• 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.

Which Harrier? (1 Viewer)

Hi there 'Real Grosser',
Given that we can all be mistaken, including you, there is never really any need for triumphalism when it comes to bird identification, never mind such dismissive and arrogant comments directed towards some of those who have commented on here in good faith.
I have seen acknowledged experts make bad calls based on record shots and even in the field, but these people tend to realise that the mistake was made when more evidence comes to light, and learn from this as a result. Would you just dismiss them (and I'm talking about really big names here!) the same way that you did to those singled out earlier?
I have absolutely no problem with you, rather the manner in which you chose to express yourself. I would urge you, man to man, to read back over what you had said and ask how you would feel if such a post was aimed at you.
For the record, I will freely admit to having been unable to make a call on the harrier based solely on the initial video-grabs, mainly due to the relatively poor quality of these. Now that I have seen the video, I do feel that it may well have been a 2nd cal Montagu's Harrier, as you say (it certainly seems to be one), but still find myself unable to see the barred axilliaries (and I tried, as they would, if present, sort out the ID straight away!) and find the exact wing formula difficult to make out...perhaps this is due to my relative lack of experience with Monty's, some failing/ ineptitude on my part or maybe it just isn't possible to see these?
I have seen a few Montagu's in Spain, 2 here, 2 juvs in Bulgaria and 1 in Morocco, loads and loads of Hen Harriers of all ages and a few Pallids in Bulgaria, though could do with seeing more of the smaller species.
Regards,
Harry
 
Harry Hussey said:
Hi there 'Real Grosser',
. I would urge you, man to man, to read back over what you had said and ask how you would feel if such a post was aimed at you.
Harry

Surely man to man means just that, you have posted this onto a public forum.
 
Marcus Lawson said:
Surely man to man means just that, you have posted this onto a public forum.
Only because, my good chap, 'Real Grosser' proceeded to rip a few contributors to shreds on here. As I feel such a triumphalist approach to bird identification to be an anathema, I thought it best to give him a chance to retract some of the more venomous statements that he made. Maybe my posting of this message to a public forum was inappropriate, I don't know, but note one thing: unlike how he acted towards some others, who contribute to many ID threads, I didn't insult him in the slightest, nor do I wish to do so.
I do hope that you haven't been indirectly offended by my call for calm, as that was all that was intended? Apologies if so.
Harry
 
To continue with the bird, let everybody be forgiven:
For ad female Montague's the black secondary bar is diagnostic but in the juvenile's they do not appear as being exclusive for either species. What if it is a faded 1st plumage?:The less dark area's would be faded the more and the darker still remain.
As said, if this has to be an ad Montague's: Its called falcon-like, but in many actions (to reckon the extremes) this species is even more remniscent of a tern! being longer and more pointed winged and tailed than a young bird.This bird never showed this extreme.
Would an adult female show an unstreaked breast and belly?
And if it is no female, what about the feature of the secondary bar?
 
Marcus Lawson said:
Will this do you? Taken this Spring.

yes, OK, here's a few shot's taken recently, not females or juvs but harriers non the less!

nirofo.
 

Attachments

  • Hen Harrier male in flight.jpg
    Hen Harrier male in flight.jpg
    93.5 KB · Views: 147
  • Marsh Harrier male flight.jpg
    Marsh Harrier male flight.jpg
    98.3 KB · Views: 149
  • Montagu's Harrier male in flight.jpg
    Montagu's Harrier male in flight.jpg
    97.4 KB · Views: 159
Real Grosser on my list said:
Start with the upper wing secondary bars. Find a photo of a Hen Harrier that shows these bars and I will hang up my bins and start knitting. Promise.
QUOTE]

Mines a large size please. 3:)
 

Attachments

  • pho_classes.jpg
    pho_classes.jpg
    25.5 KB · Views: 153
Yes, back to the bird... if I'd known this would run & run I would have kept out of it, no need to be rude.
I thought Monty's right from the start. Interesting to see how this has see-sawed. Others have spelt out many features which I won't repeat, just to say why I thought immediatly of Monty's : structure shouted Monty's, I saw a narrower wing than others seemed to see, and the hand was long & narrow despite some moult. Yes the body looks heavier than it should - maybe it has just fed, you know how these BOPs can balloon.
Never thought of Pallid at the time, but this seems the only realistic alternative to me, but the collar/head pattern doesn't look right (I'm only going off lit. here; I haven't seen Pallid for a long time).
Let's keep it clean folks this one shows how difficult it can be - disagreeing isn't an insult unless you add the insult in.
 
The male Hen Harrier is taken in september and probably near it´s end of the complete moult, p9 & p10 growing. Compare with this Montagu´s:

http://www.tarsiger.com/images/masa/Cirpyg10.jpg


I think we can all safely call the subject harrier a Montagu´s, which was actually indicated from the start, and then reinforced good but heavily by AL!
Who want´s to be the fool on the hill.

JanJ
 
halftwo said:
- probably just perspective. Nice photo by the way.

Some other perspectives but I dont have a video. These includes three different birds (the juv s are one male and a bird with a dark iris, though they are shot at the same date)
 

Attachments

  • cir_cya_m_pk_0564.jpg
    cir_cya_m_pk_0564.jpg
    99.4 KB · Views: 134
  • cir_cya_m_pk_0573.jpg
    cir_cya_m_pk_0573.jpg
    78.6 KB · Views: 118
  • cir_cya_pk_0233.jpg
    cir_cya_pk_0233.jpg
    67.3 KB · Views: 148
  • cir_cya_pk_9735.jpg
    cir_cya_pk_9735.jpg
    44.1 KB · Views: 146
Although I think gerdwichers can speak for himself, I don´t think he meant the Hen to be a Montagu´s, just that the wing formula was rather similar to Montagu´s. And as mentioned by me and Greg the Hen is in wing moult.
However other characters in the subject bird clearly demonstrate, as mentioned by others here, that it´s a Montagu´s Harrier, which I agree to. Subject harrier is not in wing moult. The Hen,s and the Montagu´s I linked in #9 invites to good studies of both wing formula and jizz. Harriers in wing moult can of course be problematic.

JanJ
 
If it is difficult for me to argue on the wing formula and the secondary bar why it should not be Montague's, I say yes, you are right to weigh the load as to be a heavy one to shift aside.
But it is the same for the body, tail and uppertailcoverts on your side: Heavy not to consider those any longer and not to argue why an ad female Montague's is allowed to have these wrong features.
Ad to it for the wings that it never shows the ternlike appearance in a vid of more than 8 minutes which ought to be seen for an adult male and female Mont! So I am sorry to state it never came out of range of Hen in wing action.
Moreover: a first plumage Hen is more slender winged than an adult bird.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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