Nick Rossiter
Well-known member
Let's give Greg a chance to reply.
-
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.
"Northumberland Honey Buzzard" on video (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter John Cantelo
- Start date
martin kitching
Obsessed seawatcher
Aquila said:
Aquila
What Nick said was 'complete experience of the actual birds'. This means having watched the actual birds in the field rather than just looking at the photographs not a complete experience of Honey Buzzard. If people are so intent on sniping that they don't bother reading (or maybe simply don't understand) what is written then we are never going to get anywhere with this one.
martin kitching
martin kitching
Obsessed seawatcher
Hi all
I've deliberately stayed out of this debate for a long time but finally feel that there are a number of points that I wish to make, including some which I consider add to the debate;
1) The quality of many of the photos, and the video, on Nick's website is poor and in many cases definite ID is not possible. I'm sure that Nick will agree with this. As I know Nick well I will not comment further on the images on his site - everything I have to say about them I have already said privately to Nick. I have been saddened by the often personal attacks that have been aired in this forum, on both sides of the debate. Much of what has been written would have been far better in a PM, or not said at all. That an individual who has written several offensive comments about other members of the forum is now a staff member only serves to lessen the value of BirdForum.
2) Positions have become so entrenched that backing down now seems unlikely from any quarter so the continuous merry-go-round of this debate should be seen, by any sensible individual, as pointless
3) The suggestion by Stoned Curlew that Nick is the only person to find breeding HB and Hobby in Northumberland is incorrect. At least three fieldworkers in the county are studying those species. As our studies are in their infancy the current debate (which within Northumberland itself is little short of hysteria) is benefiting nobody, least of all the birds. Beyond this I don't think it is appropriate to reveal any other information.
4) Nick's website is the public face of Nick's ideas about HB and Hobby in Northumberland, and it is debatable whether it is a necessary public face anyway. Each individual can make up their own mind about whether they believe a) some, b) all or c) none of it.
5) Raptor ID is, occasionally, very difficult. Hobbies do sometimes look like Peregrines - anyone who does not believe this probably hasn't looked at enough Hobbies. At Falsterbo in August of this year I was birding with another English birder (with many more years of raptor study than myself and a proven track-record of finding rare raptors) and he made exactly this point about Hobbies and Peregrines. I'm not going to name him as that would be unfair but suffice it to say that Greg McIvor is aware of his field ability and he is very well respected. The two juvenile Hobbies I found at Falsterbo this year (I think the first of the Autumn) were only five minutes after watching a soaring Peregrine but I still found it necessary to think about which species they actually were - the differences are not always clear-cut. The other thing I learned at Falsterbo was that despite having seen hundreds of CB, and a few dozen HB, in Britain seperation of the two is not always simple. Some of the published literature even contradicts what is shown in accompanying photographs, and sometimes contradicts what you see in the field, and even contradicts ID features described by some supposed experts on this forum! Excellent views in good lighting conditions make it much easier but I think we all need to be realistic about our observations.
5) Finally, and uneasily in my role as would-be diplomat, I hope that we can just let this debate die a peaceful death and regain sight of what actually matters.
best wishes
martin kitching
I've deliberately stayed out of this debate for a long time but finally feel that there are a number of points that I wish to make, including some which I consider add to the debate;
1) The quality of many of the photos, and the video, on Nick's website is poor and in many cases definite ID is not possible. I'm sure that Nick will agree with this. As I know Nick well I will not comment further on the images on his site - everything I have to say about them I have already said privately to Nick. I have been saddened by the often personal attacks that have been aired in this forum, on both sides of the debate. Much of what has been written would have been far better in a PM, or not said at all. That an individual who has written several offensive comments about other members of the forum is now a staff member only serves to lessen the value of BirdForum.
2) Positions have become so entrenched that backing down now seems unlikely from any quarter so the continuous merry-go-round of this debate should be seen, by any sensible individual, as pointless
3) The suggestion by Stoned Curlew that Nick is the only person to find breeding HB and Hobby in Northumberland is incorrect. At least three fieldworkers in the county are studying those species. As our studies are in their infancy the current debate (which within Northumberland itself is little short of hysteria) is benefiting nobody, least of all the birds. Beyond this I don't think it is appropriate to reveal any other information.
