Peregrine or Hobby ? You Decide. (1 Viewer)

London Birder · Oct 21, 2005

we know the bird has been caught and rung, because we've been informed, but without meaning to sound in any way dismissive of this fact or any BF poster's current arguments for this being an immature (or specifically juvenile) Peregrine I can only go with the evidence of my own eyes, which is always subjective (regardless of however objective it may feel), same as everyone else ... if I (and others) are proved wrong about it being a Hobby then naturally there's sod all I can say apart from 'well, well, well' and ponder upon what it is about Peregrine Falcon identification that I don't understand (by proof I'm afraid just being told it was rung as one is not what I mean; if we are supplied with a set of biometrics that conform to Peregrine I would wonder again and again the exact same sentiment as above, only somewhat more profoundly) ~ only because I feel it's relevent to the argument (at least from my own point of view) I can only reiterate that my own experience with Peregrine isn't what you could term 'average', by saying that I mean my normal birding experiences, whether that be on my patch (though granted only on occasion there) or elsewhere combined latterly with near daily, and often ridiculously intimate close views, either roosting, hunting, prey-caching, loafing, bathing (rarely), at the eyrie over 3 succesive years (soon to be 4th) and in hand (under license naturally) ~ I would ask those who haven't already to go to the Surfbirds galleries and have a look at their Peregrine shots, go through each one and note the shape and extent of the white on the face on each; take into account light, angle of bird relative to camera etc ~ obviously use some some common sense when evaluating this...now go through them again and look at the broad-shouldered structure of the the Peregrines (a good jizzy pointer that's led me to correctly ID perched Peregrine without laying my bins on it many a time), now go back to the Hobbys and do the same ... which to you honestly appears closer to the contentious bird ? The Hobby is a relatively dainty falcon compared to Peregrine (the Dungeness and Icelandic fence shots well illustrate this) so comments like it's a 'slim image because it's peering' and 'nervous because it's in a tree' are really missing the point when it comes to the seperation of these two species. Now (and if anyone is still awake reading this), check out the breast streaking on the Surfbirds Hobby pics againa taking into account light, angle etc ... why does the contentious falcon NOT conform to whats illustrated there yet does conform more in favour of Peregrine?

(excuse long-windedness)

Steven Astley · Oct 21, 2005

I have looked extensively at immature peregrines and I am 99% certain this is one. All the immature peregrines show the white of the cheek almost reaching the corner of the eye. I have yet to see i photo where this is the case with hobby. Also I have a yet to see a photo where hobby shows streaking this fine.

What is a fact is birds stretch and thus look slimmer.

Steven Astley · Oct 21, 2005

London Birder said:
we know the bird has been caught and rung, because we've been informed, but without meaning to sound in any way dismissive of this fact or any BF poster's current arguments for this being an immature (or specifically juvenile) Peregrine I can only go with the evidence of my own eyes, which is always subjective (regardless of however objective it may feel), same as everyone else ... if I (and others) are proved wrong about it being a Hobby then naturally there's sod all I can say apart from 'well, well, well' and ponder upon what it is about Peregrine Falcon identification that I don't understand (by proof I'm afraid just being told it was rung as one is not what I mean; if we are supplied with a set of biometrics that conform to Peregrine I would wonder again and again the exact same sentiment as above, only somewhat more profoundly) ~ only because I feel it's relevent to the argument (at least from my own point of view) I can only reiterate that my own experience with Peregrine isn't what you could term 'average', by saying that I mean my normal birding experiences, whether that be on my patch (though granted only on occasion there) or elsewhere combined latterly with near daily, and often ridiculously intimate close views, either roosting, hunting, prey-caching, loafing, bathing (rarely), at the eyrie over 3 succesive years (soon to be 4th) and in hand (under license naturally) ~ I would ask those who haven't already to go to the Surfbirds galleries and have a look at their Peregrine shots, go through each one and note the shape and extent of the white on the face on each; take into account light, angle of bird relative to camera etc ~ obviously use some some common sense when evaluating this...now go through them again and look at the broad-shouldered structure of the the Peregrines (a good jizzy pointer that's led me to correctly ID perched Peregrine without laying my bins on it many a time), now go back to the Hobbys and do the same ... which to you honestly appears closer to the contentious bird ? The Hobby is a relatively dainty falcon compared to Peregrine (the Dungeness and Icelandic fence shots well illustrate this) so comments like it's a 'slim image because it's peering' and 'nervous because it's in a tree' are really missing the point when it comes to the seperation of these two species. Now (and if anyone is still awake reading this), check out the breast streaking on the Surfbirds Hobby pics againa taking into account light, angle etc ... why does the contentious falcon NOT conform to whats illustrated there yet does conform more in favour of Peregrine?

(excuse long-windedness)

Keep up the good work with peregrines. Truly amazing atheletes in the birding world

London Birder · Oct 21, 2005

huh?

sorry don't follow you ... 'white on the face reaching the corner of the eye'

some birds (though not all) do look slimmer when they stretch, but as far as Peregrine go thats like saying Raven can take on proportions of a Jackdaw when strecthing (though sexual dimorphism can be significant in Peregrine) ...

Oh well Bolton, me n you ain't ever gonna agree on this one ...

(just wondering if anyone knows what species of tree that is?)

Steven Astley · Oct 21, 2005

Lets face it we are unable to assess size with confidence. Must admit comparison with tree goes in favour of hobby (but we cannot be sure of the exact size of the tree). All birds look slimmer when stretched (thats logic).

London Birder · Oct 21, 2005

to be honest I can't even see why you think the bird is 'stretching', just looks perched-up to me ...

