Jane Turner
Well-known member
Beats me Alan! Its pretty obviously a female Wheatear spp!
-
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.
ID this small bird please (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Tav94
- Start date
Barred Wobbler
Well-known member
It's only dumpy because it's probably partly in three-quarter view, producing a fore-shortening effect. Not all silhouettes are full profile.Jane Turner said:
(does my avatar look too dumpy to be a Bee-eater?)
Jane Turner
Well-known member
That is why I can't rule out female BEW!!!! 
Barred Wobbler
Well-known member
It would be hard to rule out one of those in good light! |;|Jane Turner said:That is why I can't rule out female BEW!!!!
Barred Wobbler
Well-known member
Alan Seaton said:
A White-fingered Pseudoraptor?
3
3 3 Hahaha, sorry, a joke from another thread... http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=79932
Barred Wobbler
Well-known member
Closeoverworkedirish said:A White-fingered Pseudoraptor?
3
dantheman
Bah humbug
overworkedirish said:You all are bonkers! It's clearly a Bald Eagle! Someone should report it...
Not meaning to diss you're photoshop skills Alex, but I was thinking more along the lines of Christmas Pudding Bird myself. . .
Otherwise I'm going for Blackstart(Cercomela melanura). . . hunched down in the wind. .
Last edited:
Pete Mella
Getting there...
I'd say Robin, I can see why someone would think Wheatear, but I think the dark wing-bars are a trick of the light. Robin would be my first choice, with possible Dunnock second.
Nicola Main
Well-known member
I remain convinced it is a Robin.
This bird is NOT a female Wheatear because: I fail to notice any supercilium at all in the bird photographed, the area of black on the wing only covers a small area of it and does not extend over the whole wing which it does in a female Wheatear.
This bird is NOT a Black Redstart because: There is no whitish wing panel at all (that I can see). The breast is not too dark which rules out male Black Redstart which has black mask and breast. (Females and juveniles don't have any markings on the breast at all).
This bird IS a Robin because: If you look closely you can actually see the outline of a red breast. Robins have brown on the crown, neck and back and this gets slightly darker brown as it reaches the wing.
No doubt some of you will disagree with me but hey this is my opinion. One final thing to add: THIS IS A ROBIN!!!
This bird is NOT a female Wheatear because: I fail to notice any supercilium at all in the bird photographed, the area of black on the wing only covers a small area of it and does not extend over the whole wing which it does in a female Wheatear.
This bird is NOT a Black Redstart because: There is no whitish wing panel at all (that I can see). The breast is not too dark which rules out male Black Redstart which has black mask and breast. (Females and juveniles don't have any markings on the breast at all).
This bird IS a Robin because: If you look closely you can actually see the outline of a red breast. Robins have brown on the crown, neck and back and this gets slightly darker brown as it reaches the wing.
No doubt some of you will disagree with me but hey this is my opinion. One final thing to add: THIS IS A ROBIN!!!
jforgham
Birding for fun
Good day to all,
Good to see this still going.Now back on decent monitor and have pointed out what is visible on original photo. Have to agree that I was incorrect with my male wheatear shout. Not enough black, but still going with that species.
Remember: not all male black redstarts show white wing panels, they tend to develop with age and a 1st / 2nd year bird would not show these. However, doesn't sway me from my position.
As many would tend to agree with, I am familiar with talking cr*p and there is clearly strong evidence of there being specific species cr*p on the rocks as id'd in the photo. Too conclusive to disagree with I would wager!
Good to see this still going.Now back on decent monitor and have pointed out what is visible on original photo. Have to agree that I was incorrect with my male wheatear shout. Not enough black, but still going with that species.
Remember: not all male black redstarts show white wing panels, they tend to develop with age and a 1st / 2nd year bird would not show these. However, doesn't sway me from my position.
As many would tend to agree with, I am familiar with talking cr*p and there is clearly strong evidence of there being specific species cr*p on the rocks as id'd in the photo. Too conclusive to disagree with I would wager!
Attachments
Last edited:
Jane Turner
Well-known member
I'm mystified that this thread is still going on - its a bit like that Whitethroat one a month or so back. Its a Wheatear on the thumbnail let alone the full pic.
Jono - take a look at the bird and then the rock. Look how obvious the paler crap/lichen stuff is compared to the dark of the rock.
One would expect a Wheatear's pale parts (i.e. obvious super, pale breast/belly) to be on show.
If Tav thought it was a Black Red then thats probably what it was. You would have thought any contrast on the bird would have lead to a different identification (i.e. that of a wheatear). Especially the white rump when it flew - this is always REALLY obvious and if Tav didn't see it then it probably wasn't there.
Jane - not sure why its "obviously" a wheatear sp - if we all had your skills to be able to tell this then surely everyone would have immediately said "yes, its a wheatear". Anyway if it is one then Black seems more likely than Northern. Do I have to keep repeating that this bird shows virtually no contrast at all, and isn't a silhouette?
Look at the bill here:
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=75026
Thats too fine and the wrong structure for a wheatear, I'm afraid.
One would expect a Wheatear's pale parts (i.e. obvious super, pale breast/belly) to be on show.
If Tav thought it was a Black Red then thats probably what it was. You would have thought any contrast on the bird would have lead to a different identification (i.e. that of a wheatear). Especially the white rump when it flew - this is always REALLY obvious and if Tav didn't see it then it probably wasn't there.
Jane - not sure why its "obviously" a wheatear sp - if we all had your skills to be able to tell this then surely everyone would have immediately said "yes, its a wheatear". Anyway if it is one then Black seems more likely than Northern. Do I have to keep repeating that this bird shows virtually no contrast at all, and isn't a silhouette?
Look at the bill here:
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=75026
Thats too fine and the wrong structure for a wheatear, I'm afraid.
Jane Turner
Well-known member
jforgham said:
You might still be right - the darkness of the majority of the wing might suggest its a 2nd CY bird that has delayed the majority of its moult.
That would fit better with the date too.
Jane Turner
Well-known member
Josh - I can see plenty of contrast on my monitor - between peachy breast and browner mantle.... and espectially between black primaries (and secondaries) and brown back. I can even contrast over the eye - consistent with a pale supercilium. The tail is black too.
As for the bill on that attahment - does it not worry you a bit that the legs look even thinner?
As for the bill on that attahment - does it not worry you a bit that the legs look even thinner?
