• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Kentish Plover or Little Ringed Plover ? (1 Viewer)

osprey0311

Well-known member
Hello1
Help, please, with ID :
 

Attachments

  • DSC07731.JPG
    DSC07731.JPG
    138.1 KB · Views: 359
  • DSC07733.JPG
    DSC07733.JPG
    129.7 KB · Views: 315
  • DSC07734.JPG
    DSC07734.JPG
    114.2 KB · Views: 288
It's a juv. Little Ringed Plover.

KP would show an obvious wing bar. This bird has a basically plain wing with just a hint of pale edgings to the coverts - typical for LRP. The eyering (= LRP) is hard to see (but I think it's there!). The bird also looks 'capped' as it lacks supercilium and much of a white forehead - typical of juv. LRP. The bill looks better for LRP too. The shape is hard to judge as it's end on (and the tele lens will distort the image a little). The only KP feature appears to be dark legs BUT LRPs in this sort of mud frequently seem to have dark legs (the leg to the left looks distinctly paler too),
 
don't see where the idea of kentish comes in here at all, the flight views show a lack of wingbar and on the ground the structure is wrong for kentish (which is a heavy-headed almost rear-less plover) and the head pattern is great for LRP with a diffuse hardly noticeable buff supercilium. Certainly LRP for me.
 
Juv LRP. As has been pointed out the final shot shows no wingbar plus there is a thin yellow eyering in the first two photos. The dark looking legs could be down to staining or a photographic artifact, the rather thin, longish looking bill in the first photo is due to a slight burning out of the shot ( IMO ).

Chris
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top