Western Sandpipers are the only stints
with webbed toes, more extensive between the outer and middle toes than
between the middle and inner (fig. 4). This feature is readily observable if
the terrain is not too wet or muddy.
Little Stint C. minuta
ALL PLUMAGES (length 12-14cm; wing-span 34-37cm) Bill length about twice loral distance;
bill hasfinetip and very slightly deaaved lower mandible; bill-tip expansion very slight or lacking.
Small-headed (with slightly back-sloping forehead) and rather round-bodied. Toes unwebbed.
Primary projection typically long, involving three or four primary tips and two wide spaces.
302 Identification of stints and peeps
webbed unwebbed
A B

Fig. 4. Head-on views of legs and feet of stints Calidris, showing A: foot-webbing on
Semipalmated C. pusilla or Western Sandpipers C. mauri (note greater extent of webbing
between outer and middle toes than between middle and inner), compared with B: unwebbed
toes of other stints (Lars Jonsson)
Feeding actions typically quick and active, but slower, more-methodical surface picking not
unusual. Voice: sharp, rather high-pitched and incisive 'stit', uttered singly or repeated.
JUVENILE (plates 113a, b, c & 119d) Head: white supercilium and well-marked fine, whitish
lateral crown-stripes usually give prominent split-supercilium effect!and accentuate dark 'ridge'in centre of
crown (plate 119d); contrasting pale grey hindneck. Upperparts: white mantle V obvious; white
scapular V usually obvious; blackish-centred mantle feathers and upper scapulars otherwise
fringed rufous; lower scapulars sharply fringed and solidly blackish-centred at tips (plate 120); inner
greater coverts and tertials rather solidly blackish-centred, with sharply defined pale (usually strongly rufous)
fringes; median coverts and lower lesser coverts dark-centred with rufous fringes; thus, general
pattern and coloration of innerwing-coverts matching that of scapulars and mantle; upper lesser coverts
rather uniformly dark, forming blackish area at 'shoulder'. Underparts: breast-side streaking
confined to a few (typically three to six) rather clear-cut dark lines overlying orange-rufous wash which
sometimes extends faintly across upper breast; at distance, gives effect of isolated dark-streaked
patch on breast-sides, shown in fig. 3.
WINTER (plate 115a & b) Upperparts usually slightly darker than others in Group One,
through on average more extensive dark feather centres, which also give less uniform effect,
but much variation and probably of no value on lone individual. Some have grey wash, sometimes
finely streaked, forming a complete breast-band apparently not shown by others in this group (but
compare Western).
ADULT SUMMER (plate 117a, b & c) Significantly similar only to Red-necked. Orange to
orange-rufous coloration on head, breast and upperparts of variable extent and strength, but
this orange not extending to throat; and completely pervaded by dark speckles and streaks on ear-coverts, side of
neck and breast (but at distance these areas can appear uniform); split-supercilium effect usually
obvious; intur-wing-coverts and tertials mainly or wholly summer-patterned, matching general pattern
and coloration ofrest of upperparts, not contrastingly plain; prominentyellowish or cream mantle V.