4) Nick's website is the public face of Nick's ideas about HB and Hobby in Northumberland, and it is debatable whether it is a necessary public face anyway. Each individual can make up their own mind about whether they believe a) some, b) all or c) none of it.
5) Raptor ID is, occasionally, very difficult. Hobbies do sometimes look like Peregrines - anyone who does not believe this probably hasn't looked at enough Hobbies. At Falsterbo in August of this year I was birding with another English birder (with many more years of raptor study than myself and a proven track-record of finding rare raptors) and he made exactly this point about Hobbies and Peregrines. I'm not going to name him as that would be unfair but suffice it to say that Greg McIvor is aware of his field ability and he is very well respected. The two juvenile Hobbies I found at Falsterbo this year (I think the first of the Autumn) were only five minutes after watching a soaring Peregrine but I still found it necessary to think about which species they actually were - the differences are not always clear-cut. The other thing I learned at Falsterbo was that despite having seen hundreds of CB, and a few dozen HB, in Britain seperation of the two is not always simple. Some of the published literature even contradicts what is shown in accompanying photographs, and sometimes contradicts what you see in the field, and even contradicts ID features described by some supposed experts on this forum! Excellent views in good lighting conditions make it much easier but I think we all need to be realistic about our observations.
5) Finally, and uneasily in my role as would-be diplomat, I hope that we can just let this debate die a peaceful death and regain sight of what actually matters.
best wishes
martin kitching
Edward woodwood
Member
Hi Martin
I don't think it's all that reasonable that you say some of the pix are not identifiable and hint that they might be HB, and then go on to say let's stop 'debating' it. I too have tried to stay out of this until it resurfaced recently.
It would be easier if you stated which of the birds on the website you consider to be HB....or at best unidentifiable
- you'll be a better judge than Dick Forsmann!
Maybe it would be more politic to accept the true id of the birds on the website while also acknowledging the presence of breeding HB and Hobby in your county, then we could move on - although some pix of the birds involved next year would add a touch of certainty
all the best
Tim
I don't think it's all that reasonable that you say some of the pix are not identifiable and hint that they might be HB, and then go on to say let's stop 'debating' it. I too have tried to stay out of this until it resurfaced recently.
It would be easier if you stated which of the birds on the website you consider to be HB....or at best unidentifiable
- you'll be a better judge than Dick Forsmann!Maybe it would be more politic to accept the true id of the birds on the website while also acknowledging the presence of breeding HB and Hobby in your county, then we could move on - although some pix of the birds involved next year would add a touch of certainty
all the best
Tim
steve_nova
Well-known member
Can no one shoot this damn bird and get a positive id?..........er, I'll get my coat.
Seems to me this is three pages of twaddle, more about a few people bitching at one another than adding anything informative about birds. The only bit of information I have learnt is a few breeding localities for this (I presume) schedule one species ... at least two approximate areas have been mentioned.
Great job this thread is doing ...
Great job this thread is doing ...
Edward woodwood
Member
three pages of twaddle!
you should see the original thread....or maybe not Jos!
you should see the original thread....or maybe not Jos!
There's more?! Ah shucks, thanks Tim, but I'll perhaps skip on that one!
Rob Smallwood
Well-known member
Wise words I'd say.
But there will always be those who disagree!
Grampy Bustard
Well-known member
Nothing personal...
Nick
As there are so many contentious photos which do little to prove what you are claiming, why not give the website a rest and try and at least get some irrefutable evidence with decent pictures to prove your point.
By keeping this site going, it is doing nothing but giving rise to bad feeling and undermining reputations, as anyone who insists on putting their views so blatently in the public eye, is a target for dissentors.
Get yourself a decent camera.
Nick
As there are so many contentious photos which do little to prove what you are claiming, why not give the website a rest and try and at least get some irrefutable evidence with decent pictures to prove your point.
By keeping this site going, it is doing nothing but giving rise to bad feeling and undermining reputations, as anyone who insists on putting their views so blatently in the public eye, is a target for dissentors.
Get yourself a decent camera.
