• 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.

yet another willow/marsh tit (UK) (1 Viewer)

rule of thumb but not always possible to see... shiny head it's a Marsh and if it has a dull head then it's a Willow
soooo I am edging to Willow, where was it, as there are gaps in coverage in UK
 
does the very small black bib also support Marsh Tit? Or is the bib size insufficient to confirm ID?
(not my photos, by the way - I didn't see the bird)
 
insuficient. only in combination with 'stronger' features. best one is the pale spot on base of lower mandible, others are structure like the bullnecked appearance of willow tit. for british willow tits, darker underparts. most essential in separating these is: CALL! learn their vocalizations, they differ more significantly than anything else.
 
That's the problem. The photographer identified the bird as a Willow Tit by its call. That's why I wondered about the photos - I could see nothing that was obviously Willow Tit in the photos (I neither saw nor heard it myself), but I don't want to suggest he might be mistaken unless the photos alone are 100% certain for Marsh Tit.
 
i don't think the pale patch is an artefact since it is at the right place and has the right shape. and that one is diagnostic for marsh tit.
 
This topic keeps coming back and the issue of very subjective features like "glossy"/"matt", size of bib etc are constantly recycled. British Birds had an article which debunked the reliability of those features.

"Features such as cap, bib, structure, colour of underparts, habitat and behaviour (except that of extensive nest excavation) appear to have limited or negligible value for identification, owing to the degree of overlap."

Full article at https://britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/article_files/V102/V102_N11/V102_N11_2_14.pdf
 
This topic keeps coming back and the issue of very subjective features like "glossy"/"matt", size of bib etc are constantly recycled. British Birds had an article which debunked the reliability of those features.

"Features such as cap, bib, structure, colour of underparts, habitat and behaviour (except that of extensive nest excavation) appear to have limited or negligible value for identification, owing to the degree of overlap."

Full article at https://britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/article_files/V102/V102_N11/V102_N11_2_14.pdf

Thank you Gordon
Harry:t:
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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