[cuckooroller]

Folks,

I have an idea of what this is but would like to hear other voices. The image is posted with permission of the photographer. Purposely cropped to eliminate indication of specific location.

I would appreciate any help that eliminate possible lingering doubts as to it's true identity.

The header should read Australasian and not Australian. This photo was not taken in Australia.

[Andrew Rowlands]

From the books I have here Steve, it's similar to New Zealand or Collared (Mangrove); I have a feeling it's neither of those - time to think of investing in another Field Guide....

Andy.

[M Cowming]

Hi Steve,

Looks to be a Sacred Kingfisher to me. If it is, this species is the second most widespread Kingfisher in Australia next to the Red-backed Kingfisher. I know the photo wasn't taken in Australia but according to Pizzey & Knight this species also winters in PNG and Indonesia. It is also resident in Indonesia.
Not to mention...I saw one while I spent a year in Australia. My memory isn't good enough to compare that bird to this one but Sacred Kingfisher would my best guess.

Regards,

[MikeMules]

If it was taken in Australia, I wouldn't even stop to think: it's a Sacred Kingfisher. However, I don't know if there are other, very similar species in PNG or other places. But since the Sacred's found in Indonesia and PNG (and Norfolk and Lord Howe Islands, among others), I'll plump for that.

The features I used to point to Sacred were: buff spot in front of eye, indeterminate streaking through greeny crown, greeny upperparts, buff flanks, buff markings on breast, and lighter colouring on lower mandible (bill not massive enough for Collared Kingfisher either).

So, where was it from?

[Taco]

Does look like a Sacred to me....but not familiar with some others that are found in Australasia

[Edward woodwood]

Hi Steve

had a quick look

maybe a little Rufousy underneath, too greenish and small-billed for Collared? Not entirely sure as they aren't as easy across parts of their ranges as some of the regional field guides might infer. I know from your PM that it is an unusual record for the area where the photo was taken if it is a Sacred but it does look like one. However, Collared is a very variable bird and i don't have experience of them in Philippies. Wouldn't convince me of a Collared if it were Indonesia or Australia.....

[Nancy]

My guess is subspecies Vangans of the Sacred Kingfisher found in New Zealand

[cuckooroller]

Folks,
Here is another view of the same bird. Is anyone interested in trying to convince me that this is not some immature form of White-collared Kingfisher? The reason that I have been playing coy on this is that there are no published and documented records of the occurence of Todirhamphus s. sanctus (Sacred Kingfisher) in the Philippines. Geographically, Samal Island is just off the extreme southcentral coast of Mindanao and therefore, very close to the known range of Sacred Kingfisher, that could be expected sooner or later to turn up in the Philippines. As can be seen from the photos we are talking about a forest habitat.

[M Cowming]

Hi Steve,

Again, after consulting Pizzey and Knight, I'd still stick with Sacred Kingfisher despite the fact that this bird could be a "first" for the area in which the photo was taken.

A couple of points of note are

a) although there is nothing in the photo for direct comparison, the bird does appear to be on the small side which would fit with Sacred in comprison to Collared. Relative sizes of both birds are 20-23cm and 24-29cm respectively. Granted, this opinion of mine is open for debate due to the reason already stated.

b) P & K also describe immature Collared Kingfishers as being "duller and scalloped", both features I fail to see in these photos.

c) The bird appears to have generous amounts of "buff" along the flanks, on the nape and before the eye, all consistant with Sacred Kingfisher. P&K never mentions "buff" at any stage in relation to Collared Kingfisher, immature or adult. In fact, the "white areas" on this species are just that, white.

d) Finally, as regards habitat choice, Sacred Kingfishers are known to frequent "open forests/woodland". This habitat choice is not mentioned regarding Collared Kingfisher.

I understand your reluctance to commit to a species, but, being one that hates to sit on the fence in general, I think it's a Sacred Kingfisher.

Hope this helps,

Best Regards,

[Rasmus Boegh]

Well, Steve and I had already exchanged comments on this one before the question was raised here on birdforum. - He does know my position. I basically have one question: Do pre-ad. Collared Kingfishers (from SE Asia-Indonesia region, not the varous Pacific Island forms) ever have this hue on the upperparts/cap and secondly, do they ever have buffy lores? The problem is that juvenile Collared are buffy below, with vague dark edging to the chest-feathers. Actually, I can see a dark shadowing on the chest of the bird in this thread. Therefore, underparts are not really useful in this case, judging from those it could be either a Sacred or an imm. Collared. This is what leads me to the upperparts. I have seen quite a few of both species, but not enough to have noted exact hues and if juv. Collared ever show a buff eye-brow. Any takers? Among others, there must be a bunch of Australian members with experiance with Sacred...

[Edward woodwood]

Hi Rasmus

I've seen a fair few Collared in Indonesia and a few Sacred and both in Australia. Collared are very very variable across their range and the birds in Philippines could well be very different form those in Aus/NZ field guides. The colour tone as you mention is not really correct for Collared but i don't know ho much to trust a photo as most Collareds/Sacreds I've seen have been in an open bright environment not in the greenish light of a forest.....

[banyantree]

I don't have much experience of Sacred Kingfisher but I've seen a lot of Collared Kingfishers in SE Asia including the Philippines and if I'd seen this bird I would never have questioned its being anything other than Collared. I think that you need more than its being in forest to suggest that it is something other than the common local species - from my experience in the Philippines Collared Kingfisher is quite capable of penetrating forest on small islands where other kingfishers are absent.

Mike

[Edward woodwood]

I wasn't referring to locality having any effect on the veracity of the record - just how locality can change tone of upperparts etc.....

[Rasmus Boegh]

Originally Posted by Tim Allwood

Collared are very very variable across their range and the birds in Philippines could well be very different form those in Aus/NZ field guides.

Hi Tim,

Yes, I am very well aware of the massive variation found in the Collared. This was why I specifically asked about individuals from the SE Asia-Indonesian region, as in general they are very similar. Normally, individuals from the Philippines (ssp. collaris) are a clear white below, but do note my previous comments on juveniles. However, I still don't have any info pointing towards the eye-brow/lores of Collared ever being buff (again, I am talking about populations in SE Asia-Indonesia; some races on Pacific Islands have clear buffy eye-brows/lores even as adults). Australian Collared are quite similar to individuals from the SE Asian-indonesian region, but have significantly darker upperparts.

So, I can ask very specifically:

1) Have anyone ever seen a Collared from the SE Asia-Indonesian region with buff eye-brow/lores?
2) If you have experiance with Sacred, does this individual look like the individuals you have seen (esp. hue of back, cap & eye-brow)? Any Sacred on the Philippines would almost certainly belong to the migrant nominate also found throughout much of Australia.

[cuckooroller]

The question regarding the buff lores is well taken. I have communicated with Des Allen about this point and he has said that he has seen a few juveniles in Phils. sporting buff lores but in spite of the literature admitting the possibility of a buff wash on the chest or elsewhere on the underparts, he says that he has not seen that. Other than these points one of the things that gives me pause is that I have seen quite a few T. chloris collaris including immature forms and I have yet to see any photo where a Philippine collaris does not have a noticeable change to dark blue immediately aborally to the posterior eye canthus. The bird in these two photos, of whatever species and developmental stage it is, demonstrate a very wide and unbroken and only black stripe from the bill insertion to the nuchal region. Here it is not a question of coming down by instinct on one side or the other of the fence. It may not be possible from these two photos to give an unequivocal determination of the exact identity of this bird. Too little is known of the individual age-related morphological changes in developing T. chloris collaris. These pics may just have to be put into a drawer until such time as better documentation in this sense might warrant their being pulled out again and looked at. I am satisfied that the bird is Sacred Kingfisher, but that is just not enough to start to thinking about writing it up and presenting it as such in the literature. Thanks to everyone for their comments.

[Tannin]

Thank you Steve for a very interesting thread. Much to ponder here. Like you, I'd lean in the Sacred direction - largely because it seems to be so small - but photographs can be deceptive, and I'm not sure that I've seen enough kingfishers to justify having an opinion in any case. But an enjoyable thread just the same.