I'd be the first to recommend a good dose of humility when it comes to identifying raptors in flight. It can be a tricky! As with most birding, reliability correlates closely to experience. I agree that in some cases - usually at distance - Hobby can resemble Peregrine and vice versa. A female (i.e. large) Hobby in active flight, flying away from the observer or at an angle could well be taken for a Peregrine or at least create doubt in the observer's mind. But there shouldn't be any real problem given views of reasonable length and distance. If the bird turns to circle, soar or hunt the differences between the two species should be readily apparent.
Separating adult Honey Buzzards from other buzzard ssp should not be problematic unless viewing conditions are difficult. However, juvenile Honey Buzzards need to be treated with greater care since they are much more similar to Common, with among other things shorter tails and much more darkly barred underparts than adults. They can certainly be confused with Commons - especially juvenile Commons, which can look slimmer and less chunky than adults - by the unwary. Even so, with experience they can be picked out surprisingly quickly among groups of Commons on jizz if not on plumage.
On to Nick's video and pictures. There are clearly Honey Buzzards among his stock of pictures, e.g. the Liege and Tampere birds. Then there are many images that are simply too fuzzy, distant or whatever to permit a safe ID. But I have to say that those that conjure up a CB-feel outnumber those that conjure up a HB-feel.
Equally, there are some images that are labelled as HBs that are demonstrably CB, e.g. Staufen bird nr 8. Nick, you asked why - so here goes.
Tail barring, remiges barring and underbody pattern all exclude HB. The tail barring, with a diffuse, broad subterminal band and very fine barring extending to vent excludes HB, which shows thicker, more widely spaced bars inside the subterminal plus two clearly set off bars on the innertail. The remige barring is too narrow and on too dusky a background even for juv. HB. The underbody pattern, with a pale bar on the chest extending onto the coverts is classical for Common and in my experience never shown by HB.
On the video, plumage details can't really be seen but my instant reaction on seeing the first few seconds was Common. Of course jizz is highly subjective, but I've seen very many thousands of HBs, including numerous birds on territory, and have never once see them raise their wings above the horizontal except during their spectacular wing-clapping display flight. The feel of the bird - compact, broad-winged, laboured flapping - cries Common.
As to the Hobbies, I think Nick also asked for clarification and I'll simply say that IMHO some of the images show Peregrines. Then there are others I wouldn't be able to confidently ID Hobby from.
For example, Kirkhaugh 19 August photos 3 and 4 depict (to my eye) a Peregrine. Body is barrel-chested and lacking the sleekness of Hobby; body looks heavy, not streamlined and light as in Hobby; head too big and heavy; wings too broad-based and too sharply tapering at arm/hand for Hobby (which shows proportionately slimmer and straighter-edged wings). The real giveaway is the tail, which is too broad at the base for any Hobby. A Hobby's tail would invariably be pinched in where it joins the body (some of Nick's pictures of other falcons do show this detail) whereas Peregrine is more similar to Gyr in that the tail appears to extend seamlessly from the vent region. To my eye, jizz of the Kirkhaugh bird is actually more reminiscent of Gyr than Hobby!
Happy raptor-watching!
Greg
Separating adult Honey Buzzards from other buzzard ssp should not be problematic unless viewing conditions are difficult. However, juvenile Honey Buzzards need to be treated with greater care since they are much more similar to Common, with among other things shorter tails and much more darkly barred underparts than adults. They can certainly be confused with Commons - especially juvenile Commons, which can look slimmer and less chunky than adults - by the unwary. Even so, with experience they can be picked out surprisingly quickly among groups of Commons on jizz if not on plumage.
On to Nick's video and pictures. There are clearly Honey Buzzards among his stock of pictures, e.g. the Liege and Tampere birds. Then there are many images that are simply too fuzzy, distant or whatever to permit a safe ID. But I have to say that those that conjure up a CB-feel outnumber those that conjure up a HB-feel.
Equally, there are some images that are labelled as HBs that are demonstrably CB, e.g. Staufen bird nr 8. Nick, you asked why - so here goes.
Tail barring, remiges barring and underbody pattern all exclude HB. The tail barring, with a diffuse, broad subterminal band and very fine barring extending to vent excludes HB, which shows thicker, more widely spaced bars inside the subterminal plus two clearly set off bars on the innertail. The remige barring is too narrow and on too dusky a background even for juv. HB. The underbody pattern, with a pale bar on the chest extending onto the coverts is classical for Common and in my experience never shown by HB.
