Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
Very skinny hips for a Gos?
-
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.
Warsaw, Poland, 09.10 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter 01101001
- Start date
It's 3 to 3 now, but I'm leaning towards Goshawk (deep breast, relatively long neck in 3.2, more pronounced shape of the trailing edge). Interestingly, I first thought it might have been a Goshawk (given the deep breast, which was about my only argument for it, though), but then I proactively 'downgraded' it to a Sparrowhawk.
EDIT: Bird of Prey ID. West Midlands, UK. is what I found about the hips of Goshawks and Sparrowhawks
EDIT 2: How can you tell it's a juvenile from these photos? Is it because of the brownish suffusion over the breast and belly (which is shown in Blasco Zumeta's ringing guide, for instance)?
EDIT: Bird of Prey ID. West Midlands, UK. is what I found about the hips of Goshawks and Sparrowhawks
EDIT 2: How can you tell it's a juvenile from these photos? Is it because of the brownish suffusion over the breast and belly (which is shown in Blasco Zumeta's ringing guide, for instance)?
Last edited:
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
As well as being browner, juv Goshawk has vertical not horizontal breast, dashes.
(>vertical/horizontal
which of course we can't see properly in these images, although they look more orangy [=sprawk] to my eyes)
As an aside, I've just checked that Merlin's Photo ID--which, from what I understand, should be better at judging jizz than fine plumage features--is (also) split 4 to 4, but birds in better photos are more likely to be ID'ed as Goshawks, and, conversely, more distant shots are said to show a Sparrowhawk (the most blurry picture being apparently unidentifiable).
Thanks @Butty, @dantheman, @Alexander Stöhr, @tconzemi, @RafaelMatias, @Val35, @Andy Adcock, @THE_FERN and @PW23.
I didn't initially intend it as an aside to the other thread, but this bird should be in the realm of Sparrowhawk as well, from what I understand.
EDIT: Just in case, I did demote it back from Goshawk to Accipiter sp. a while ago already, now aiming to log it in as a Sparrowhawk.
EDIT: Just in case, I did demote it back from Goshawk to Accipiter sp. a while ago already, now aiming to log it in as a Sparrowhawk.
Last edited:
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
Agreed in that not a Sparrowhawk (in my opinion)
3.7 in particular shows a head and a neck that is not that of a sparrowhawk, and the tail in the same picture is not squared off like that of a sparrowhawk.
lou salomon
the birdonist
2cy male Goshawk for me too. Most has been said (warm buffish colour to underparts); bulging secondaries, long arm.
Prestdj
its good to be back
merlin never used it as it seems to be wrong most of the time! so much for technology you cannot beat experiance of birds
Just as you can't beat experience of technology if you've...
🤷🏻
Prestdj
its good to be back
your great at picking up on posters faults! do you actually go birding or do spend your time sat at home just being annoying? im a birder i make mistakes but i own up to them.......hands up made a mistake, not sure if your autistic or just annoying? ...............sorry op but he drives me up the wall his constant monotone critisism
TheBlackGrouse
Well-known member
Trying to get back on topic, recently I uploaded some pictures of a 100% Sparrowhawk to our national bird recognition software and to my surprise the results were: 97% Goshawk, 1% Sparrowhawk. Strange but pictures don't say everything. In this case, very often I'd seen the quick wingbeats and the short glides giving the typical undulating flight. There was a good size estimation, shape, plumage were correct, no doubt. Then I checked my pictures again and chose other ones. Now the results were the opposite, the AI decided it was a 99% Sparrowhawk.
Same bird, different pictures were uploaded, totally different results. Only the birder in the field has the decisive elements: size, proportions, flight.
To be honest, several times I've looked at the bird of this thread. My 'software' has no answer. The tail is spread often, has a thin base, is much longer than the width of wings and the corners are sharp. This is the tail of a Sparrowhawk. However, there are other reasons to call it a Goshawk, for instance look at the size compared to the crow, the body, the head, the slightly red color (if that's correct) etc. Yes, it's an interesting bird.
Same bird, different pictures were uploaded, totally different results. Only the birder in the field has the decisive elements: size, proportions, flight.
To be honest, several times I've looked at the bird of this thread. My 'software' has no answer. The tail is spread often, has a thin base, is much longer than the width of wings and the corners are sharp. This is the tail of a Sparrowhawk. However, there are other reasons to call it a Goshawk, for instance look at the size compared to the crow, the body, the head, the slightly red color (if that's correct) etc. Yes, it's an interesting bird.
I don't remember the exact details, but there was an article (in British Birding?) about this stupid illusion in which things farther might be bigger (the example was a Little Stint, I think). I don't remember the initial assumptions as to the equipment, though. I took the photos with a standard bridge camera.
Similar threads