Red-necked Stint C. ruficollis

ALL PLUMAGES (length 13-16cm; wing-span 35-38cm) Bill length short (lVi-2 times loral
distance), bill straight, with bluntness of tip typically between Little and Semipalmated, often
with vertical expansion at tip giving slight blob-ended effect in profile; bill-tip expansion slight
or lacking. General shape round-headed (with steep, rounded forehead) and bulky-bodied
with long body-line and attenuated rear-end, mainly an effect of comparatively short legs and
long wings and tail. Toes unwebbed. Primary projection much as Little. Feeding action much as
Little. Voice: much as Little, but apparently consistently coarser, thus 'chit'; also sharp
squeak, 'week'.
JUVENILE (plates 114a, b & 119c) Head: supercilium dull, not strikingly white; crown
uniformly streaked and greyish, crown typically lacking strong split-supercilium or 'ridge'effects (plate
119c); lores blackish {whole head pattern, therefore, inclined to be rather plain, with blackish
lore and white forehead-sides sometimes standing out as the most prominent features).
Upperparts: mantle V and scapular V bothfaint or lacking; blackish-centred, rufous-fringed mantle
Identification of stints and peeps 303
feathers and upper scapulars; lower scapulars extensively greyish, typically with narrow
drop-shaped dark centres (plate 120); innerwing-coverts rather pale grey and colourless, with
dark shaft streaks of variable extent and very pale rufous or whitish fringes; thus, general
coloration and pattern of innerwing-coverts and lower scapulars rather plain and grey, contrasting with
blackish-centred, rufous-fringed upper scapulars and mantlefeathers; tertials with rather pale greyish centres,
blackish shaft streaks and whitish fringes (any rufous tones on fringes confined to near tip).
Underparts: breast-side streaking extensive, faint and usually diffuse, overlying often decidedly
pinkish-grey wash, which sometimes extends across whole breast.
WINTER (plate 116a & b) Lore dark, in photographs often appearing to extend through eye as
contrasting dark patch; and scapulars averaging less extensively dark-centred than Little
Stint. Plumage, structural and voice differences from Little so slight, however, that certain
separation of lone vagrant probably impossible. Distinguishable from Semipalmated and
Western by lack of foot-webbing and the latter's usually obvious bill-shape differences.
ADULT SUMMER (plate 117d & e) Significantly similar only to Little. Coloration on head, breast
and upperparts rich rufous chestnut or brick red, of highly variable extent. On classic individuals,
rufous extensive, including throat as well as ear-coverts, side of neck and upper breast, the rufous
uniform and not pervaded by dark streaking; chin and forehead often white, giving white 'face';
streaking (in form of distinctive dark arrowheads) restricted to often complete necklace of streaks
(encircling lower breast and on foreftanks) below rufous, overlying basically whitish coloration of lower
breast. On others, rufous much less extensive (e.g. restricted only to ear-coverts and narrow
band above necklace of streaks). Split-supercilium effect faint or lacking; inner-wing-coverts and
tertials (and often some lower scapulars) mainly or wholly winter-patterned, rather plain greyish or
brownish, contrasting with summer-patterned scapulars and mantle; yellowish or orange
mantle V faint or lacking. The pitfall of adult summer Sanderling C. alba, which has similar
plumage patterns, should be noted.

Semipalmated Sandpiper C. pusilla

ALL PLUMAGES (length 13-15 cm; wing-span 35-38 cm) Bill typically short (lVi-2 times loral
distance), straight, deep-based and obviously blunt-tipped in profile, with often marked
bill-tip expansion (but slight or lacking on some): on classic individuals, deep-based, blunt-tipped bill
usually striking, but some (apparently especially from longer-billed east Canadian populations)
overlap in bill length with Little and slightly with short-billed individuals of the usually
much-longer-bilftd Western. Toes webbed. Primary projection typically short, involving two or
three closely spaced primary tips. General shape much as Little. Feeding action is said to be
consistently more hesitant and plover-like (Oddie & Marr 1981), but it can also be fast and
active, like Little Stint. Voice: noticeably low-pitched and coarse; short, fiat-toned, husky
'chrup' or 'trrp'; or harsh 'kreet'.

Fig. 5. Typical winter Semipalmated Calidrispusilla and Western Sandpipers C. mauri showing
differences in head- and breast-patterns described in text. Head shows similar differences in
pattern in juvenile plumage (Lars Jonsson)
304 Identification of stints and peeps
JUVENILE (plates 114c, d, e & 119a) Although coloration variable, upperparts and crown typically
have greyish brownfeather centres, with buff or very faint rufous fringes (plate 114e); a few have stronger
rufous tones (plate 114d), hut upperparts generally much less rufous than classic Little. Head: whitish
supercilium prominent and clear-cut, largely due to contrast with rather uniformly streaked crown
(which lacks dark 'ridge' and usually lacks split-supercilium); compared with Western, white
forehead-sides less extensive and area of supercilium surrounding upper half of eye faintly grey
or streaked, so that thin white eye-ring usually complete (this comparison much the same as
for winter plumage, fig. 5); dark line across lore and dark ear-coverts, forming rather uniform
dark patch through eye, further accentuating supercilium (head pattern summarised in plate
119a). Upperparts: mantle V and scapular V both faint or lacking; blackish-centred mantle
feathers and upper scapulars have fringes which are whitish at tips and buff or dull orange at
sides, giving more scaly (less lined) pattern than Little; innerwing-coverts generally rather
greyish brown, matching pattern and colour of rest of upperparts; rear lower scapulars usually
marked with neat, dark anchor-shaped centres (plate 120) and whitishfringes across tips oflower scapulars
giving continuation of scaly pattern of rest of upperparts; tertials rather plain grey, with pale or rusty
fringes. Underparts: breast-side streaking rather diffuse and extensive, overlying warm bufTsuffusion,
which often extends across breast.
WINTER (plate 116c & d) Head-pattern differences from Western (fig. 5) much as described for
juvenile. Upperparts probably average more uniform than on Little, and browner than on
Western. Breast-sides grey with diffuse streaking, not joining across white breast-centre.
ADULT SUMMER (plate 118a & b) Lack of any strong orange or rufous tones distinctive infresh plumage,
and general tones dull greyish or buff, but some bright coloration may be revealed on
ear-coverts, crown and upperparts by loss of grey fringes. Mantle V and scapular V both faint or
lacking. Innerwing-coverts and tertials rather plain and grey, contrasting with black-centred
scapulars. Breast and foreflanks heavily streaked over whitish base.

