• 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.

Sparrowhawk (10 Viewers)

bolton birdman said:
I take it people think the moustacial strip and dark crown is caused by a branch
Yep! Considering that the "moustachial stripe" sticks out of the top of the bird's head (in two places, having branched) and continues down its body, this observer certainly thinks that bit is a branch. Look again at the lightened pics by Marcel and, particularly, JMorlan and you'll see what I mean.

Oh, yes: I'm in the Kestrel camp.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that the 'branches/leaves' obscuring view is being used to confirm the ID both ways... Will be very interesting to see a flight shot, or (as others have said) and empty tree.

Personally, my first instinct was kestrel and I've yet to be persuaded otherwise. I'm sticking firmly in the kestrel camp unless another shot, or explaination, convinces me otherwise. (humble pie on standby for when it runs out to be a peregrine...)
 
postcardcv said:
Personally, my first instinct was kestrel and I've yet to be persuaded otherwise. I'm sticking firmly in the kestrel camp unless another shot, or explaination, convinces me otherwise. (humble pie on standby for when it runs out to be a peregrine...)

I'll come out of the woodwork (or tree ;) ) and sit in the kestrel camp too. Cream with my humble pie please ...

Rob
 
Bluetail said:
Yep! Considering that the "moustachial stripe" sticks out of the top of the bird's head (in two places, having branched) and continues down its body, this observer certainly thinks that bit is a branch. Look again at the lightened pics by Marcel and, particularly, JMorlan and you'll see what I mean.

Oh, yes: I'm in the Kestrel camp.

I have looked at enhanced photos and despite my confidence that its not a kestrel I have changed my mind it could be a kestrel!! I think also it branches to the right giving definition to the shoulder and head. The dark branches enhance the small white area of the kestrel (said with such confidence).
So basically I have no idea what I am talking about. But it was good fun.
 
As it's clearly a hybrid I don't know why this has dragged on so long ;)

To me everything apart from the cheek patch says Kestrel rather than Peregrine, and as it's in a tree rather than a pylon I'll go with Kestrel... How's that for logical identification :h?:
 
Richard D said:
As it's clearly a hybrid I don't know why this has dragged on so long ;)

To me everything apart from the cheek patch says Kestrel rather than Peregrine, and as it's in a tree rather than a pylon I'll go with Kestrel... How's that for logical identification :h?:

cheek patch looks obvious and white due to the vagaries of photography 'burning-out' any detail here, consequently giving it an unmarked appearance ... would also account for lack of eye/eye-ring in that shot I would say
 
London Birder said:
cheek patch looks obvious and white due to the vagaries of photography 'burning-out' any detail here, consequently giving it an unmarked appearance ... would also account for lack of eye/eye-ring in that shot I would say

Yup- I had decided to sit this one out- but my vote is Kestrel with white flaring.

Of course some would say that this is not the most extreme example of white flaring viewable on the web- but that's one for the IBWO thread.
 
Tim Allwood said:
ya could be right Doc...

I almost saw this as one of those magic eye jobs.... you look and look until suddenly it all makes sense

although I bet it turns out to be a bloody Kestrel now...ha ha ha.....

could be some red faces... who's will it be

and Londonbirder.... sort out the simple thrushes first mate! ;) (there's some ammo for you)

Tim


well Tim, I assume your referring to the bird I reckon is Fieldfare (wouldn't that be better said in the relevent thread?)... don't worry about me being able to identify common thrushes ... as far as I'm concerned it's still a Fieldfare ... particularly given the photographer has looked at other pics of it and reckons it looks like one (yet to see those yet however) ...
 
Last edited:
London Birder said:
well Tim, I assume your referring to the bird I reckon is Fieldfare (wouldn't that be better said in the relevent thread?)... don't worry about me being able to identify common thrushes ... as far as I'm concerned it's still a Fieldfare ... particularly given the photographer has looked at other pics of it and reckons it looks like one in flight (yet to see those yet however) ...

just a joke - see the smily?
lighten up

what is it today?

Tim
 
Bluetail has made one of the most useful observations so far in this debate. The moustachial stripe that some people have made such an important feature is quite clearly a twig. It does come up the body and then splits just below the top of the head. The two points can be seen clearly against the sky, unless of course people are suggesting the bird has horns ! The other point i find slightly bewildering is the question of the reddish brown colouration. The idea that this is caused by the tree, whether it be twigs, leaves or the effect of the light, is quite frankly ludicrous. That people have argued this point so enthusiastically, including some obviously very good birders, amazes me.
If you see the dark line going up the left side of the bird as another twig with shadow, and the pale area as sky, then your left with a body which is not very bulky or peregrine- like at all. The bird must surely be a species of kestrel, even if an escape American as suggested by Jane. As others have said, i'm very aware all this could be proved wrong and accept the possibility of extra helpings of humble pie.
 
Just come across this thread...taken a while to plow through it all. Thought I would add my opinion before the flight shots arrive - Kestrel.
A Kestrel with it's head turned slightly towards the camera could show a pale chin and cheeks. There also appears to be something in front of the flanks/chest which may be making the bird look bulky. I also think the tail looks fine for Kes...
Making the image B/W using a red filter does highlight the back colour and the sugestion of an object in front.

Cheers Mark.
 
could be either, even reminds me of a juv hobby in some ways. but i will play it safe and go for either kestrel or peregrine...i will go for kessie.
 
Dave J said:
The other point i find slightly bewildering is the question of the reddish brown colouration. The idea that this is caused by the tree, whether it be twigs, leaves or the effect of the light, is quite frankly ludicrous. That people have argued this point so enthusiastically, including some obviously very good birders, amazes me.

It does not amaze me in the slightest that some very good birders are arguing this as a Kestrel and that some are arguing it as a Peregrine ...it is an unclear photo and nobody is in a clear position to say exactly 'what is' as opposed to 'what appears to be'.

I remain in the Peregrine camp (but accept I can be wrong) - it is not ludicrous to wonder what the brown blob is! If it is the bird, why does it appear (on my screen at least) that the entire back is not brown - it seems the brown is only 'covering' the left side of the back and beyond that there is hint of grey.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 19 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