Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
Looks like another one in Kent. Initial shot I've seen suggests a different bird with more obvious collar. More to come.
Owen
Owen
-
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.
harrier id east coast (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter woodhornbirder
- Start date
Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
Shot here. Different bird for sure.
http://sbbot.org.uk/sightings-2/sightings-birds/
I'd be checking every harrier roost over there lads...
Owen
http://sbbot.org.uk/sightings-2/sightings-birds/
I'd be checking every harrier roost over there lads...
Owen
tittletattler
Well-known member
Or, to put it another way, a definite Pallid Harrier.
Tib78 - the problem with the features you quote is that an internet search shows that many juv Monties have them. There are one or two good features so OK, on balance, I could go with that ID. But with the subject bird we don't have the benefit of seeing those features. We are left with a bird that does not have a distinct pale collar and doesn't have a distinct boa.
Thing is, there's a good degree of variation and some overlap. There are Pallids with relatively weak boas and poorly marked collars, such as the Finnish bird (which is a perfect Pallid notwithstanding).
The facial pattern is more consistent. I've yet to see - either live or in photos - a juv Montagu's with the classic bandit mask and solid cheek patch reaching the bill base, in combination with limited white above and below the eye, all contributing to the diagnostic evil look of Pallid.
Any links to such a candidate would be good to share.
tittletattler
Well-known member
See post 39. The subject bird does not imo show 'limited white around the eye'.
Compare the subject bird to plates 214 and 215. Ok, a flight shot of the subject bird showing the boomerang at the bases of the primaries would settle the ID. But without that, can you say for certain that the subject bird matches plates 214 and 215? No, it matches plate 245. Note the Finnish bird does show a perfect underwing (not a great 'boomerang' or barring). Non of the features on the Finnish bird are extreme or perfect.
Compare these to the subject bird:
http://www.oiseaux.net/photos/tom.lindroos/montagu.s.harrier.1.html
Strong facial pattern, limited white above eye:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=j...Ku7qhjsgCFUs7FAodTHUIDw#imgrc=hxYEE3ExmcZq8M:
Dark reaching base of bill:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2jaKqlV5_u0/VEEdUgL2VOI/AAAAAAAARgo/qqBaaM45Zk0/s1600/1mont.JPG
http://rene.dumoulin.oiseaux.net/images/busard.cendre.redu.23g.jpg
I haven't said "it's not a Pallid", I'm just asking if you can say for sure that it is.
So who is saying that this bird is definitely a Pallid Harrier based on these images?
.
.
.
.
.
Last edited:
Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
I would say it's a definite Pallid...on the available evidence.
Like anyone, I too would like to see the underwing. But as I have said, if I was confronted with this bird on the deck I would say Pallid.
You seem to have a misunderstanding of some of the features being discussed.
1. It's not that the face mask reaches the corner of the gape, like in many Montys, but the lower mandible of the bill. The subject bird's actually seems to connect right under the chin/lower mandible. Something I have never personally seen on a Montys. I'm not sure if it even exists on Montys. I'd put a fiver on in the bookies that it doesn't or is extremely rare/odd.
2. As is often the case, features should be assessed in combination. The first link you provide, apart from the mask not actually even touching the gape, let alone the lower mandible, has a long primary projection reaching the tail tip (if not slightly longer).
Same goes for your 2nd and 3rd links actually.
The last link the mask does touch the gape. But not the lower mandible, and has no suggestion of a collar or boa.
The combination in the subject bird, of face pattern, collar, boa (albeit weak) and short primary projection points to Pallid.
The hint of mostly pale under primaries as suggested by tib is supportive too IMO. Though would like to see the pattern of barring to be certain it is what it looks to be.
So you can run with it being a fairly regular pale end Pallid....or a Monty's of the type which most mimics Pallid. I'm sure a committee will play it ultra safe.
I say Pallid.
Owen
Last edited:
Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
Another way of looking at this, could be to make a case against Montagu's Harrier.
1. Primary projection on the short side. Shown by some female montys (Corso).
2. Face mask reaches lower mandible.
3. Distinct collar which on available shots seems clear, with no streaking within collar. Collar extends around head and throat and is not tapered in. (Not Crescent moon shaped).
4. Boa present, though on weak scale.
5. Available shots, though not great, show no upper breast streaking or flank streaking in any of the angles presented. It may not be detectable on these images, but we can't see any in them.
6. Underside of primaries on opposing wing seem to show mostly pale, which would be the rarer primary pattern for Montagu's.
The combination of the above is not a great case for Montagu's harrier.
Owen
1. Primary projection on the short side. Shown by some female montys (Corso).
2. Face mask reaches lower mandible.
3. Distinct collar which on available shots seems clear, with no streaking within collar. Collar extends around head and throat and is not tapered in. (Not Crescent moon shaped).
4. Boa present, though on weak scale.
5. Available shots, though not great, show no upper breast streaking or flank streaking in any of the angles presented. It may not be detectable on these images, but we can't see any in them.
6. Underside of primaries on opposing wing seem to show mostly pale, which would be the rarer primary pattern for Montagu's.
The combination of the above is not a great case for Montagu's harrier.
Owen
Thanks for the links. To my eye they all show Montagu's with standard facial patterning and are not suggestive of Pallid. The facial marking on Pallid is subtly different because the cheek patch extends onto the lower mandible/lores where it connects with the eye-mask. This creates the classic Zorro look and the 'mean' expression of a Pallid compared to the kinder countenance of a Montagu's. I've always found this difference to be rather constant between the species, especially given that other characters, including underwing patterning, can be somewhat variable.
