• 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 all,

As Harriers go, this bird is easy to identify although there are one or two anomolies which are either a result of digital camera 'burn-out' or aberrant plumage.

The following are based on my own observations and also Dick Forsman's excellent (and essential) Raptors of Europe & Middle East. I have referenced some of the points below to plates (photographs) and pages in that book. If you don't have this book, then shame on you!

1) The split dark bars on the upper wing secondaries are diagnostic of adult female Montagu's Harrier, ie, the bar across the tips of the secondaries and the bar across the bases. Plate 263 in Forsman.
2) The arm is shorter than the hand. Pallid would show an arm to hand ratio of about 1:1 and Hen would show an arm that is longer than the hand. This bird can only be a Montagu's based on this and can never, ever, be a Hen Harrier. (Page 186.)
3) Due to 2) above, adult female Montagu's shows long narrow wings which gives it a more falcon like appearance as shown by the bird in question (Plate 260). Hen would also show a broader hand and arm which gives it an accipiter like appearance. This bird clearly has a more Kestrel like profile - it can't possibly be a Hen Harrier (Plate 212).
5) The body structure is fine for Montagu's especially as the body becomes rather 'rakish' towards the lower belly. Hen has a broader body and often shows an owl like face (see plates 209 -212 in Forsman). Pallid harrier deepens at the belly rather than the breast. Harriers can look broader bodied just after they have eaten. Please look at R Fray's excellent photos of a juv Pallid on Shetland as evidence to support this (Surfbirds). The bird had just eaten a Lapwing.
6) The extremely strongly barred secondaries on the underwing (ie, pale, dark etc) show that this bird is an adult female harrier. The point of this is that this eliminates ALL juvenile plumages (ie from the nest to remex moult the following mid-summer at least). Second calendar (aka 1st summer in old money) male harriers all show solidly dark/faintly barred secondaries in the underwing until they begin moult. The central retrices would almost certainly have been moulted by June and would be grey if this was an immature male Harrier sp.
7) P7-P9 are long (P10 short in all 3 species). P6 would also be long in Hen. This bird would not begin remex moult until July at the earliest (but usually later) so this bird is definitely not a Hen Harrier (Plate 209). To suggest that a Raven etc has managed to damage both P6s and no other feathers is simply ridiculous.
8) The dark tipped inner five primaries eliminates Pallid Harrier (pale tipped). Also, the dark areas on the head and breast are all uniformly dark brown on adult female Pallid (gives it a 'hooded effect') whereas this bird shows some differences in shade between the brown areas. Adult female Pallid Harrier also shows a secondary 'bulge' which this bird clearly doesn't have.
9)This bird is even shown soaring with the the shallow 'V' in the photographs. What more do you want to prove the ID?
10) The collar on this bird does not seem to extend onto the throat wheareas it usually would on Hen and Pallid.

There are more features but frankly how much more is needed?

The features that aren't evident are as follows but note that this bird is 100% female Montagu's, I'm only pointing these features out as they would probably have been evident in the field:

1) Adult female Montagu's usually shows the heavier streaking of the three confusion species. I would expect to see heavy streaking down the entire body (Plate 261). Pallid is restricted to the upper breast which forms a loose pectoral band (with some faint streaks below on the flanks). Plate 234.
2) Barred axillaries = Montagu's. This is certainly the thing to look for, especially in younger birds as these feathers are oftened moulted in March/April before any other feathers are moulted. See this and last month's Monties pictures in Birding World. Also look at Sean Nixon's shots on Surfbirds from this spring of the Colne Point bird - the axillaries on his 2nd Calendar female are the only feathers that have been moulted, I think.

Nice find. Very easy decision for the NI Committee to make.

If anyone disagrees with the above, then please reference your opinions to photographs and text as I have.

Cheers,

Andy Lawson.
 
