• 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.

Wader Confirmation (1 Viewer)

Nigel G

Well-known member
Whilst twitching the Baird's Sandpiper at Keyhaven this morning I arrived at the reported lagoon and almost immediately a little sandpiper type bird flew in an landed in front of me. This is easy I thinks and proceed to get bins and scope on it followed by a couple of quick pics just before it ups and disappears over the seawall.

Happy I'd got my tick I check out further along the lagoon only to have another little sandpiper type flit in and land on a spit 40yds off. Bins, scope etc - much more time to study confirmation of squat shape, long wing projection - yeah definitely a lifer.

However on studying the pics at home the first bird doesn't have the long wing projection and has a more rounded shape than the Baird's in pic 2 - so what is it? My best attempt is Little Stint but grateful for confirmation. (The black mark on the face is (I assume) mud where it had just scratched).
 

Attachments

  • Little Stint.jpg
    Little Stint.jpg
    104.6 KB · Views: 237
  • Baird's Sandpiper-01.jpg
    Baird's Sandpiper-01.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 191
Hi Tim,
Yes, and also the bill length and acquisition of some grey 1st-winter scapulars while still on migration.
Harry
 
Hmm - disappointing. I had thought it was smaller than that but it was a singleton and so nothing to compare it with. I've also just listen to the respective calls (which I should have done in the first place) and unsurprisingly it sounded far more like a Dunlin than a Little Stint!

Just shows the power (or danger) of wishful thinking. Thanks all.
 
Last edited:
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