JANJ · Oct 21, 2005

The truth is, wheather the bird is stretching or not, is of no relevance to it´s identity a Hobby is a Hobby and a Peregrine is a.....
This may sound silly, but take a look at Lou´s linked bird in #34, don´t we immediately ID it as a Hobby, (although not partly hidden) isn´t there a nice well known feeling of instant recognition the minute we lay eyes on it. If yes, on what grounds? Doesn´t almost every juvenile Hobby look more or less like that - I´m asking myself.
Ringed as a female Peregrine it was. well...
JanJ

Steve G · Oct 21, 2005

Forgive my stupidity but if this bird was ringed it was presumably ringed prior to fledging. Assuming this to be the case it stretches the imagination to accept that a ringer licensed to ring raptors could mistake a Peregrine brood for a Hobby brood & vice-versa especially given their different nesting habits & the presumed presence of adult birds around.
Having said all that it looks very Hobbyesque to me. Our local juvie Peregrines usually look a lot less gracile & delicate than this bird(but see image below). Being a Scot I don't get much chance to see Hobbys though the last young Hobby I saw was (funnily enough) also perched in a Scots Pine nervously head-bobbing & with an appearance not dissimilar to this bird.
Given that there is only this single image available (apparently) I would be happier to accept that my impression of this image being a Hobby is an artefact of the picture angle rather than a fairly major ID blunder by the ringer concerned. Single images of birds can be very misleading with respect to size & plumage appearance.
The images below are of one of our local boys with his rather big mamma -like chalk & cheese. The third image confirms Peregrines will perch in trees (but only Oaks apparently

).

Terry Smith · Oct 21, 2005

Gordon Bennett!!

The bird in the photo is a Hobby. How the devil can anyone say it's a Peregrine??

I wish some experts would come on this site and run riot amongst some of these silly suggestions.............

London Birder · Oct 21, 2005

rather than doubting 'a ringer' banded 'a peregrine' on that date in that place etc, I'm inclined to think that the pic has been mixed-up and/or wrongly labelled with the Peregrine pics in the photographers online portfolio ...

London Birder · Oct 21, 2005

Terry Smith said:
Gordon Bennett!!

The bird in the photo is a Hobby. How the devil can anyone say it's a Peregrine??

I wish some experts would come on this site and run riot amongst some of these silly suggestions.............

:clap: :clap: and thrice :clap:

mjmw · Oct 21, 2005

Steve G said:
Forgive my stupidity but if this bird was ringed it was presumably ringed prior to fledging. Assuming this to be the case it stretches the imagination to accept that a ringer licensed to ring raptors could mistake a Peregrine brood for a Hobby brood & vice-versa especially given their different nesting habits & the presumed presence of adult birds around.
QUOTE]

Its those pesky, parasite Hobbys, known to lay their eggs in the nests of Peregrines to catch out the ringers.

Sorry, losing the will to live...I know I banged on yesterday, but can't be ar...bothered today.

Cheers Mark.

PS. I still think Peg

mjmw · Oct 21, 2005

BTW, thanks London Birder for creating the new thread.
What is amazing, this should be such an easy ID, based on the quality of the photo, and I am replying to page three in less than 9 hours!

London Birder · Oct 21, 2005

mw ... it is an easy ID, it's a Hobby

mjmw · Oct 21, 2005

London Birder said:
mw ... it is an easy ID, it's a Hobby

Don't you mean Peregrine :h?:

Steve G · Oct 21, 2005

London Birder said:
rather than doubting 'a ringer' banded 'a peregrine' on that date in that place etc, I'm inclined to think that the pic has been mixed-up and/or wrongly labelled with the Peregrine pics in the photographers online portfolio ...

I hope that this is the case.
To me the bird looks like a Hobby but I can't bring myself round to accepting that someone who's licensed to ring raptors could make such an enormous cock-up with a bird in the hand............ so I must be mistaken! :-C

Barred Wobbler · Oct 21, 2005

At first glance, several hours ago, I thought it looked like a hobby.

After a closer look, however.....

It was still a hobby.

I held my peace and didn't get involved and now it's on page three! But does it matter what it is? It's a picture, for crying out loud. Pictures can tell lies. I think it's a hobby, others don't.

It makes no difference. The bird has flown off and in a hundred years we (and the falcon) will all be dead.

jonny h · Oct 21, 2005

well the new thread worked LB ! but is absolutely a HOBBY ! either the ringer mixed the photo up(i hope !) or made a gaff but that pic is a hobby!

M Cowming · Oct 21, 2005

Hi guys,

Been an interesting couple of threads on falcons! Just proves how judging one bird from one photo can be soooooo troublesome. I can honestly see where both camps are coming from and am not tempted to fully call it either Hobby or Peregrine.

However, if push came to shove, a couple of points;

1) Habitat....been proven that Peregrines land in trees! Still, suits Hobby more.
2) Gizz/Jizz ( which spelling is correct?) Contrary to what one contributor says, can be an important part of bird id. Some birders are just better at it than others! (no offence intended)
3) Most important concerning this particular bird! The cheek patch! To me, it's too broad and reaches up the back of the neck/head rather than being "rounded", typical of Perry!

For these reasons, for me it's a Hobby! I accept this bird has been rung as a Peregrine...I think? just breezed through the posts, but, as i say, if push came to shove...Hobby!

I will hold my hands up however....hard to prove ringing measurements wrong!! Isn't it??

Happy debating boys......it's great!!

Kind regards,

MSA · Oct 21, 2005

.....

Peregrine or Hobby ? You Decide. (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

RAINBIRDER

Attachments

Walking Birder

Well-known member

Well-known member

formally known as mw_aurora

formally known as mw_aurora

Well-known member

formally known as mw_aurora

RAINBIRDER

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

I may be relaxed but I'm not drunk....

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread