Greater Scaup or Tufted Duck, Gloucestershire UK (1 Viewer)

[payaminotom]

Hi all. Looking through some old records and found an observation that gave me pause. This grainy photo is a bird I originally identified as female Greater Scaup last year in Late July. I have had a lot of encounters with Scaup over the years, and for me the jizz of this bird was very scauplike, chunky, round head, extensive white on face... and while this photo does not show it, I attempted to analyse the bill and judged it to be wide with the pure black to be restricted to the tip. However, coming across this photo again, I'm not quite sure, and while I do trust my initial judgement, I am definitely not immune from mistakes and if presented with this photo as is, I would struggle to say between Scaup and Tufted Duck. I know it's very terrible quality, but if anyone here has any input on the ID of this bird I'd be super grateful thanks!

 

[MacNara]

For me it could be either. Personally I'd go for Tufted. But it doesn't matter.

I have now been on this forum for over fifteen years. I've had a lot of help, and sometimes given help.

You say you have had 'lots of encounters with [Greater] Scaup' over the years, and presumably also with Tufted Duck. So it's not a lifer or something similar for you.

So why are you posting this very poor photo (No Offence™) for an ID for a bird you would have seen often anyway whichever way the ID went?

A genuine question; I can't work out the psychology of this. I would simply have binned this photo. Do you (and there are quite a few others like you) try to identify every poor, dark, distant photo you take, even if you know that whatever the answer is it will be a bird you have seen many times already and have proper photos of?

 

[LowellMills]

I would be happy with scaup on that view, good spot! Structurally just isn't right for tufted duck but mainly the white blaze looks sufficiently extensive and 'hard' to rule out the female tufties carrying the limited blaze. All the best!

 

[payaminotom]

So why are you posting this very poor photo (No Offence™) for an ID for a bird you would have seen often anyway whichever way the ID went?

Because I am interested? I like to hear opinions from others? To get tips on future IDs and to learn more about birds? There are many reasons, I just like birds. Some people on this website forget that not everyone has the luxury to be able to afford a flashy camera. If there isn't a consensus it's just as interesting to me as if it was confirmed to be either species.

A genuine question; I can't work out the psychology of this. I would simply have binned this photo. Do you (and there are quite a few others like you) try to identify every poor, dark, distant photo you take, even if you know that whatever the answer is it will be a bird you have seen many times already and have proper photos of?

I tried to identify the bird in real life, not from the photo. I simply came across this photo and thought "hmmm, I wonder what the kind folk of BirdForum might think of this?"! Does there have to be some greater justification?

 

[payaminotom]

I would be happy with scaup on that view, good spot! Structurally just isn't right for tufted duck but mainly the white blaze looks sufficiently extensive and 'hard' to rule out the female tufties carrying the limited blaze. All the best!

Thanks @LowellMills ! Personally I've seen the white blaze being very extensive on Tufted Duck also, but the proportions and size are what persuaded me in the field. I'm learning more and more each year and so it's fun to look back on previous observations and reanalyse!

 

[Butty]

A genuine question; I can't work out the psychology of this.

I think your inability to understand it is a question for you to wrestle with - not the OP. Additionally bemusing is the gratuitous rudeness of the quizzing - especially given your past attacks on others for (what you have chosen to perceive as) their rudeness. Remarkable really.

Does there have to be some greater justification?

No.

 

[Steve Lister]

Ignoring any psychology or anything like that, this bird has the head silhouette of a Tufted Duck, nothing like a Scaup.

 

[THE_FERN]

Good reason to want to id everything one sees is simply conscientious recording. It's essential for proper science (i.e. instead of whatever form of listing one's pursuing). Of course, there's no requirement that one do proper science. One might just want to double-check one's skills or record seasonal abundance patterns. So admit I'm surprised at @MacNara 's response.

 

[payaminotom]

Ignoring any psychology or anything like that, this bird has the head silhouette of a Tufted Duck, nothing like a Scaup.

Cheers Steve! I admit I had a feeling I'd made a blunder when I seen the photo... I'm glad I posted this here so I could get these helpful insights, despite what some others may think of that!

Now can anyone direct me to the forum for psychological assessment?? 🤣

 

[MacNara]

Hi Payaminotom:

Obviously, it's not my forum, and anyone can post any question and photo they like and if people are williing to answer, then that's fine.

Please note: I didn't simply make a gratuitous comment about your rationality.

I took the trouble to modify your photo to bring out more information, as I sometimes do, and as I regularly encourage posters to do for themselves before posting. Despite your (perfectly reasonable) comment that "not everyone has the luxury to be able to afford a flashy camera," there was still information to be gained from this adjustment (my photo in post #2). I also gave an ID, saying that for me it was a Tufted Duck, which appears to be the agreed ID judging from Steve Lister's post #7 and the likes it got. Admittedly, your post was only a couple of hours old when I replied, but it was already slipping behind other later posts which had been answered and was dropping towards page two (my post was your first answer), so I answered partly to make sure that it would have an answer since no-one else had done so. If your original ID of Scaup had been correct in my opinion, then I probably wouldn't have posted at all.

So: before I made my genuine enquiry about why you posted this, I treated your post with respect by giving it my best attention and the fullest answer I could.

But I was genuinely interested in why you took this one particular photo from a year ago and asked for an ID. You specifically said that both possibilities are not new to you; and they are not rare. In my time, I have posted equally low-quality photos, but when I did it was always the case that the answer might be a lifer or location lifer for me (especially after trips to Africa).

If you kept this photo from a year ago, then I surmise you have possibly many other equally unclear photos from that time, and I wondered why you chose this one.

So I thought maybe you are one of those people who takes complete lists on a daily basis - I don't at all, and therefore some people consider me not a 'real birder' for this reason - but I only started birding after fifty, and it grew from just doing it for the personal enjoyment of nature on daily walks to something more time-consuming, though not obsessive. Or do you have some other reason?

My post was just a query; poorly expressed perhaps, but just that.

On Saturday, when I posted, my wife and I were on day six of isolation at home, having finally got covid-19 after three successful avoidance years. So although I probably replied because your question seemed to be on the verge of isolation itself, my questions about your reasoning may have arisen out of boredom, and I would not have asked them if my week had been more fun.

(Thank you for asking: Covid (XBB variant here in Japan) is not fun, but not as bad as feared (four vaccinations?). My wife, having made preparations, managed to do her quite difficult and important job via Skype from home. She's back at work today. I still have a slight headache which won't go away, but temperatures having got up to 39ºc are now back in the normal range.)