Proposal
(#13) to South American Classification Committee
Continue to recognize Strix chacoensis as distinct
from S. rufipes
Finally, I propose that we
follow Straneck & Vidoz (1995), Hardy et al. (1999), and Kšnig et al.
(1999) in treating Ciccaba chacoensis as a distinct species from C.
rufipes. Plumage and vocalizations strongly support the split (see above
refs; listen to Hardy et al.). Given that chacoensis may be more closely
allied with C. hylophila, chacoensis should be placed between
those two taxa in our linear arrangement.
Mark B. Robbins, December 2001
===========
From Alvaro Jaramillo:
"Yes. Having seen and
heard chacoensis in Salta, Argentina as well as rufipes in Chile
I have no doubt that they are separate species. There are similarities in
plumage, in particular pale female rufipes may look like chacoensis
but that is about the entirety of the similarity between these two taxa. Most
male rufipes, and certainly all southern rufipes are much darker
and coarsely marked than any chacoensis. The differences in voice are
very striking, as are the differences in habitat between the two species. The
chaco thorn forests where chacoensis is found are quite dissimilar from
the southern beech (Nothofagus) forests that one finds rufipes
in. In the northern part of the range rufipes is found in much shorter,
arid woodlands but in these cases it is found in the moistest, tallest,
protected valleys. "