Western Sandpiper C. mauri

ALL PLUMAGES (length 14-17 cm; wing-span 35-37 cm) On classic Western, bill obviously long
(2V2-3 times loral distance) with deep base, and bill slightly decurved with ratherfinetip; bill-tip
expansion slight or lacking. Compared with Semipaimated, head rather large and square-cut,
with long, tapered body; flat-backed and round-shouldered (plate 114g), with long-looking
legs. Bill structure and general shape jointly give bill outline recalling miniatuft Dunlin (C. alpina)
rather than stint, so much so that confusion possible on lone bird where Dunlin's actually larger
size, heavier general build and thicker legs may be less apparent. Toes webbed, instantly
eliminating Dunlin and other stints, except Semipaimated. Primary projection very short,
involving one or two closely spaced primary tips. Compared with Semipaimated, feeding
action often more methodical (with less frequent pecks and more probing) and Dunlin-like;
tends to wade in deeper water than do other stints. Voice: thin, high-pitched, penetrating,
slightly drawn-out 'jeet' or 'cheep'; coarser, Dunlin-like 'chree' and shorter versions which
probably overlap with Semipaimated, but at least thin, high-pitched call-notes distinctive.
JUVENILE (plates 114f, g & 119b) Head: prominent white supercilium, broadest in front of eye and on
forehead-sides; ear-coverts rather pale, and supercilium immediately surrounding upper half of
eye white, so that thin white eye-ring usually evident only below eye (these differences from
Semipaimated much as for winter plumage, illustrated in fig. 5); ear-coverts and rather uniformly
streaked, greyish crown often obviously rusty-toned (head pattern summarised in plate 119b).
Upperparts: general coloration variable from strongly chestnut-rufous (plate 114f) to rather
greyish (plate 114g), but always at least centre of mantle andfringes of upper scapularsrichrufous-
chestnut, latter contrasting with greyer lower scapulars and innerwing-coverts; mantle V and
scapular V both usuallyfaint, sometimes lacking; rear lower scapulars marked with clear anchor-shapes
(plate 120). Underparts: breast with orange-rufous wash of variable strength, and sharply
defined breast-side streaking often more extensive than on Little.
In USA, post-juvenile moult to first-winter plumage often started August and complete mid
September to October, earlier than for Semipaimated. This possibly only a function of
Western's more northerly wintering range, however, and may not be significant where
vagrants are involved.
WINTER (plate 116e & f) Head pattern differences from Semipaimated (fig. 5) much as described
for juvenile, but lacking rusty tones; upperparts averaging shade less brown, more cold grey,
Identification of stints and peeps 305
than Semipalmated, and more uniform and paler than Little and Red-necked; breast-sides pale
grey with sharp,finestreaks; streaking usually extends as distinctive complete necklace of very fine
streaks across upper breast (fig. 5), but this difficult to see except at close range.
ADULT SUMMER (plate 117f & g) Distinctive combination of extensive bright rufous on bases of lower
scapulars and usually also on crown-sides, rear crown, nape, rear ear-coverts and upper
scapulars; rather plain grey innerwing-coverts and tertials; and extensive arrowhead-shaped markings on
breast and flanks, often extending to vent-sides and undertail-coverts asfinestreaks. In worn plumage,
streaking may coalesce into sometimes almost solidly blackish areas on underparts.

