-
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.
Which Harrier? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Keith Glasgow
- Start date
gerdwichers8
Well-known member
Despite the black line running over the base of the secondaries on the upperside, I say Hen Harrier to this bird.
It has a heavy build in the body, the wings are not particular slender and not pointed in the hand too much and the white uppertail patch is broad.
It has a heavy build in the body, the wings are not particular slender and not pointed in the hand too much and the white uppertail patch is broad.
Edward woodwood
Member
very dark secondary tips, wingtip shape, relatively narrow pale bar above secondary tips all point to Hen
Why not a Montagu's?
If this is a Hen Harrier, how do you explain the dark band across the secondaries on the upperwing and the fact that this bird clearly has only three fingers (as opposed to the Hen Harrier's four)? I hate to disagree, but I have to say that this looks very much like an adult female of Montagu's Harrier to me.
If this is a Hen Harrier, how do you explain the dark band across the secondaries on the upperwing and the fact that this bird clearly has only three fingers (as opposed to the Hen Harrier's four)? I hate to disagree, but I have to say that this looks very much like an adult female of Montagu's Harrier to me.
Edward woodwood
Member
P1 on one wing appears short... (see pic 2)
other looks ok for Hen?
Tim
other looks ok for Hen?
Tim
Last edited:
gerdwichers8
Well-known member
The right wing shows a wing formula which seems to be Monty's
But fortunately the left wing shows us differently, best in the first picture, we find p1 and p2 very near one another (1 is concealed but not enough:it is visible)and then the formula is Hen's.
But fortunately the left wing shows us differently, best in the first picture, we find p1 and p2 very near one another (1 is concealed but not enough:it is visible)and then the formula is Hen's.
JANJ
Well-known member
If the (non juvenile) harrier isn´t moulting it´s wing (right time of year though) then certainly wing formula is wrong for Hen, which gives Iben a point. Hen Has 5 fingers, Montagu´s and Pallid has 4. Structure is good for Hen. In Montagu´s tail looks narrow, pin like, which is not the impression you get in the subject bird.
Check:
http://www.tarsiger.com/index.php?p...ohaukka,+Hen+Harrier,+Circus+cyaneus&lang=eng
http://www.tarsiger.com/index.php?p...agu´s+Harrier,+Circus+pygargus&lang=eng
JanJ
Check:
http://www.tarsiger.com/index.php?p...ohaukka,+Hen+Harrier,+Circus+cyaneus&lang=eng
http://www.tarsiger.com/index.php?p...agu´s+Harrier,+Circus+pygargus&lang=eng
JanJ
Last edited:
Keith Glasgow
Well-known member
Many thanks to all who took the time to comment. The identification of this bird is important. Is there anyone else who could add their opinion. Are there any other sites worth posting the photos on for help. There are other photos (similar to these), which I could post if it helps in any way,
again, many thanks,
Zek.
again, many thanks,
Zek.
lou salomon
the birdonist
please go ahead, zek, any different angle could be worth to look at. my impression from the beginning was monty's - not bulky and broad winged enough for hen but i'm not sure.
edit: show me a hen harrier with that dark band along the bases of secondaries (see pics 2 and 4) - i thought that was diagnostic for monty's!
edit: show me a hen harrier with that dark band along the bases of secondaries (see pics 2 and 4) - i thought that was diagnostic for monty's!
Last edited:
The Raptor
Bristol City's No.1 Fan!
I vote for adult female Montagu's. Wings appear quite narrow & pionted compared to the female Hen Harriers more broader ones. Rod.
gerdwichers8
Well-known member
I cant do it with my editor (I dont know how to put some arrows) but if one zooms in on the left wing which shows itself on picture 1 (the other pictures all show the right wing best with Montagu's formula), I find on the place of p1 two and not one black marking (the feather tip), which is not only seperated by a paler line inbetween those two (the end of one feather) but also two more dense black lines in the two dusky fields (the shafts) and a 'step' on top of the hardly visible one.
So I get three visible marks, seperating one feather from the other.
If that is right, the formula of Monty which is found on the right wing, which wing shows most in this set, is not valid.
Any one?
This may well be too much for the resolution though (not showing the thing for real.
(The link of JanJ provided us with two equals in the wing formula in Hen (a male and a juvenile male, a female was obvious moulting)
I do admit that Monty has two strong features as a pre in this bird,
(not certain if they can be passed )
So I get three visible marks, seperating one feather from the other.
If that is right, the formula of Monty which is found on the right wing, which wing shows most in this set, is not valid.
Any one?
This may well be too much for the resolution though (not showing the thing for real.
(The link of JanJ provided us with two equals in the wing formula in Hen (a male and a juvenile male, a female was obvious moulting)
I do admit that Monty has two strong features as a pre in this bird,
(not certain if they can be passed )
Last edited:
Gavin Haig
Well-known member
Monty's for me too. Pics 4 and 5 really do it for me - they are NARROW wings! No bulge in secondaries at all. Anyway, that's my vote.......
Incidentally, white areas usually look bigger than they actually are in blurry photos.
Incidentally, white areas usually look bigger than they actually are in blurry photos.
gerdwichers8
Well-known member
Again, the secondary bar may be a too strong argument pre Monty and against Hen.
But how is it, the first picture does not show that, but a whole dark contrasting secondary field against the rest of the bird in stead?
Dont forget a Hen Harrier DOES have a dark line running there as well, but it disappears the more in the darker background of the secondaries whilst this feature in Montague's is Monty's outstanding feature because of the less dark background.
But how is it, the first picture does not show that, but a whole dark contrasting secondary field against the rest of the bird in stead?
Dont forget a Hen Harrier DOES have a dark line running there as well, but it disappears the more in the darker background of the secondaries whilst this feature in Montague's is Monty's outstanding feature because of the less dark background.
Last edited:
Steven Astley
Well-known member
Monty's for me aswell. Lou and Iben have summed up what i was thinking.
Last edited:
Steven Astley
Well-known member
Changed my mind it's definitely a hen harrier that looks like a monty, probally. Or it could be a monty which explains why it looks like a hen i mean monty.
hope that helps.
anyway i am off to have a full monty's breakfast hopefully to help clear my hang over.
hope that helps.
anyway i am off to have a full monty's breakfast hopefully to help clear my hang over.
Last edited:
Jane Turner
Well-known member
When I first saw this pic I thought that it was a moulting female Hen Harrier
I still do.
I still do.