On the video, plumage details can't really be seen but my instant reaction on seeing the first few seconds was Common. Of course jizz is highly subjective, but I've seen very many thousands of HBs, including numerous birds on territory, and have never once see them raise their wings above the horizontal except during their spectacular wing-clapping display flight. The feel of the bird - compact, broad-winged, laboured flapping - cries Common.
As to the Hobbies, I think Nick also asked for clarification and I'll simply say that IMHO some of the images show Peregrines. Then there are others I wouldn't be able to confidently ID Hobby from.
For example, Kirkhaugh 19 August photos 3 and 4 depict (to my eye) a Peregrine. Body is barrel-chested and lacking the sleekness of Hobby; body looks heavy, not streamlined and light as in Hobby; head too big and heavy; wings too broad-based and too sharply tapering at arm/hand for Hobby (which shows proportionately slimmer and straighter-edged wings). The real giveaway is the tail, which is too broad at the base for any Hobby. A Hobby's tail would invariably be pinched in where it joins the body (some of Nick's pictures of other falcons do show this detail) whereas Peregrine is more similar to Gyr in that the tail appears to extend seamlessly from the vent region. To my eye, jizz of the Kirkhaugh bird is actually more reminiscent of Gyr than Hobby!
Happy raptor-watching!
Greg
Nick Rossiter
Well-known member
sphinx79 said:
Agreed so far! Thanks for your comments, Greg.
The separation of HB from CB in breeding areas in Britain IMHO, and that of Steve Roberts, is complicated by poor under-lighting over dense woods and pastures, making plumage features difficult to see. You can see (and hear) what Steve Roberts says on the page:
http://www.nrossiter.supanet.com/hb/plumage.html
If you want to get nice photos of HB, go to a migration point with sand or bare rocks underneath the birds. HB also IMHO show considerable weight variation so that the apparent weight of the bird should be treated with caution as an id feature (heavy does not necessarily mean CB). See below.
The first part of the id section deals with HB calls, the recording of which is the primary purpose of this part of the website. The pictures in Northumberland are often of birds making these calls. It is not possible to divorce the two. Some pictures are taken at sites where other very good evidence for nesting has been found this year. In the photos, tail lengths, tail shapes and the S-trailing edge on birds in spring do point decisively to HB. The birds though often look heavy at the front – HBs are heavier in breeding areas than on migration (up to 80% heavier, see the jizz page) so this is not surprising though not a point made in the current id literature (though the variation in weight is well recorded in the main literature). I think the heavier feel to HBs in breeding areas needs to be acknowledged more. Of course if the feeding is poor, then HBs may well stay thinner: the variation in body weight between one HB and another must be enormous.
I take your point about juvenile CB appearing to have longer tails in autumn than adult CB (partly because of shorter secondaries) and would not want to rely on relative tail length at this time. But then in raptor id you should never rely on one feature.
OK, the Staufen bird, photo 8, has been mentioned before. I’m not convinced too much should be read into the plumage as the detail relies on post-processing, a technique I’ve gone off. I’m not convinced at all that lightening the underside, when it has been under-exposed, produces an accurate portrayal of reality. Conversely Staufen 9 must show a male HB with moult on inner primaries at this time of year. And you’ve only provided detailed feedback on one photo out of c100. I don’t suggest you comment on all the rest on this forum but I would welcome an exchange in private messages of opinions where we can be more frank and detailed (and report back later to the forum). In a similar way, I would welcome very much any constructive comments from others.
And we thought jizz might add objectivity! This is a very young bird, still in its natal area. Juvenile HB at this stage look even more like CB than ones on migration. Broad inner wings are characteristic of HB (bulging secondaries) and laboured flapping often occurs at low altitude when the birds are getting going. Some juvenile HBs are very heavy – look at the ill-fated Inverness bird which made it to Madeira in 2002 (over 1,000g when fitted up) and the hefty 2001 youngsters. When birds are banking, the raising of the wings is exaggerated to an observer from the side. It’s also an old literature hangover (and a major aerodynamic handicap for the species – raising the tips gives extra lift) to say that HBs never raise their wings – look at Forsman for
more recent literature. But, as HB generally have lower wing loading, the effect is not as marked as in CB and the wings are never kinked at the elbow. Maybe, in poor soaring conditions, the heavier HB need to raise the tips a little to improve the lift.