Group Two: Least Sandpiper and Long-toed Stint

I n all p l u m a g e s , distinguished from the species in G r o u p O n e especially by
obviously pale legs (which can be dull yellow, yellowish green, yellowish
brown or dull orange), although the pitfall of other stints with mud-covered
legs needs to be borne in mind. Bill not so deep at base and more finely
tipped (size of bill is probably in proportion to body-size, so actual small
size not necessarily obvious as such); primary projection lacking or very
short (involving one or two closely spaced primary tips); and rather long
toes (especially marked on Long-toed): these structural points perhaps
subtle, b u t jointly can be distinctive. T o make comparison easier, the two
species a r e described together.
Least Sandpiper C. minutilla and Long-toed Stint C. subminuta
ALL PLUMAGES (Least: length ll-12cm; wing-span 33-35cm. Long-toed: length 13-14cm;
wing-span 33-35 cm) On average, bill of Least slightly more decurved (due to more curved
lower mandible), and legs proportionately shorter than Long-toed; forehead steeper and more
rounded on Least, slightly back-sloping and flatter on Long-toed; Least smaller, and general
proportions more like other stints: Least is shorter-necked, shorter-legged, andhas rather hunched outline
in normal feeding posture, whereas Long-toed is larger, rather small-headed, longer-necked and 'leggier',
giving outline which may recall Wood Sandpiper Tringa glareola; like all stints, Least may
occasionally adopt long-necked, upright stance (possibly for long periods when alert or
nervous), but adoption of this stance is not a consistent trait as in Long-toed (fig. 6); toes of

Fig. 6. Long-toed Stint Calidris subminuta in classic, alert, upright posture (Lars Jonsson)
Least long-looking compared with other stints, but Long-toed especially striking in this
respect: all these structural and behavioural differences slight, overlapping or difficult to
discern on lone individual, but jointly may give strikingly distinctive appearance on typical
examples. On Least, middle toe, tarsus and bill lengths about same, whereas, on Long-toed, middle toe is
usually longer than tarsus and always obviously longer than bill: differences probably difficult to
discern in field, and best carefully measured on photographs in which these features shown in
full profile (note mean measurements for bill, tarsus and middle toe in table 1; also note correct
and precise methods of taking these measurements); hind toe of Least is normal lengthfor stint (ten
306 Identification of stints and peeps
specimens all 4.0-4.5 mm) whereas hind toe of Long-toed is rather long (ten specimens all 5.5-
7.0mm). Toes of Long-toed project farther beyond tail tip in flight than those of Least. Base of
lower mandible dark on Least, but obviously pale on Long-toed (and, sometimes, whole of Long-toed's
bill-base is pale). Like most other stints, Least has white-based primary shafts and obvious narrow
outerwing-bar, whereas Long-toed (like Temminck's) has brownish primary shafts except for whitish
outermost, and thus Long-toed lacks obvious outerwing-bar. Voice: Least has shrill, very high-
pitched, rising 'trreee', and lower-pitched, vibrant 'prrrt'. Some calls of Long-toed apparently
very close to Least, but main calls apparently lower (e.g. soft, liquid 'chree' or 'chuilp', latter
almost disyllabic), recalling Curlew Sandpiper C.ferruginea.
JUVENILE (Least: plates 113e & 119e; Long-toed: plates 113d, 115d & 119f) Head: pattern of
Least generally plainer, less contrasting than Long-toed; supercilia of Least duller, especially
behind eye, joining finely across forehead, whereas supercilium of Long-toed whiter, starting
short of forehead and well-marked at rear, merging into greyish nape, accentuating capped
effect; on Least, eye separated from dark patch on rear ear-coverts by faint paler area, whereas,
on Long-toed, ear-coverts more solidly dark, giving subtle masked effect and further
accentuating strength of supercilium; rufous or whitish lateral crown-stripes on Long-toed
give sometimes-striking split-supercilium effect; split supercilium faint or lacking on Least
(head pattern differences illustrated in fig. 7 and plate 119e & t). Upperparts: general pattern
and coloration of upperparts rather similar on both species and darker than other stints. On

Fig. 7. Typical juvenile Long-toed Stint Calidris subminuta and Least Sandpiper C. minutilla
showing difference in head pattern described in text. Head shows similar differences in pattern
in winter plumage (LarsJonsson)

average, Long-toed has richer-rufous feather-fringes; more obvious mantle V; and longer and
broader lower scapular feathers (plate 120). Long-toed has obvious whitish tips and fringes on
innerwing-coverts, whereas innerwing-coverts of Least usually rufous-fringed and more uniform.
Underparts: breast-streaking (over buff wash) averages more complete on Least, often
forming breastband, whereas breast-centre often paler or unstreaked on Long-toed. General
plumage patterns of Least may recall Pectoral Sandpiper C. melanotos, whereas those of
Long-toed (especially the head pattern) may recall Sharp-tailed Sandpiper C. acuminata.
WINTER (Least: plate 115e & f; Long-toed: plate 115c) Both species generally much browner
than Group One stints. Head pattern differences much as for juveniles, but less well-marked.
Scapulars and innerwing-coverts of Least have diffuse dark centres and pale fringes, giving
strong scaly pattern at long range; Long-toed has distinctive blackishfeather-centres and broad, clear-cut
grey-brown fringes to scapulars and innerwing-coverts, giving strongly contrasting pattern which may be
less evident in worn plumage.
ADULT SUMMER (Least: plate 118c & d; Long-toed: plate 118e) Differences between typical
Least and Long-toed illustrated, but some Least can match Long-toed in amount of rufous
coloration, in which case best distinctions are Long-toed's broader and more rufousfringes on tertials
and some innerwing-coverts, and Long-toed's head pattern and breast-streaking differences (much as
described for juveniles).

Temminck's Stint
Temminck's Stint C. temminckii
ALL PLUMAGES (length 13-15cm; wing-span 34-37 cm) Bill shape much as Least or Long-toed;
typical shape is long-bodied and short-legged, with long tail often extending beyond wing-tip
(typical shape illustrated in plate 118f). Temminck's treated separately because of distinctive
combination of general structure; pale legs (e.g. yellowish-green, dull yellow or pale greyish-
Identification of stints and peeps 307
green); three outermost tail feathers white showing no contrast with white rump-sides, and
giving prominent white area in flight not shared by any other stint and obvious especially when
tail spread on landing (note, however, that other stints' tail-sides can look white in bright
light); rather plain brownish or not-strongly-pattemed head and upperparts; uniform or very diffusely
streaked breast or breast-sides; last two features give appearance recalling miniature Common
Sandpiper (Actitis hypoleucos); typically crouching, hunched, rather furtive and slow feeding action;
preference for vegetated, rather than open, mud (but last two features not invariable, and
other stints may have similar feeding action and choose similar habitat on occasions); and habit
of flying off high on erraticflight-coursewhenflushed,calling continuously (behaviour sometimes
shared by Least and Long-toed). Supercilium faint or confined to in front of eye, giving
plain-headed look compared with other stints, especially in juvenile and winter plumages;
shows thin, pale eye-ring. Voice: distinctive, thin, high-pitched, trilling 'trrrr', this call usually
much-repeated in erratic series (e.g. 'tr-trrrr-tr-trrrr').
JUVENILE (plate 113f) Upperparts basically grey- or greenish-brown. Innerwing-coverts and
especially scapulars (plate 120) neatly pale-fringed with thin dark subterminal crescents (on some dark
individuals, discernible only at close range), pattern not shared by other stints.
WINTER (plate 115g) Plain grey-brown above; usually faint supercilium; and uniform breast-sides are
best distinctions from other stints.
ADULT SUMMER (plate 118f & g) Adult summer upperparts plumage is mixture of new
summer-patterned feathers (blackish-centred with greyish or rufous fringes) and new, plain
greyish winter-patterned ones, giving variegated or patchy appearance. A few individuals,
however, may acquire full, summer-patterned upperparts. Fresh plumage (e.g. in May, plate
118g) rapidly loses greyish feather-fringes, revealing more rufous, but often becomes highly
worn by late summer (e.g. plate 118f).

