[AdamfromCanada]

Both photos taken in August:

1) Speckled Mousebird? Taken at Waterberg Plateau. Fairly late when I saw it, so lighting is very poor, but figure from location it could only be speckled or White-Backed and from all the photos I've seen, the high crest is more likely speckled.

2) No idea on this one. Very quick bird living in the rocks atop Sesriem Canyon, not terribly far away from Sossusvlei.

[MacNara]

When we went to Sesriem Canyon in early May last year, the only bird we saw like yours was Bradfield's Swift (my first two pictures), which looked as if it had short wings in some shots. If I didn't know this, however, I would go for something like Rock Martin for your bird.

The Southern Africa books say Speckled Mousebird is not in Namibia. I don't see why White-backed Mousebird (my third picture, from Swakopmund) wouldn't fit your very indistinct photo. These birds have a crest, too.

While I was looking at Namibia photos in response to this thread, I came across this photo from Etosha of a Starling, which doesn't fit any of the pictures in Sinclair et al. Is it Sharp-tailed, or is the eye-colour misleading and it's Greater Blue-eared? Tib, or anyone?

[stonechat1]

Adam, I´ve no idea about the second bird but #1 is IMHO a Grey Go - Away Bird. Compare the crest with this bird, also the beak of the mousebirds is not so curved like at the bird in question.: http://www.wilkinsonsworld.com/wp-co...-away-bird.jpg

[MacNara]

Originally Posted by stonechat1

Adam, I´ve no idea about the second bird but #1 is IMHO a Grey Go - Away Bird. Compare the crest with this bird, also the beak of the mousebirds is not so curved like at the bird in question.: http://www.wilkinsonsworld.com/wp-co...-away-bird.jpg

That's a very sensible suggestion!

[kitefarrago]

Agreed, the first bird is a grey go-away bird and not any kind of mousebird. The second bird looks good for rock martin, which I've seen all over Namibia and which are indeed very quick (I didn't get a single sensible pic of one).

McNara's glossy starling is a Cape, I think (Lamprotornis nitens).

Andrea

[Tib78]

Cape starling for me too, and to anticipate Mac's question, even Cape starling can show a black mask in some lights, though never as well defined as the Blue-eared starlings.

[AdamfromCanada]

Thanks! Those were the last two Namibian birds (other than vultures, which I really struggle with even with good photos) that I had to figure out. I appreciate the help!

[MacNara]

Originally Posted by Tib78

Cape starling for me too, and to anticipate Mac's question, even Cape starling can show a black mask in some lights, though never as well defined as the Blue-eared starlings.

Well, thanks Tib (and kitefarrago). It's very strange that Sinclair et al actually has a comment on the drawing 'no facial mask' and emphasises this in the text. Also, the eye in the drawing is as yellow as could be, whereas in my photo(s) it's as red as could be. Finally, the bird in the drawing is totally green (well, so is the Greater Blue-eared, except for the belly). So, I don't see how anyone who didn't know already could identify this bird from this book.

And for the Sharp-tailed, Sinclair has 'long, wedge-shaped tail' on the drawing, but 'difficult to tell from other short-tailed starlings' in the text.

Is there a a better book for southern African birds that I should be using?

[kitefarrago]

I'm not an expert on glossy starlings - I've only experienced them on two trips, to the northern half of Namibia and the north-east of South Africa. I did, however, spend some time in trying to sort out how to go about identifying glossy starlings. If any of this is wrong or misleading hopefully somebody will come along to say so.

- Colour: Any glossy starling can look more green or more blue depending on the ambient light. I found this a completely useless feature. There may well be a way of looking at just the right part of the bird, and knowing what just the right light is to judge colour there accurately, but I suspect this takes a really experienced eye.

- Eye colour. Some birds have bright (yellow/orange), others have dark eyes. This is really useful when observed, but I doubt it can be reliably applied beyond this simple distinction. Cape glossy starlings can certainly have orange-looking eyes (again I suspect that some of what one sees depends on the ambient light), see http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/sho...5/ppuser/91670, and I would describe the colour of your bird's eyes as orange rather than red. In my copy of Sinclair the eye colour for Cape and Greater Blue-eared is identical. If these eyes can look more yellow or more orange at times, how is a field guide supposed to illustrate them? If there was more space for text one might expect something there, I guess.