I'm with Pariah that this is a certain Pallid on head pattern alone. Sure, it'd be nice to see the underwing. As for wing length and the subsidiary characters mentioned by Pariah, I agree that they also indicate Pallid.
tittletattler
Well-known member
Thanks.
the links provided were from the 1st or 2nd page of a quick image search. To my eye they show that each of the facial features shown by Pallid can be found on Montagu's except if they are at the extreme end (again, see plates 214 & 215 in Forsman).
A little more searching throws up more oddities. Which species is that bird in your view?
http://i0.wp.com/birdingfrontiers.c...ircus-macrourus-con-marca-alar-_mg_3827-2.jpg
Again, see plate 245 in Forsman. Probably chosen specifically to show that juv Montagu’s can look like Pallid?
I disagree with Owen’s appraisal above. The collar is more a ‘half moon crescent’ and I can see smudging within that collar. The boa (what there is of it) is blotchy and not uniform. In some images the wings look short and besides, it’s easy to find long-winged Pallids via Google and short-winged Montagus. The links I provided show birds without streaking on the underside so that’s not relevant in this instance.
Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
I don't see any smudging. And on both the crow shot and the one where the nape is shown, the collar is clearly complete and of even thickness.
Forsman states where possible a combination of features should be used to ID the pair. None of these features visible exists in a vacuum. The point consistently being made is that this bird has a combination of features which TOGETHER make a better fit for Pallid.
Of course everyone has their preferred individual feature, whether it be the mask or collar or primary length, but to put all of these into one candidate? Whilst also lacking upper breast or flank streaking? ( yes it is relevant. Some montys don't show it. But many do. In context with everything else it's very relevant)
You either have the rarest of the rare Montys or a pretty regular variant of Pallid. It now comes down to what people's experience lead them to believe the bird is.
Owen
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
it’s easy to find long-winged Pallids via Google and short-winged Montagus. The links I provided show birds without streaking on the underside so that’s not relevant in this instance.[/QUOTE said:
Last edited:
tittletattler
Well-known member
You again fail to mention the other option: harrier sp. And three times now you have ignored my request to compare plate 245 to this bird.
For me this is an insight into how some birders think. They have to put a name to a bird (and then submit it in some instances). I strive to do this myself but sometimes there is just not quite enough for a safe ID.
tittletattler
Well-known member
I agree. Just check the primary projection on some "yellow bellied flycatchers".
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
it’s easy to find long-winged Pallids via Google and short-winged Montagus. The links I provided show birds without streaking on the underside so that’s not relevant in this instance.[/QUOTE said:
Last edited:
Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
No. I've actually mentioned, several times over, that this will likely be put down as a pyg/mac harrier. Including in the report. Read back.
I am on the move here, so I can't exactly pull out my copy of forsman. Feel free to post grabs if you like. I do have a pdf of the Dutch birding article though.
But, and this may be more important, I have 1st hand experience of more weakly marked Pallids. So like others have said, from MY perspective, I don't see anything wrong with Pallid as the ID.
I see no reason to go down the route of this being the most unusual of Montagu's, when it's well within variation of Pallid.
Owen
tittletattler
Well-known member
I think simply because in this instance this species pair in juvenile plumage can cause problems more than most.
http://birdingfrontiers.com/2012/09/30/juvenile-montagu´s-harrier/
Quote from the link above:
"All in all, an interesting bird that addresses the need of good views and a proper study of the primaries, amongst other things, when confronted with any pale-collared juvenile Harrier."
Hybrids:
http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=42962
http://www.dickforsman.com/bird-identification/
Scroll down to Dick Forsman's comments. Note the similarity to the subject bird.
Quote:
"Can birds looking like Pallids any longer be identified as Pallids?"
With this species pair (+hybrids!) it would be wise to play it safe. So, for me, the subject bird, without flight shots, is a harrier sp.
Cheers,
Andy.
rosbifs
PutAin STOP
He did say that but I suspect has strengthened his position since then after reviewing and discussing. This isn't a criticism and shows the benefit of BF (plus its educational for us).
Would there be any harm in printing this discussion and sending it in with a submission? Let the commitee decide (did I really say that?).
Anyway, I'm sure that lesser examples have been passed and better rejected - likewise Monties - and even more missed! This is a bird that is on the increase in western europe and the help of Forsman, BF et al more will be found.
Tib78
Well-known member
The boa is ill defined I give you that but I am not so sure the collar is "indistinct" so to speak. In fact, I believe the second feature is a consequence of the first one (ie the collar is less obvious when not set against a dark boa) and since a weak boa is well within the normal variation of juv Pallid harrier, the face pattern displayed by the Northumberland bird should be no problem for that species. Remember also that the collar almost always stands out more clearly on worn 2cy Pallid than on fresh 1cy autumn bird because the collar has a tendency to whiten with time.
Incorrect statement IMO. Try to find a Montagu's with an up-turned rear end to the supercilium or a Pallid with a supercilium that broaden and/or wraps around the back of the eye for instance. But anyway as others have said, it's the combination of several features that indicate this bird is a Pallid. And honestly I fail to see anything suggestive of Montagu's in this bird...
A very straightforward Montagu's.
Again this is part of the normal variation and not at all a problem for juv Pallid, same goes for the pale crown, compare the subject bird to this Pallid (and yes it is correctly identified!!): http://www.faune-aquitaine.org/index.php?m_id=54&mid=62349
Last edited:
tittletattler
Well-known member
What do you make of the subject bird in this respect? The super, and white area under the eye, on the subject bird seems to fall between both species.
I did say 'except if they are at the extreme end'.
Helsinki Birder
Stealth Birder
That's nice and all. And I don't necessarily disagree....but your original line of debate was towards Monty's...not hybrids.
It could of course be a hybrid. However in the absence of any cause for concern (I.e a more hen harrier like wing pattern)...that's a stretch in itself.
Owen