Real Grosser on my list said:
Hi all,

As Harriers go, this bird is easy to identify although there are one or two anomolies which are either a result of digital camera 'burn-out' or aberrant plumage.

The following are based on my own observations and also Dick Forsman's excellent (and essential) Raptors of Europe & Middle East. I have referenced some of the points below to plates (photographs) and pages in that book. If you don't have this book, then shame on you!

1) The split dark bars on the upper wing secondaries are diagnostic of adult female Montagu's Harrier, ie, the bar across the tips of the secondaries and the bar across the bases. Plate 263 in Forsman.
2) The arm is shorter than the hand. Pallid would show an arm to hand ratio of about 1:1 and Hen would show an arm that is longer than the hand. This bird can only be a Montagu's based on this and can never, ever, be a Hen Harrier. (Page 186.)
3) Due to 2) above, adult female Montagu's shows long narrow wings which gives it a more falcon like appearance as shown by the bird in question (Plate 260). Hen would also show a broader hand and arm which gives it an accipiter like appearance. This bird clearly has a more Kestrel like profile - it can't possibly be a Hen Harrier (Plate 212).
5) The body structure is fine for Montagu's especially as the body becomes rather 'rakish' towards the lower belly. Hen has a broader body and often shows an owl like face (see plates 209 -212 in Forsman). Pallid harrier deepens at the belly rather than the breast. Harriers can look broader bodied just after they have eaten. Please look at R Fray's excellent photos of a juv Pallid on Shetland as evidence to support this (Surfbirds). The bird had just eaten a Lapwing.
6) The extremely strongly barred secondaries on the underwing (ie, pale, dark etc) show that this bird is an adult female harrier. The point of this is that this eliminates ALL juvenile plumages (ie from the nest to remex moult the following mid-summer at least). Second calendar (aka 1st summer in old money) male harriers all show solidly dark/faintly barred secondaries in the underwing until they begin moult. The central retrices would almost certainly have been moulted by June and would be grey if this was an immature male Harrier sp.
7) P7-P9 are long (P10 short in all 3 species). P6 would also be long in Hen. This bird would not begin remex moult until July at the earliest (but usually later) so this bird is definitely not a Hen Harrier (Plate 209). To suggest that a Raven etc has managed to damage both P6s and no other feathers is simply ridiculous.
8) The dark tipped inner five primaries eliminates Pallid Harrier (pale tipped). Also, the dark areas on the head and breast are all uniformly dark brown on adult female Pallid (gives it a 'hooded effect') whereas this bird shows some differences in shade between the brown areas. Adult female Pallid Harrier also shows a secondary 'bulge' which this bird clearly doesn't have.
9)This bird is even shown soaring with the the shallow 'V' in the photographs. What more do you want to prove the ID?
10) The collar on this bird does not seem to extend onto the throat wheareas it usually would on Hen and Pallid.

There are more features but frankly how much more is needed?

The features that aren't evident are as follows but note that this bird is 100% female Montagu's, I'm only pointing these features out as they would probably have been evident in the field:

1) Adult female Montagu's usually shows the heavier streaking of the three confusion species. I would expect to see heavy streaking down the entire body (Plate 261). Pallid is restricted to the upper breast which forms a loose pectoral band (with some faint streaks below on the flanks). Plate 234.
2) Barred axillaries = Montagu's. This is certainly the thing to look for, especially in younger birds as these feathers are oftened moulted in March/April before any other feathers are moulted. See this and last month's Monties pictures in Birding World. Also look at Sean Nixon's shots on Surfbirds from this spring of the Colne Point bird - the axillaries on his 2nd Calendar female are the only feathers that have been moulted, I think.

Nice find. Very easy decision for the NI Committee to make.

If anyone disagrees with the above, then please reference your opinions to photographs and text as I have.

Cheers,

Andy Lawson.

Your copy still looks nice and clean?
 