Appendix 1. Six in-the-hand criteria for separating juvenile Little Calidris minuta and
Red-necked Stints C. ruficollis
The last feature applies to all ages
Feature Little Red-necked

Colour fringes of rump If present at all, rufous, If present at all, cold grey-
feathers sometimes brown brown, never rufous
Pale fringe at tips of Rufous, usually Typically lacks pale fringe.
longest (central) pair of prominent If present at all, cold grey-
uppertail-coverts brown, never rufous
Pale fringe of central Obvious pale or rufous Pale fringe, if present at all,
pair of tail feathers fringe on both webs at thin and confined usually to
tips of feathers. Dark outer web only. Dark feather-
feather-centre breaks fringe centre rounded at tip
at tip, typically as sharp
point
Pattern and colour of Complete whitish fringe Whitish fringe on outer web
rearmost pair of mantle on outer web confined to tip
feathers
Pattern of tiny outer- White feather-fringe of White feather-fringes wider on
most primary even width on both webs. outer web than on inner web,
Dark feather-centre sharply thus abutting shaft at different
pointed at tip points, and dark feather-centre
'stepped' (not coming to even,
sharp point as on Little)
Wing-length divided by Less than 5.0 More than 5.2. This reflects
tarsus length (precise Red-necked's proportionately
methods of taking longer wings and shorter
measurements are tarsus. (Note small overlap
described in table 1) zone between 5.0 and 5.2)
308 Identification of stints and peeps

113. Stints Calidris in juvenile plumage (Larsjonsson)

Identification of stints and peeps 309

114. Stints Calidris in juvenile plumage; one (c) in worn juvenile plumage, and one (g) starting
moult to first-winter plumage (note grey, first-winter upper scapulars) (LarsJonsson)
310 Identification of stints and peeps

115. Stints Calidris'm first-winter plumage (a); fresh adult-winter plumage (b, c, e & g); worn
adult-winter plumage (f); and worn juvenile plumage (d) (Lars Jonsson)
Identification of stints and peeps 311

116. Stints Calidris in fresh adult-winter plumage; two (a & c) near end of moult from summer
plumage (LarsJonsson)
312 Identification of stints and peeps

117. Adult stints Calidris in fresh summer plumage in May (a & e); worn summer plumage in
June/July (c, d & f); and very worn summer plumage in July/August (b & g) with grey mantle
feathers and scapulars indicating start of moult to winter plumage (Lars Jonsson)
Identification of stints and peeps 313

118. Adult stints Calidris in fresh summer plumage in May (b, c, e & g); worn summer
plumage in June/July (a & d), and very worn summer plumage in July/August (f) (Lars
Jonsson)
314 Identification of stints and peeps

119. Heads ofjuvenile stints Calidris showing typical patterns and bill structure when viewed
head-on (Larsjonsson)

120. Feathers from rear of upper row of lower scapulars of juvenile stints Calidris, showing
typical patterns described in text (Larsjonsson)

Author's acknowledgments
Lars Jonsson's interest in stint identification has been the main force behind the recent
advances. His paintings are the sine qua non of this paper, and I thank him for permission to use
them, also for commenting extensively on a first draft of the paper.
I thank the many photographers who have contributed pictures of stints for study by myself
and other stint enthusiasts, leading to clarification of many difficult points. I am especially
grateful to Takeshi Shiota for many slides of Red-necked Stints from Japan, and Larry
Sansone for several useful series of Nearctic species.
I thank the staffs at the British Museum (Natural History) at Tring, especially P. R. Colston
and D. K. Read, and at Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, especially Kimball
L. Garrett, for assistance when examining specimens.
Identification of stints and peeps 315
I thank Stanley Cramp for permission to include the tables of biometrics from BWP (table
I o n pages 298-299).
I am extremely grateful to Jon Dunn, Killian Mullarney, W. E. Oddie, David Rosair, Keith
Vinicombe and D. I. M. Wallace for extensive comments on a first draft of this paper: the text
is much more accurate and readable than would otherwise have been the case. These and
many others, including W. G. Harvey, Peter Hayman, Steve Madge, John Marchant, Tony
Prater, Will Russell and Dr J. T. R. Sharrock, have all helped to advance stint identification,
and the text and plates are hopefully a fairly accurate distillation of all their contributions.

References
GRANT, P.J. 1980. Judging the size of birds. Brit. Birds 73: 227-228.
1983. Size-illusion. Brit. Birds 76: 327-334.
ODDIE, W. E., & MARR, B. A. E. 1981. Identification ofSemipalmated Sandpipers and Little
Stints in autumn. Brit. Birds 74: 396-398.
PRATER, A. J., MARCHANT, J. H., & VUORINEN, J. 1977. Guide to the Identification and Ageing of
Holarctic Waders. BTO Guide 17. Tring.
WALLACE, D. I. M. 1974. Field identification of small species in the genus Calidris. Brit. Birds
67: 1-16.
P.J. Grant, 14 Heathfield Road, Ashford, Kent TN248QD