- Mask. Most of the time most glossy starlings look dark in the area between the eye and the bill. This is caused by the fact that in order to show their iridescence the feathers have to catch a certain amount of light at a certain angle, and the structure of the bird's head means this is hardly ever the case for this area. Hence at first sight, many glossy starlings look as if they have a mask. Fortunately once one has realized this, there is something to look for: The black on a properly masked starling is actually quite distinct (showing no trace of a colour cast), and in many cases the mask extends behind the eye onto the ear coverts. So to detect a mask, look behind the eye. Your starling clearly shows colour there (although the area behind and below the eye is once again shaded), and that's why in my opinion it's not a Greater Blue-eared.

- Size. If the difference is big enough it's really quite noticeable, eg between Burchell's and Cape, both of which are very common in Etosha.

Here's another bird that looks at first sight as if it had a mask http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/sho...p?photo=245129, yet it is another Cape, and another such that looks blue with a similar `mask' http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/dat...y_Starling.jpg.

It's actually quite difficult fo find pictures in the gallery that clearly show the mask of a Greater Blue-eared, and some of them look doubtful to me regarding their id. But here's one where you can see the mask clearly extending behind the eye http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/sho...p?photo=389974 on a bird that otherwise looks mostly blue, and here's another http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/sho...p?photo=134366.

I ultimately decided to leave as unidentified any glossy starling that I hadn't got a good look at unless it was completely obvious by something like size (Burchell's), or dark eye when all the others are bright eyed). I'm just glad I didn't visit the area when there even more confusing ones around, like juveniles moulting into adult plumage...

Any picture in a field guide is going to be a compromise. I believe it takes some experience with the species to judge the natural variability that gives you deviation from the `typical'. Sometimes you see a bird in the flesh and you know at once what it is, and sometimes you look at one and it puzzles you until you finally see `oh that's what they look like in real life'. I suspect if you want more detail you'll have to go to some kind of encyclopaedia. And, of course, mistakes do happen occasionally even in good field guides.

Hopefully the above will be useful to somebody, and hopefully it can be confirmed/improved by somebody with more experience on a wider range of glossy starlings.

Andrea

[MacNara]

Well, thank you Andrea for posting that detailed explanation. It's very generous of you.

On the Sinclair guidebook, I think you are being a little generous. Even though I accept the colouring of these birds is especially difficult, I really think Sinclair overdoes the bright green on the glossy starlings. Stevenson and Fanshawe's illustrators for East Africa seem to be much closer their green-blue looks like it would change with the light, whereas Sinclair's pictures are an uncompromising bright green.

In addition, guides contain a verbal description, where variations can and should be highlighted. Sinclair says bluntly, 'no facial mask' and 'glossy green ear patches' for Cape Glossy. For this reason, I had this bird (despite the red eye) and the others we saw at Etosha down as Greater Blue-eared which the guide has down as also in range. Guides should note colour variations if they are likely to be significant.

We only saw glossy starlings at Etosha twice (and nowhere else in Namibia): the bird in my photo above which was alone, and a group playing in a puddle.

(The Namibia we saw - early May, 2011 - was very wet. The Namib Desert got its famed 'annual' 7mm of rain in a single day three or four times in the ten days we were there. All the underground rivers were flowing strongly overground, and we had to change routes sometimes to avoid flooding. On the plus side, because of the clouds, the light varied a lot, and the scenery was spectacular and could vary from minute to minute. See the attached photo from Sesriem near Sossusvlei.)

Here are some photos of the other starlings, which I had to take against the light as the driver was waiting.

I'll put all of these down as Cape Glossy. And when I'm stronger, I'll go back and look at my glossy starlings from East Africa.

[Jenny S]

The Glossy Starlings are quite tricky but the Greater looks much longer legged and more upright on the ground than Cape and in direct sunlight the Greater definitely looks almost electric blue-turquoise whereas the Cape Glossy looks darker and more green-turquoise. Also the calls are fairly different with the Greater giving a distinct, nasal "squeeeaaar".

I hope this helps.