The trouble is that jizz is not identifiable from photographs. Gyr would be quite a claim for Northumberland. On this forum, confident ids of Merlin have also been made of these birds. What do you think of this? I cannot agree that the body on photo 3 (Kirkhaugh) is heavy and barrel-chested, nor that the base of the wing is broad. Also picture 1 of the same bird does show a narrow tail base. The hand looks perfect for Hobby with long slender shape. In addition the wing/length ratios for these birds is high, as in Hobby. Female Hobbies can weigh up to 50% more than males. By the way pictures 1-4 here are all of the same bird, taken over a 30 second period. The bird had stalled, into a headwind, meaning that it is not in active flight and hence not so
streamlined. The variation in appearance is quite staggering, which brings in humility, upon which we all perhaps are agreed!!
And to you, too! Cheers ... Nick
Edward woodwood
Member
:h?:
:bounce:
:bounce:
Rob Smallwood
Well-known member
Tim,
A former colleague of mine always ended discussions with "You have to have the last word don't you?".
It used to drive me mad but it works!
A former colleague of mine always ended discussions with "You have to have the last word don't you?".
It used to drive me mad but it works!
Edward woodwood
Member
I'm sure it's not over yet
wish it was.
hope this is the last word
wish it was.
hope this is the last word
Andrew Rowlands
Well-known member
RecoveringScot
Well-known member
For what it's worth - I am familiar with Honey Buzzard from abroad and lived for many years surrounded by Common Buzzards in Wales my vote goes to Honey Buzzard.
Reasons: the head is too small in relation to wingspan for Common Buzzard (see especially at 00.18 sec), and in forty years of watching Common I have never seen one with a tail of that particular shape. The tail is clearly too long in the mid tail feathers to be Common. Additionally as the bird swings round from behind the tree to fly left an two-inch-wide pale undertail bar about an inch from the tip is clearly visible with a dark terminal bar right to tip of tail (00.14). However the quality isn't too wonderful, but I'd not be unhappy to label this a Honey. I'm not bothered by the raised wings as the bird is clearly stabilising itself at that point. When the bird is later seen from the rear the profile is quite convincingly flat.
As for the flapping flight at the beginning, it looks wrong for Common Buzzard again to me. The wingbeats are far too deep and fast. Even when chasing each other at speed (which is usually fairly slo-mo) I have never seen Common Buzzards beat their wings that low. Since all the Honey Buzzards I have seen have been in hot countries though, I've rarely seen them flapping quite so fast either. In a British climate with less lift, this may mean very little.
Phil
Reasons: the head is too small in relation to wingspan for Common Buzzard (see especially at 00.18 sec), and in forty years of watching Common I have never seen one with a tail of that particular shape. The tail is clearly too long in the mid tail feathers to be Common. Additionally as the bird swings round from behind the tree to fly left an two-inch-wide pale undertail bar about an inch from the tip is clearly visible with a dark terminal bar right to tip of tail (00.14). However the quality isn't too wonderful, but I'd not be unhappy to label this a Honey. I'm not bothered by the raised wings as the bird is clearly stabilising itself at that point. When the bird is later seen from the rear the profile is quite convincingly flat.
As for the flapping flight at the beginning, it looks wrong for Common Buzzard again to me. The wingbeats are far too deep and fast. Even when chasing each other at speed (which is usually fairly slo-mo) I have never seen Common Buzzards beat their wings that low. Since all the Honey Buzzards I have seen have been in hot countries though, I've rarely seen them flapping quite so fast either. In a British climate with less lift, this may mean very little.
Phil
Last edited:
Rob Smallwood
Well-known member
My experience of Honey Buzzard (despite seeing 100's in Mallorca, Turkey and elsewhere) is insufficient for me to join the debate - but I have to say that as an outside observer it is great to see someone supporting Nick's view.
Similar threads
