dalat
...
Hi,
I am often impressed by the knowledge that can be found in the bird ID section, it's a great source of learning.
But sometimes I wonder how much of the things I learn there are actually useful in the field. For example in this thread http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=262877 the ID was clinched with the conclusion
I myself would certainly not be able to see these details on warblers in the field, even with primary projection I usually have a very hard time to see enough to be useful for ID. Obviously in the field there are other things that help, like call, behaviour, habitat.
So my question is: do the pros among you actually use things like wing formula and primary projection for ID in the field (on small birds), or is this something that can only be reasonably used on photos or birds in the hand?
Cheers,
I am often impressed by the knowledge that can be found in the bird ID section, it's a great source of learning.
But sometimes I wonder how much of the things I learn there are actually useful in the field. For example in this thread http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=262877 the ID was clinched with the conclusion
I myself would certainly not be able to see these details on warblers in the field, even with primary projection I usually have a very hard time to see enough to be useful for ID. Obviously in the field there are other things that help, like call, behaviour, habitat.
So my question is: do the pros among you actually use things like wing formula and primary projection for ID in the field (on small birds), or is this something that can only be reasonably used on photos or birds in the hand?
Cheers,
) but when you look at the photos afterwards - there they are. It all comes with practice. One, personal, example is, I grew up in the north west of England and I was used to seeing Common Guillemot and Razorbill flying passed and I didn't think anything of identifying them. I moved to north Norfolk in the 70's and the vast majority of birders, some of them well known and exceptionally good ones, were adamant you couldn't tell them apart unless they were fairly close (under a mile ). Calls are another thing - as I get older, and deafer, I know I'll never be any good at them but, yet again, there are birders that say "Siskin overhead. About 150 metres up. There's a Linnet and a couple of Redpoll among them". :eek!: I go back to looking in bushes and trees. :-C If you know what the criteria are for separating similar species / field marks then you lock on them first, we all do, except with some people the ability is magnified considerably.
