• 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.

4 british birds (1 Viewer)

Pic 2 shows a sylvia warbler. I thought structure and plumage details would establish that from the outset (plumage is not right for Cetti's, its in a place where Cetti's wouldn't be found unless they were hopelessly lost etc), and it is also not a Nightingale (I think most reasons why it isn't have been mentioned so I won't bother raising them again, apart from to find a Nightingale hopping around in broad daylight in bracken would be quite remarkable).

So yes, it is a sylvia warbler. It has a clear white throat, a greyish tinge to the face and head, and a bit of an eyering going on.

It is a Whitethroat.
 
dan pointon said:
Now that's finally establised ..

All that has been established IMO is that some people are sure this is a Whitethroat and others had/have some doubt and refuse to be drawn into calling an Id when they are not 100% convinced.

Perhaps you could let us know what you think the pic is in post 4 too, as some doubt over it's Id was expressed there too?
 
Notice the head shape, body shape, tail shape, bill depth and relative intensity of the rufous on the wing coverts and tail in two different Nightingales.... as well as the underpart colour etc. etc.
 

Attachments

  • bfpost.JPG
    bfpost.JPG
    16.6 KB · Views: 112
deborah4 said:
All that has been established IMO is that some people are sure this is a Whitethroat and others had/have some doubt and refuse to be drawn into calling an Id when they are not 100% convinced.

Perhaps you could let us know what you think the pic is in post 4 too, as some doubt over it's Id was expressed there too?

No real doubt that this is a (very) juv Whitethroat too. Probably looking for its mum that is frollicking in the bracken. Its a lot harder to provbe than the other one though.
 
Last edited:
I posted some links of whitethroat to go with these, to show how rufous they are! and the pic disappeared??? Should be ok now - thanks for posting your links Jane.
 

Attachments

  • nightingale cf.jpg
    nightingale cf.jpg
    53.6 KB · Views: 89
  • nightingale or female whitethroat.JPG
    nightingale or female whitethroat.JPG
    80 KB · Views: 106
  • Whitethroat1.JPG
    Whitethroat1.JPG
    92.7 KB · Views: 76
Last edited:
1 = whimbrel
2 = very clearly a wren - just look at the tail and jizz for heaven's sake! It's got a bit of sun glare on it, that's all.
3 = fledgling whitethroat
4 = juv chiffchaff
 
Poecile said:
2 = very clearly a wren - just look at the tail and jizz for heaven's sake! It's got a bit of sun glare on it, that's all.


I think the shaded side of the bird (out of the sun glare) would look more like a wren (super, barring etc), clearly(?) a more elongated bird than the dumpy ol' wren. .

If no.2 could be Wren, Nightingale, Whitethroat or a Cetti's, why not a Reed Warbler? (warm brown above, pale buffy below, can't see any white outer tail feathers (for whitethroat)) ok, not ideal habitat I know!

no.5 ok prob a Spot Fly, but does look long-tailed, dark-chinned, and with a curved bill!
 
Last edited:
dantheman said:
I think the shaded side of the bird (out of the sun glare) would look more like a wren (super, barring etc), clearly(?) a more elongated bird than the dumpy ol' wren. .

If no.2 could be Wren, Nightingale, Whitethroat or a Cetti's, why not a Reed Warbler? (warm brown above, pale buffy below, can't see any white outer tail feathers (for whitethroat)) ok, not ideal habitat I know!

no.5 ok prob a Spot Fly, but does look long-tailed, dark-chinned, and with a curved bill!


It's probably a juv, which can be much paler than ads. It just screams wren at me, I'm sorry.

No. 5 similarly shouts Spot Fly at me.

I think when people are dealing with distant, funny-angled, blurred, unhelpfully-lit and colour-imbalanced digital images which are highly pixelated on enlargement, they should just go with a gut feeling and/or the most likely common species and forget about bill shapes and other fine details, as the images do not stand up to that level of scrutiny.
 
Jane Turner said:
2 is a female Whitethroat and the Phyllosc is a Chiffchaff

Reasons why Whitethroat and not Nightingale
1. Eye crescents
2. Greyish ear coverts
3.White throat with sharp demarcation to cream upper breast
4. No grey/brownish breast
5. Wing coverts and tertials the most rusty part of the bird.

Also its very slim

Except the tail's completely wrong....way too rufous and no hint of white at all, and probably way too short if angle was better.
 
I reckon that both 2 and 3 are juv whitethroat.

The bird in 2 is simply to big for a wren and the wrong body shape- tail length means nothing in just-fledged birds anyway and ditto for tail markings - so that should not be a deciding criterion in this discussion- if you think that is could be a Juv. There is enough info as describes by Jane et al for a good whitethroat

Also if you have a look at the thickness of the Tarsi- that is just too thick for a wren and the wrong shape totally.

Number 2 for me at least cannot be a cetti's- as it is the wrong shape and colouring and the same for the nightingale too.

Number 3 has been dealt with very well also and the only conclusion for me is juv whitethroat too
 
J Moss said:
I vote Lesser Whitethroat for 3, although its v. young, so I cant be 100%

That crossed my mind too, but it the grey doesn't look cool enough and there's no contrast at all in the cheek (lesser usually shows at least a bit of contrast), the lores aren't dark enough and there's too much colour on the breast. That's the bird I'm least sure about though, between common and lesser, what with it being such a young bird.
 
iainhawk said:
I reckon that both 2 and 3 are juv whitethroat.

The bird in 2 is simply to big for a wren and the wrong body shape- tail length means nothing in just-fledged birds anyway and ditto for tail markings - so that should not be a deciding criterion in this discussion- if you think that is could be a Juv. There is enough info as describes by Jane et al for a good whitethroat

Also if you have a look at the thickness of the Tarsi- that is just too thick for a wren and the wrong shape totally.

What are you using for a size reference?! Aside from the bracken, there's nothing to say it's a 10cm wren or a 14cm whitethroat in that pic.

Jane ignores the tail in her critque, which is completely wrong for whitethroat, which have darker tails. Even if the white outer tail feathers were obscurred in the pic, it's way too ginger and does not contrast with the rest of the upperparts. It would contrast strongly with the rufous wings but, if anything, it's even more rufous!

Juv wrens are quite fleshy in the leg for the first few weeks, as the scales have not hardened, and the tarsi are slightly thicker than for adults. This is true of all birds - juv great tits even take a larger ring size than adults. The legs look perfect in length, legginess and colour for a juv wren.
 
Thanks for the lesson on Tarsi! Next time you have a wren in the hand have a look at its legs!

The reference for size, is of course the bracken fronds.

I was just suggesting that you should not use tail length as a diagnostic above everything else when the photo in question shows a bird substantially larger than a wren.
 
iainhawk said:
Thanks for the lesson on Tarsi! Next time you have a wren in the hand have a look at its legs!

The reference for size, is of course the bracken fronds.

I was just suggesting that you should not use tail length as a diagnostic above everything else when the photo in question shows a bird substantially larger than a wren.

I've had enough wrens in the hand to know about their tarsi, believe me! And that includes fledglings and pulli. They darken and harden with age after fledging.

Seeing as bracken fronds are about as variable as they come, ranging massively in size depending on age etc, I don't think you can really use them as a ruler to measure a bird at 3/4 angle on a poor-quality picture at unknown distance, especially when trying to determine a difference of about 4cm in a bird of unknown age and therefore with an unknown tail length.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 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