• 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.

Not another willowchiff (1 Viewer)

rafo1

Well-known member
So, I've read all the threads, looked at all the pictures and I'm still no closer to deciding which this is - Willow or Chiffchaff. We had it in hand to untangle and release it but it didn't make a sound so no clues there! It looks like a juvenile and as both types are in passage here at the moment........... :h?:
 

Attachments

  • Warbler ID.jpg
    Warbler ID.jpg
    173.1 KB · Views: 311
It go for Willow Warbler on probability, though it does have more than an element of Spanish Chiff to it!

The Primary projection is too long for a standard Chiff
 
Jane Turner said:
It go for Willow Warbler on probability, though it does have more than an element of Spanish Chiff to it!

The Primary projection is too long for a standard Chiff

Do these help? the forms Abientinus and tristis occur here.
 

Attachments

  • Warbler ID 2.jpg
    Warbler ID 2.jpg
    148.8 KB · Views: 246
  • Warbler ID 3.jpg
    Warbler ID 3.jpg
    164.1 KB · Views: 239
I agree on primaries.... the dark rear lores and big eye ring... and black legs are a little out of the norm though... I had a go and thoughtI could see/imagine and 6th primary emargination... which would mke it not WW though... will try again tomorrow :)

That's why I raised the spectre of Iberian Chiffer..... :)... in jest... but had it been caught in Sapin... not Oman... you'd be thinking!
 
Last edited:
Wood Warbler crossed my mind at the beginning but I'm pretty sure it isn't one. Although the primary projection appears to be longer than that of a normal chiff it's still not long enough for that of a wood warbler which tends to be greater than or equal to the length of the tertials. Also, I would expect Wood W to have much whiter underparts which on this bird appear to be buff/off white, more in keeping with chiffwillow.
Finally there is a lack of the obvious lemon colour on the breast, throat and earcoverts synonomous with Wood Warbler. Willow and chiffs are tricky and as we have seen recently on various threads but given the length of primary projection, I think it is the most consistant feature to go on? Variation in plumage, leg colour etc.. has caught out even the best birders before. I stick by Willow but............ (you never know ;) )
 
yep it's pretty difficult from one photo even to judge colour...the green does look very bright but this might just be from the reproduction of the photo.
I thought the tail looked quite short due to the long primaries which fitted Wood Wabrler but agree it doesn't look white enough and though the breast isn't clearly visible doesn't seem too much yellow.
I certainly don't think it's a Chiff.

JP
 
jpoyner said:
yep it's pretty difficult from one photo even to judge colour...the green does look very bright but this might just be from the reproduction of the photo.
I thought the tail looked quite short due to the long primaries which fitted Wood Wabrler but agree it doesn't look white enough and though the breast isn't clearly visible doesn't seem too much yellow.
I certainly don't think it's a Chiff.

JP

Back again, sorry about that but time difference and work get in the way of pleasure. It must be the reproduction of the photos, different systems, monitors etc; it was noticeably very yellow and not green, especially under the wing inboard leading edges and roots! (sorry about the non technical terms, I'm an aircraft engineer); the lighting inside the building was also screwed up as well, what with flourescent strip lights, camera flash and the guy holding the bird was wearing a 'Persil white' Dish-dasha. Last reasonable photo attached. :cool:
 

Attachments

  • Warbler ID 4.jpg
    Warbler ID 4.jpg
    190.9 KB · Views: 225
It has to be a Willow, for all the reasons mentioned before really. Willows have such a variation of colour as well, that even some guys Persil-white (can you buy Persil in Oman?) dish-dasha (whatever that is) wouldn't alter the ID process too much I wouldn't think.
 
tom mckinney said:
Obviously its difficult to say from the pics, but why not some asian phylloscs?

Sulphur Bellied?????
Tickells Leaf?????

Sulphur-breasted look like bright Pallas' with a stripier head.
Tickell's Leaf is a nearer match, but the upperparts are paler and the breast is very yellow, kind of Wood Warblery. Having said that, if you have a tree-full of Leafies in front of you, IDing half properly is a result! Plus, would they be in Oman?
 
Sulphur Bellied not Breasted.

Also Smoky Warbler may fit the bill. Why would it be unreasonable to get one of these in Oman as a vagrant?

I don't have a clue what it is, by the way, just trying to keep things going!
 
mikebirdart said:
Sulphur-breasted look like bright Pallas' with a stripier head.
Tickell's Leaf is a nearer match, but the upperparts are paler and the breast is very yellow, kind of Wood Warblery. Having said that, if you have a tree-full of Leafies in front of you, IDing half properly is a result! Plus, would they be in Oman?

Righty, I think I'll stick with Willow then, according to the latest Oman bird list there have been no Sulpur bellied or Tickell's................yet but one can live and hope.
Mike, we do have persil over its one of the better buys, and a dishdasha is the long flowing robe that the Omani men wear. :bounce:
 

Attachments

  • arab_man_looking_around_md_clr.gif
    arab_man_looking_around_md_clr.gif
    20.9 KB · Views: 186
I still haven't got the dividers out... but it is possible to frimly do the wing formula on this bird. I believe its a Willow Warbler... and Spanish Chiffer is a better explanation of the features than Sulphur-bellied!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 20 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