Real Grosser on my list said:
Hi all,

As Harriers go, this bird is easy to identify although there are one or two anomolies which are either a result of digital camera 'burn-out' or aberrant plumage.

The following are based on my own observations and also Dick Forsman's excellent (and essential) Raptors of Europe & Middle East. I have referenced some of the points below to plates (photographs) and pages in that book. If you don't have this book, then shame on you!

1) The split dark bars on the upper wing secondaries are diagnostic of adult female Montagu's Harrier, ie, the bar across the tips of the secondaries and the bar across the bases. Plate 263 in Forsman.
2) The arm is shorter than the hand. Pallid would show an arm to hand ratio of about 1:1 and Hen would show an arm that is longer than the hand. This bird can only be a Montagu's based on this and can never, ever, be a Hen Harrier. (Page 186.)
3) Due to 2) above, adult female Montagu's shows long narrow wings which gives it a more falcon like appearance as shown by the bird in question (Plate 260). Hen would also show a broader hand and arm which gives it an accipiter like appearance. This bird clearly has a more Kestrel like profile - it can't possibly be a Hen Harrier (Plate 212).
5) The body structure is fine for Montagu's especially as the body becomes rather 'rakish' towards the lower belly. Hen has a broader body and often shows an owl like face (see plates 209 -212 in Forsman). Pallid harrier deepens at the belly rather than the breast. Harriers can look broader bodied just after they have eaten. Please look at R Fray's excellent photos of a juv Pallid on Shetland as evidence to support this (Surfbirds). The bird had just eaten a Lapwing.
6) The extremely strongly barred secondaries on the underwing (ie, pale, dark etc) show that this bird is an adult female harrier. The point of this is that this eliminates ALL juvenile plumages (ie from the nest to remex moult the following mid-summer at least). Second calendar (aka 1st summer in old money) male harriers all show solidly dark/faintly barred secondaries in the underwing until they begin moult. The central retrices would almost certainly have been moulted by June and would be grey if this was an immature male Harrier sp.
7) P7-P9 are long (P10 short in all 3 species). P6 would also be long in Hen. This bird would not begin remex moult until July at the earliest (but usually later) so this bird is definitely not a Hen Harrier (Plate 209). To suggest that a Raven etc has managed to damage both P6s and no other feathers is simply ridiculous.
8) The dark tipped inner five primaries eliminates Pallid Harrier (pale tipped). Also, the dark areas on the head and breast are all uniformly dark brown on adult female Pallid (gives it a 'hooded effect') whereas this bird shows some differences in shade between the brown areas. Adult female Pallid Harrier also shows a secondary 'bulge' which this bird clearly doesn't have.
9)This bird is even shown soaring with the the shallow 'V' in the photographs. What more do you want to prove the ID?
10) The collar on this bird does not seem to extend onto the throat wheareas it usually would on Hen and Pallid.

There are more features but frankly how much more is needed?

The features that aren't evident are as follows but note that this bird is 100% female Montagu's, I'm only pointing these features out as they would probably have been evident in the field:

1) Adult female Montagu's usually shows the heavier streaking of the three confusion species. I would expect to see heavy streaking down the entire body (Plate 261). Pallid is restricted to the upper breast which forms a loose pectoral band (with some faint streaks below on the flanks). Plate 234.
2) Barred axillaries = Montagu's. This is certainly the thing to look for, especially in younger birds as these feathers are oftened moulted in March/April before any other feathers are moulted. See this and last month's Monties pictures in Birding World. Also look at Sean Nixon's shots on Surfbirds from this spring of the Colne Point bird - the axillaries on his 2nd Calendar female are the only feathers that have been moulted, I think.

Nice find. Very easy decision for the NI Committee to make.

If anyone disagrees with the above, then please reference your opinions to photographs and text as I have.

Cheers,

Andy Lawson.

If you want to accept this as a Monty's that's up to you, I still think it's an Hen harrier, I see Hens regularly up here in the north of Scotland, I've worked with them for years, this bird fits like a glove!

nirofo.
 
Real Grosser on my list said:
Hi all,

As Harriers go, this bird is easy to identify although there are one or two anomolies which are either a result of digital camera 'burn-out' or aberrant plumage.

The following are based on my own observations and also Dick Forsman's excellent (and essential) Raptors of Europe & Middle East. I have referenced some of the points below to plates (photographs) and pages in that book. If you don't have this book, then shame on you!

1) The split dark bars on the upper wing secondaries are diagnostic of adult female Montagu's Harrier, ie, the bar across the tips of the secondaries and the bar across the bases. Plate 263 in Forsman.
2) The arm is shorter than the hand. Pallid would show an arm to hand ratio of about 1:1 and Hen would show an arm that is longer than the hand. This bird can only be a Montagu's based on this and can never, ever, be a Hen Harrier. (Page 186.)
3) Due to 2) above, adult female Montagu's shows long narrow wings which gives it a more falcon like appearance as shown by the bird in question (Plate 260). Hen would also show a broader hand and arm which gives it an accipiter like appearance. This bird clearly has a more Kestrel like profile - it can't possibly be a Hen Harrier (Plate 212).
5) The body structure is fine for Montagu's especially as the body becomes rather 'rakish' towards the lower belly. Hen has a broader body and often shows an owl like face (see plates 209 -212 in Forsman). Pallid harrier deepens at the belly rather than the breast. Harriers can look broader bodied just after they have eaten. Please look at R Fray's excellent photos of a juv Pallid on Shetland as evidence to support this (Surfbirds). The bird had just eaten a Lapwing.
6) The extremely strongly barred secondaries on the underwing (ie, pale, dark etc) show that this bird is an adult female harrier. The point of this is that this eliminates ALL juvenile plumages (ie from the nest to remex moult the following mid-summer at least). Second calendar (aka 1st summer in old money) male harriers all show solidly dark/faintly barred secondaries in the underwing until they begin moult. The central retrices would almost certainly have been moulted by June and would be grey if this was an immature male Harrier sp.
7) P7-P9 are long (P10 short in all 3 species). P6 would also be long in Hen. This bird would not begin remex moult until July at the earliest (but usually later) so this bird is definitely not a Hen Harrier (Plate 209). To suggest that a Raven etc has managed to damage both P6s and no other feathers is simply ridiculous.
8) The dark tipped inner five primaries eliminates Pallid Harrier (pale tipped). Also, the dark areas on the head and breast are all uniformly dark brown on adult female Pallid (gives it a 'hooded effect') whereas this bird shows some differences in shade between the brown areas. Adult female Pallid Harrier also shows a secondary 'bulge' which this bird clearly doesn't have.
9)This bird is even shown soaring with the the shallow 'V' in the photographs. What more do you want to prove the ID?
10) The collar on this bird does not seem to extend onto the throat wheareas it usually would on Hen and Pallid.

There are more features but frankly how much more is needed?

The features that aren't evident are as follows but note that this bird is 100% female Montagu's, I'm only pointing these features out as they would probably have been evident in the field:

1) Adult female Montagu's usually shows the heavier streaking of the three confusion species. I would expect to see heavy streaking down the entire body (Plate 261). Pallid is restricted to the upper breast which forms a loose pectoral band (with some faint streaks below on the flanks). Plate 234.
2) Barred axillaries = Montagu's. This is certainly the thing to look for, especially in younger birds as these feathers are oftened moulted in March/April before any other feathers are moulted. See this and last month's Monties pictures in Birding World. Also look at Sean Nixon's shots on Surfbirds from this spring of the Colne Point bird - the axillaries on his 2nd Calendar female are the only feathers that have been moulted, I think.

Nice find. Very easy decision for the NI Committee to make.

If anyone disagrees with the above, then please reference your opinions to photographs and text as I have.

Cheers,

Andy Lawson.

The only moment this subject bird looks slender winged, its the moment when it is coming over the electricity wires. That has to do with the retraction of the body.
You find that in any accelerating raptor: For a moment the bird will appear slimmer.
I found it this year in a 1st winter Hen I could follow for a long time this winter, knowing for sure it was the same bird, because it lacked one primary in its wing.
In the moment it fled for a male Marsh or was kicked out of the teritory of a male Goshawk, it appeared for a moment very agile, small and longwinged, therefore causing confusion risk with a first winter male.
(I had to sort out male and female first winter)
But it all had not much to do with reading Forsmans book.
 
Another point worth considering is the number of obvious tail bands showing on this bird, 3 obvious with a fourth adjacent to the white rump, this is another diagnostic of female Hen Harrier. The Monty's tail banding has 4 distinct tail bands with a fifth adjacent to the white rump, this bird does not.

See Flight Identification of European Raptors, Page 91, Fig 37/38B for Hen Harrier and Page 95, Fig 40B,C and D for Monty's.

nirofo.
 
nirofo said:
If you want to accept this as a Monty's that's up to you, I still think it's an Hen harrier, I see Hens regularly up here in the north of Scotland, I've worked with them for years, this bird fits like a glove!

nirofo.

So how many Monties do you get up there?
 
Marcus Lawson said:
So how many Monties do you get up there?
I've seen plenty and photographed a few throughout Europe, (including Hen harrier, Monty's and Marsh)! How many do you get to photograph where you are.

nirofo
 
Haven't posted for ages but couldn't resist contributing to a harrier thread :) I'm fortunate to see Hen and Monty's regularly here in Falsterbo, along with occasional Pallids. To me this is a classic female Montagu's and I'd have no hesitation submitting it to the relevant records committee as such.

Andy has pretty much said it all. Jizz and proportions alone rule out Hen. This bird is very slim bodied, with narrow, tapering wings and a slender head really very unlike the owl-like head and Sparrowhawk hand shown by Hen. In the video footage there's a sequence towards the end when the bird is almost dancing across the fields, so buoyant and "springy" is the flight.

It's right to be mindful of moult when assessing the wing formula but it's clear from the images that this bird is not in primary moult and that the wingtip on both wings is indeed formed by three primaries. There's also a marked tapering between arm and hand.

I've yet to see a Hen Harrier with such warm and unstreaked underparts. In any case, the underwing pattern (broad white bar reaching the body inside a narrower but still broad dark subterminal) is only shown by Monty's among European harriers.

The fine barring on the underside of the hand is perfect for Monty's and always coarser on Hen. The upperwing has already been dealt with, except to say that Hen would typically be colder grey in tone rather than the warmer brown of this Monty's. The secondary band is a Monty's field mark, as has has been said.

As Andrew says, the barred axillaries rule out Pallid (as does the patterning of the secondaries). I beg to differ on age though. The buffish wash to the underparts, weak streaking confined to the upper breast and vestiges of a neck collar are hallmarks of a second cal-year bird. The secondary pattern is more in keeping with an older immature but would in any case be better marked on a full-adult Monty's. The remnants of pale shoulder pads on the upperwings also indicate an immature bird.

It could be a third-cal but you'd expect adult-type underparts at that age. The underpart pattern suggests to me a second-cal with unusually adult-like secondaries. As with so much when it comes to harriers, secondary patterns do vary at the individual level and some are better marked than others.

Rgds

Greg
 
"As Harriers go, this bird is easy to identify"
"Very easy decision for the NI Committee to make."

Hello Andy,

I am sure the NI Records Committee are pleased you have this record sorted out for them!

Derek
 
Because this is a potentially important record, there would be no shame in sending the original video to a raptor expert. Why not send it to Forsman and see what he says? I'm sure he'd love the challenge (or easy ID, which ever way you look at it!). Also, Pierre-Andre Crochet in France knows his onions, so maybe worth tracking him down and showing him the video/images.
As a thought, experience is all relative. Even if you see Hen Harriers in Britain day in, day out, your experience is still limited to a small number of individuals present in that area. Likewise for most of us in northern Europe. We just don't see enough raptors to appreciate their variability. Even if Forsman says a dark bar across the secondaries is diagnostic of Monties, and I've never seen a Hen Harrier with a dark bar across the secondaries, i'm willing to believe they might exist.
I still think its a Monties though.
 
Well you live and learn!

Strangely though I can't make out any barring on auxilliaries on the video - also the inner secondaries appear to be almost completely dark from below, with only the faintest thin pale sub-terminal bar.

Thanks Andrew and Greg for taking the time to educate the masses.
 
Nirofo, Gerwichers8,

No, my copy of Raptors of E & ME isn't nice and clean. But I bet yours is! The clear, plastic wrapper that it comes in does come off. Try it.

Guys, I'm really sorry but you are way off! To be honest I responded to this thread as I felt sorry for you. I also felt that I had a sense of duty to do so as other European birders would have been reading the postings to this thread and laughing at us Brit birders. Blimey - how can any birder suggest that a Hen Harrier can show black bars on the secondaries on the upperwing. Have you no shame? I'm embarrassed for you.

You need to address each point that I have raised. If you do, you will find that this bird is a Monties. How many diagnostic features do you need?

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.

Next: Hand to arm ratio. You can have a Pallid or Monties with a shorter hand (in worn juvenile plumage) but never a Hen with a longer hand than arm. Again, find some evidence. Hint: you won't.

The pattern of the secondaries in the underwing - Find a photo of an immature Harrier with broad white bands on the secondaries and in return I will find rocking horse droppings.

What about the shallow 'V' in flight? Also, look at the flight shots - can you honestly say that this bird has an accipiter look about it? Do you know what accipiter means?

The pattern of the tail is variable. I'll find supporting evidence for this later and post it here.

Guys - please, please contact somebody on your regional rarity panel before you reply again. They should make you see sense (I hope!).

I must admit that now I have witnessed the quality of the postings to this forum, I can now see why other serious birders steer well clear!
 
nirofo said:
I've seen plenty and photographed a few throughout Europe, (including Hen harrier, Monty's and Marsh)! How many do you get to photograph where you are.

nirofo

Will this do you? Taken this Spring.
 

Attachments

  • Monties.jpg
    Monties.jpg
    16.7 KB · Views: 185
  • Monties3.jpg
    Monties3.jpg
    16.2 KB · Views: 192
Certainly a Pyg/Mac harrier Id say. And it looks Montys to me.
Noticeable on the video is some lovely rufous barring on the inner underwing.
Lovely bird. Flight is lovely and light. Right for Montys id say.

Pariah
 
Jane Turner said:
Thanks Andrew and Greg for taking the time to educate the masses.

First post in a blue moon and a sarcastic response straight off. I was trying to make a helpful contribution to what would be a very rare bird in Northern Ireland. Won't be bothering again.
 
sphinx79 said:
First post in a blue moon and a sarcastic response straight off. I was trying to make a helpful contribution to what would be a very rare bird in Northern Ireland. Won't be bothering again.


Greg - don't know what you mean by this - but thank you means THANK YOU!

Read again you will see I wrote...Well you live and learn - followed by thanks for taking the time to educate the masses.

I guess you have been away for a long time or you would know that sarcasm is a style I avoid, with two notable exceptions (BF contributors that I have lost patience with, and neither of these will ever be seen dead in the ID forum)
 
Last edited:
Real Grosser on my list said:
You need to address each point that I have raised. If you do, you will find that this bird is a Monties. How many diagnostic features do you need?

For a full pull I need them all or I need just one which is fresh and unique for the one species and in no extreme shared by the other. :flowers:
 
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