Short-toed or Common Treecreeper? (1 Viewer)

mike a · Dec 16, 2006

Hi All,

I recently posted some photos of what I thought was a common treecreeper, but received an email from someone who said:

"I think it is a Short-toed Treecreeper. The shape of the buffish wingbar, the bill, the white spots on the end of the primaries all suggest this.
Although the hind claw is quite long, more like the Common Treecreepers. It would be good if others have a look at it."

The photos can be seen on my website at: http://mikeatkinson.net/Treecreeper.htm

Any comments would be greatly appreciated!

Many thanks,
Mike.

JRE · Dec 16, 2006

Where did you take it? Short-toed would be extremely unusual in Britian.

Geoff Pain · Dec 16, 2006

Can't help you with the Treecreeper,but some cracking shots on your website.

mike a · Dec 16, 2006

The Firecrest said:
Where did you take it? Short-toed would be extremely unusual in Britian.

I took the photo two weeks ago in woods adjacent to Redesmere lake in Cheshire (northern England).
Mike.

dan pointon · Dec 16, 2006

Hi Mike,

Although I have very little experience with STTs, a few points are noticable (apart from the obvious liklihood of it being CT.) The white spots on the primaries are variable in Treecreepers- and some birds can show some pale fringing in this area (nicked from Collins!), albeit perhaps not pure white as in STT, I think this could be the case with this bird. In terms of the 'even stepping' on the wing, this too is variable dependant upon obviously, what posture the bird is in, but I think that the very large step towards the bottom is diagnostic of CT, as STT only shows a small step. Add this to the fact that as you say the hind claw is fairly long, and I think it would be fair to say this bird is a CT.

I reckon if you study and Treecreeper for long enough you could turn it in to a ST or vice versa, and perhaps that's what's happened here.

Cheers

D

dan pointon · Dec 16, 2006

Great pics, btw.

martin kitching · Dec 16, 2006

Hi Mike

The obvious dusky flanks and very 'scruffy' looking supercilium are both good features for Short-toed Treecreeper. I can't decide looking at the images whether the mantle is grey or brown though (it has a different appearance in the different images). I don't have a great deal of field experience of STT (although I have seen many, many Treecreepers; all of which have cleaner underparts and supercilia than this) but this bird looks like a very good candidate for one and would be one hell of a record for Cheshire.

martin

bitterntwisted · Dec 16, 2006

I can see your correspondents' thinking. I don't have experience of Short-toed but this does not look typical of an adult Common Treecreeper to me. The ventral area and also supercilium seem very buff-coloured, and the bill is quite long. However the wing pattern and primary tips appear a better match for Common Treecreeper, and the potentially eponymous hindclaw is long.

Given the extreme unlikelihood of vagrancy of Short-Toed Treecreeper to Cheshire I'd be thinking this was just a Common Treecreeper showing atypical plumage tones, but I'll be looking forward to posts form those who see both species regularly.

Short-Toed Treecreeper has only 21 accepted UK records, and only 1 away from the south coast.

Graham

hannu · Dec 16, 2006

Common Treecreeper,
e.g. pale spot on 7P (4P in Svensson) is prominent, Short-toed Treecreeper it has often small or even absent.

StuartReeves · Dec 16, 2006

I used to go birding quite often in a corner of Denmark that has both species, which was often challenging. My first impression of this bird was that the buff on the flanks isn't extensive enough for Short-toed treecreeper. Other features also tend to support the ID as Common Treecreeper, including the fact that the supercilium is well defined in front of the eye, the spacing of the primary tips, and, as others have mentioned, the long hind claw. In the field the best feature is the call, but even that isn't always straightforward.

Stuart

dan pointon · Dec 16, 2006

Does the really large step towards the bottom not point more towards CT?

Keith Dickinson · Dec 16, 2006

Even the Macmillan field guide says that the best way to seperate them is on voice

mike a · Dec 16, 2006

Unfortunately, I didn't hear the bird make any calls at the time, so I can't help with the voice id.

The balance of opinion so far seems to be that it's a CT, but a slightly unusual one.

Mike.

P.S: Geoff, Dan, thanks for your kind comments about the pics on my website.

Motmot · Dec 16, 2006

Not sure if these pics will help or not

but here´s two different STT from central Spain. One with no pale step on 4th primary, the other with a biggish one. Also eyebrows look very prominent on these birds, contra some of what I read on a few posts. Treecreepers out of range, no voice heard, too hard...
First two pics 1st bird, 3rd & 4th second bird

halftwo · Dec 16, 2006

I found this:
http://www.fbog.co.uk/descriptions/TREECREEPERsp.htm
Hope it helps!
Got to say that this primary description is going to be useless in the field - OK if you catch the bird. And take a look at the overlap of hindclaw size for the two species - I had always assumed that they were called STT because that was a feature. These things are not as "easy" as I thought. If they don't call its going to be really difficult.
H

Th_SQ · Dec 17, 2006

mike a said:
The photos can be seen on my website at: http://mikeatkinson.net/Treecreeper.htm

Any comments would be greatly appreciated!

Amazing pics Mike !

This is a Common Treecreeper for me :
- ratio claw/bill too large
- pattern on alula more like Common
- spacing of primaries perfect for Common
- pale spot on 4th primary too big for Short-Toed
- ...

dan pointon · Dec 17, 2006

Here's another bird that shows similar features to this one, this bird was at Carsington Water this week. STT's, rare! Pha! The UK's crawling with um

http://www.carsingtonbirdclub.co.uk/Sightings_images.htm

(2nd bird down on the right)

Hotspur · Dec 17, 2006

To be honest with a species that is soooo cryptic i'd be extremely surprised if it wasnt a more frequent vagrant than we realize.

JANJ · Dec 17, 2006

Hi Mike.

I tend to agree with others here the 'creeper' being a Common for the reasons made by Th_SQ (who´s back). The complete pale fringe on the outer web of the alula is sometimes lacking in STTC:

http://www.microbirding.se/vellinge/images/pictures/ttk050410_PB.jpg

but check the the pale bar (spot) on p4 mentioned by Th_SQ and compare the degree of overlap with pale bar on p6 & p7 on the linked SSTC with mikes bird. The hind claw looks huge.

JanJ

mike a · Dec 20, 2006

Thanks for all your comments, folks.
I've certainly learned a thing or two, including how similar the short-toed treecreeper is to the common and how much variation can exist in either one.
I still don't think I'd recognise a short-toed in the field without a lot more practice.
I'm just glad you guys are on hand to help if I manage to photograph anything a bit different!

Mike.

Short-toed or Common Treecreeper? (1 Viewer)

Member

Guest

Rural Member

Member

Can't Stop

Can't Stop

Obsessed seawatcher

Graham Howard Shortt

Well-known member

Local rarity

Can't Stop

Well-known member

Member

Eduardo Amengual

Attachments

Wird Batcher

Well-known member

Can't Stop

James Spencer

Well-known member

Member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread