• 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.

Norfolk birding (27 Viewers)

Redbridge said:
Ironian, or should I call you Ian Robinson? http://www.flickr.com/photos/ianarobinson/page3/ Great pictures :t: Nice ghillie too http://www.flickr.com/photos/63284196@N05/6818662518/in/faves-ianarobinson/
Click to expand...

Ian, agree with Mick, some stunning pics there. Have to meet up and sort out our different views on birding.
Seems the thread has finished, back to the birds or the few that are around.

Not sure if has been on this forum, but the old female Marsh Harrier at Cley has developed a way to get through the Avocet protection and snatch their chicks. A superb pic of it with a chick whilst being attacked by three adults behind the desk at the Cley reserve

John

www.kellingnature.zenfolio.com

having reread this I am amazed there has not been a comment from Mr Furse re the attack by three adults behind the desk at Cley
 
Last edited:
And just when we thought peace had broken out . . .

On opening my emails, this morning, I discovered the following:

“Last evening I discovered an individual with a long lens, sufficiently close to an active Woodlark nest in North Norfolk as to deter the waiting adults with food in their bills from visiting the nest. Nothing unusual so far you may say but what was unusual in this instance was his attire. Not a vestige of the usual camouflage accoutrements but clad in [here follows a detailed description of his outer clothing] and accompanied by a [description of mammal species] running free. There are notices on site warning visitors there are S1 species breeding and a request to stay on the paths and keep dogs under control but these seem to have little effect.

I have no idea if this individual had actually 'photographed the nest or how long he had been in the vicinity but the adults took an extraordinarily long time to resume feeding the young after he departed. Maybe pure coincidence but this individual in leaving the area, kept sufficient sufficient distance so as to discourage any attempt to make contact on my part.”

The person who sent this is a long-time Norfolk birder, but not a BF member.

I have witheld two portions of his message, but can easily replace these, if required.

I solicit members to advise on what they would do in these circumstances.
 
firstreesjohn said:
On opening my emails, this morning, I discovered the following:

“Last evening I discovered an individual with a long lens, sufficiently close to an active Woodlark nest in North Norfolk as to deter the waiting adults with food in their bills from visiting the nest. Nothing unusual so far you may say but what was unusual in this instance was his attire. Not a vestige of the usual camouflage accoutrements but clad in [here follows a detailed description of his outer clothing] and accompanied by a [description of mammal species] running free. There are notices on site warning visitors there are S1 species breeding and a request to stay on the paths and keep dogs under control but these seem to have little effect.

I have no idea if this individual had actually 'photographed the nest or how long he had been in the vicinity but the adults took an extraordinarily long time to resume feeding the young after he departed. Maybe pure coincidence but this individual in leaving the area, kept sufficient sufficient distance so as to discourage any attempt to make contact on my part.”

The person who sent this is a long-time Norfolk birder, but not a BF member.

I have witheld two portions of his message, but can easily replace these, if required.

I solicit members to advise on what they would do in these circumstances.
Click to expand...

Think this is far more severe than anything to do with the Rosey. Getting too close to a clearly confiding vagrant is one thing but disturbing schedule 1 species is a totally different ball game.
Would be worth looking into the legal situation behind this as what he was doing can't possible be legal?


In more positive news the Spotted Redshanks at Titchwell were giving superb views last night. Views on the main hide aside Titchwell can be a fantastic place, you just have to go at the right time.

Photos here and here.

O.R
 
Hi John

I have put up notices on the heath re rare breeding birds with the request that anybody who witness`s any disturbance to phone the Norfolk police on 101 and quote operation Compass or ring the RSPB on 07803 241452.
The notices frequently get pulled down, I have not been up since getting back from Mull, will check later.
Cannot think of any photographer with a long lens and a dog, apart from myself;)
Did he know who the photographer was? last year we had the same problem with a Dartford Warblers nest.
Could you let me know off line which nest it was please, will let John Wagstaff know and we will keep a watch.
Cheers

John
 
firstreesjohn said:
I solicit members to advise on what they would do in these circumstances.
Click to expand...

I think the least controversial thing to do would be to put up a photo of the individual in question in his mystery overclothes and invite comments ;)

On a more serious note, if the name of the individual isn't known then there probably isn't anything more that can be done other than to remain vigilant at the site and pass on the information to any wardens/volunteers responsible for that area.

The last part of the email makes it sound like the person in this case was aware that he was in the wrong (by avoiding the correspondent), however if he wasn't observed photographing the nest then it could be that he just saw a Woodlark and followed it hoping for a photo, and may (hopefully) be a one off incident. Keeping dogs on leads or under control regrettably seems to be one of those things that is basically unenforcable, although birders should certainly fall into the "should know better" category in my humble opinion.

Regards,
James
 
A swift response. Unhappily, although I need le tail, not that one !

john miller said:
Cannot think of any photographer with a long lens and a dog, apart from myself
Click to expand...

I didn’t say it was a dog, John ! However, I can reassure members that you are known to the emailer- and it wasn’t you. But you know that, anyway.

Was not informed of the site, either. Nonetheless, that notices regarding dog-fouling and wildlife disturbance are removed is lamentable and is another illustration of the decline of our nation’s general moral compass. On that note . .

Operation Compass on 101 (http://www.norfolk.police.uk/safety...ion/tacklingtheproblems/operationcompass.aspx). Very useful. On that note . .

I have now received this: “3 individuals with long lenses acting suspiciously near the nest refered to . . were . . spoken to by police officers this morning. Naturally, they were very apologetic and stated they had no idea the birds were there let alone a nest.”
 
Last edited:
Having read the recent posts concerning the rosey it reminds me of similar behaviour experienced in Lesvos again this spring. Being one of many Birdforum members who enjoy the odd snap. I also encountered one well travelled birder there, who reflected the views expressed by some on the more venomous critics, on this forum, of camera toters (on the island). That particular fella also complained of our talking drowning out birdsong. May I point out that digital photography will not be "uninvented"?Unless the RSPB and NWT etc,change their rules and ban photography, Gatling gun camera shots will continue to echo the hides. In the meantime one can only hope that the record shot, anti field skill element will modify their behaviour in the course of time.
Our joy at a weekend in North Norfolk was dampened somewhat by cold winds and grey skies, until on our way home yesterday two lovely yellow wags warmed our spirits as the sun came out.
When we arrived on Saturday our BnB owners told us that the rosey twitch had prevented them getting to their boat in Wells, the same day. Hoping to avoid the crush, we called on Sunday afternoon, also avoiding the bird, which had flown I understand that morning.
Great county, love it!
 

Attachments

  • Wagtail yellow wagtail motacilla flava flavissima male 3LQ Chosley Barns Norfolk 250613_edited-2.jpg
    Wagtail yellow wagtail motacilla flava flavissima male 3LQ Chosley Barns Norfolk 250613_edited-2.jpg
    316.4 KB · Views: 110
  • Harrier Western Marsh-harrier (Circus aeruginosus) 3LQ Cley-Next-the-Sea Norfolk 230613_edited-2.jpg
    Harrier Western Marsh-harrier (Circus aeruginosus) 3LQ Cley-Next-the-Sea Norfolk 230613_edited-2.jpg
    116.4 KB · Views: 166
Last edited:
firstreesjohn said:
I didn’t say it was a dog, John ! However, I can reassure members that you are known to the emailer- and it wasn’t you. But you know that, anyway.

Was not informed of the site, either. Nonetheless, that notices regarding dog-fouling and wildlife disturbance are removed is lamentable and is another illustration of the decline of our nation’s general moral compass.

Operation Compass on 101 (http://www.norfolk.police.uk/safety...ion/tacklingtheproblems/operationcompass.aspx). Very useful. On that note . .

I have now received this: “3 individuals with long lenses acting suspiciously near the nest refered to . . were . . spoken to by police officers this morning. Naturally, they were very apologetic and stated they had no idea the birds were there let alone a nest.”
Click to expand...

There is another nest that is prone to disturbance, please, if you come across a Woodlark on the heath, have a good look but move off quickly, the young are being fed.
If you come across photographers or birders keeping the adults away from the
nest phone 101 and ask for operation compass. As this morning proved response is quick.

Cheers

John
 
Last edited:
"It is a truth universally acknowledged,

that a single bird in possession of a good territory must be in want of a mate."

ARTHUR BISHOP said:
It will be lovely when this thread gets back to being about your bird watching day & sharing info.
without the one upmanship and personal sniping.
If you want to have a go at me don't put it on here. send me a PM via this means
lets get back to enjoying the birds in this great county
Click to expand...

Why anyone should want to ‘have a go at you’ for such sentiments eludes me. Your keyword is in the last line: “enjoying”. Yes ! Let us ‘enjoy’ our wonderful hobby/pastime/obsession in the beautiful, natural surroundings of County !

However, I would beg to differ, in one important respect. This thread is of and about Norfolk birding. Birding is carried out by birders. Therefore, it includes birders in County and their behaviour.

To avoid contentious considerations of concern to us, is not to inhabit reality.

I am informed that the first brood of Woodlarks on a north Norfolk site failed, as a result of predation by Kestrel. A second brood has suffered a similar fate, subsequent to the recent appearances of an unusual bird there. The connection has not been established, it seems.

It is self-evident that, if birds failed in their breeding, we wouldn’t be able to watch ‘em. We, therefore, need to exercise ‘constant vigilance’ (pace Rowling), as recent posts have revealed.

Mick, your post #20788 was somewhat untimely, given those just prior to it. Surely, you’re not accepting of illegality (?).

Admirable though the ABA Code is, we don’t have to cross the Pond; here’s a home-grown code, which specifically mentions photography: http://www.rspb.org.uk/advice/watchingbirds/code/index.aspx

I believe these can be summed up by the 3 Cs: courtesy, consideration and common sense. Were these constantly to be exercised, there would be no problems. However (again), we do live in the real world, where there is sometimes the need for us to be policed- whether by officers in dark blue, or moderators.
 
1)Mick, your post #20788 was somewhat untimely, given those just prior to it. Surely, you’re not accepting of illegality (?).

2)Admirable though the ABA Code is, we don’t have to cross the Pond; here’s a home-grown code, which specifically mentions photography: http://www.rspb.org.uk/advice/watchingbirds/code/index.aspx

1)No and 2) accepted

Rare breeding birds should be protected and those that transgress should face the same penalties as egg collectors and bird killers.

A little more patience from some to those that take pictures responsibly, wouldn't go amiss though(see earlier posts about clicking in hides).

Fortunately mine and my wife's interest in birding greatly pre-dates the advent of the digital menace
Let peace break out in lovely Norfolk.

:t:
 
kevindurose said:
This rant from Mick Saunt is the biggest load of rubbish I’ve heard . I was . . I had .
, I wasn’t I hasten to add etc etc.
Click to expand...

this post has just about summed up everything I've ever felt about photographers. They aren't intrinsically bad, selfish, rude - they are just ill. At no point during this post did I hear the slightest ounce of empathy, connection, self awareness, understanding or... softness towards the circumstances. Photographer stands in front of a massive lens, which as Locustella adroitly put it, creates a quantum leap away from a reliable impression of reality. Once swaddled in this terminatoresque armoury the ego simply starts ticking over on internalised self-centred questions - 'how can I get a better shot', 'why does the sun has to be at this angle' any sense of oneness with the universe is annihilated, the world is out there, alien and unresponsive, man meshed with technology and at war with nature - anyone seen or read Ballards Crash? - its a bit like that minus the psychedelics - any connection to the bird, to the natural world, to reality, evaporates. This is the polar opposite of the perception of many people who simply want to become immersed the sights and sounds, to have genuine encounters, coincidences and visitations.

I know the North Sea is pretty shallow and there may be a danger of creating some false islands, but at least they should provide some interesting fossilled remains in 200 years time, go on you know you want to ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uRO738W9ng
 
Chiff and Chaff said:
We are very pleased to say that we have seen a pair of Red Kites gliding over Norwich Road in Wymondham a few days ago and once again over Kett's Park today, though this time a single adult, which we believe to be one of the pair from our previous sighting.
Click to expand...

Welcome to birdforum Chiff and Chaff 8-P
 
Responsibility lies with all of us...

I think the least controversial thing to do would be to put up a photo of the individual in question in his mystery overclothes and invite comments
Click to expand...

Taking a photograph is a good idea in view of the following...

On a more serious note, if the name of the individual isn't known then there probably isn't anything more that can be done other than to remain vigilant at the site and pass on the information to any wardens/volunteers responsible for that area.

The last part of the email makes it sound like the person in this case was aware that he was in the wrong (by avoiding the correspondent), however if he wasn't observed photographing the nest then it could be that he just saw a Woodlark and followed it hoping for a photo,...
Click to expand...

It is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981, to wilfully disturb any bird (not just Schedule 1 species) at or near the nest. The key to this is the 'wilfully' part of the sentence. I personally would challenge anyone, photographer or birder, acting in the manner indicated in this issue. It is a stock answer to claim 'no knowledge' of the nest in question and to be apologetic. If challenged in a polite and informative manner anyone who genuinely was unaware of a nesting bird would be glad to have been informed and should then not repeat the event. If however, there is a repeat of the event the perpetrator will be in breach of the law as the disturbance would then be wilful. In the event that law enforcement is required, a signed statement to the police would be beneficial in proving 'wilful' disturbance.

I believe it is the responsibility of all of us that know 'right from wrong' to try to protect our constantly endangered and threatened wildlife from those amongst us who care for little other than themselves.
 
Titchwell June 26th

Today’s highlights

Little gull – 12 on fresh marsh
Spotted redshank – 17 on fresh marsh
Green sandpiper – 1 on Patsy’s reedbed
Common sandpiper – 1 on Patsy’s reedbed
Ruff – 5 on fresh marsh
Avocet – 150 on fresh marsh
Red crested pochard – female in reedbed

Paul
 
Songkhran said:
Photographer stands in front of a massive lens, which as Locustella adroitly put it, creates a quantum leap away from a reliable impression of reality.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with most of what Josh has written, I have to disagree about photography, per se. I’m sure he means that particular sort, where every feather detail is delineated. It would seem to me that, far too often, many bird photographers are aiming for that result, when it's impossible to achieve without infringing one or more bits of one of the 'codes'.

However, to misquote Wordsworth, a good photo is an 'image recollected in tranquillity' and a piece of art in its own right- not just a documentation/illustration, fit for a (photo) field guide.

Two examples of what I would describe as beautifully artistic shots are those by David Bratt (Roller) and Oliver Reville (Rose-coloured Starling) in this week’s round-up from RBA.

I’m a ‘bird snapper’, with neither massive equipment nor prodigious outlay for its purchase. I take shots (almost silently- no clicking/clanking/machine gun imitations) mainly for record/ID purposes, occasionally aim for the artistic, and am generally satisfied with my commensurately modest product. In those below (of Yellow Horned Poppy Glaucium flavum at Salthouse), I haven’t even begun to count to 60,000.

I’m enjoying reading the blog from the Point: http://norfolkcoastnationaltrust.blogspot.co.uk/. It’s a shame about the loss of some of the Little Terns’ nests- but at least it was natural.
 

Attachments

  • 058pse.jpg
    058pse.jpg
    295.2 KB · Views: 96
  • 071pse.jpg
    071pse.jpg
    305.9 KB · Views: 91
Last edited:
Note to moderators. Can you please remove my post numbered #20596. Did send a PM to delete but may have got lost somewhere in t'internet. Would have deleted myself but can't work out how.

Many thanks

Mick
 
And back to the birds birders are recording whilst birding in Norfolk...

Re: Green Sandpipers, the attached might be of interest. No early spike in reporting rate (proportion of birders' lists featuring this species) and if anything, seems to be running a little late this year – like so many other things. These are the stats for all of Britain and Ireland but I had a look for the East of England and it's exactly the same story.

We're in week 26 now, so it will be interesting to see if the apparent early passage being mentioned in this thread manifests itself in the reporting rate over the next week or two... (yet) another reason to (keep) submit(ting) your complete lists to BirdTrack!

NB: This isn't a proxy for numbers but rather an indication of 'detectability' or 'likelihood of encountering' – though clearly numbers will have some impact on this.
 

Attachments

  • GreenSandpiper.jpeg
    GreenSandpiper.jpeg
    38.7 KB · Views: 81
Bird Fair, Mannington Hall

rob Wilson said:
We are arranging a Norfolk Bird Fair 17th and 18th May 2014 at Mannington Hall, Check out the website www.norfolkbirdfair.com. Lets hope the weather is better next year
Click to expand...

Right place, wrong time of year! mid-June would be better, for future reference, then us ladies can have a look at the lovely roses at the same time, for which Mannington Hall is famous!
 
willowgrouse said:
Taking a photograph is a good idea in view of the following...



It is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981, to wilfully disturb any bird (not just Schedule 1 species) at or near the nest. The key to this is the 'wilfully' part of the sentence. I personally would challenge anyone, photographer or birder, acting in the manner indicated in this issue. It is a stock answer to claim 'no knowledge' of the nest in question and to be apologetic. If challenged in a polite and informative manner anyone who genuinely was unaware of a nesting bird would be glad to have been informed and should then not repeat the event. If however, there is a repeat of the event the perpetrator will be in breach of the law as the disturbance would then be wilful. In the event that law enforcement is required, a signed statement to the police would be beneficial in proving 'wilful' disturbance.

I believe it is the responsibility of all of us that know 'right from wrong' to try to protect our constantly endangered and threatened wildlife from those amongst us who care for little other than themselves.
Click to expand...

Was this bit not amended to read "wilfully or recklessly" ( the latter meaning it doesn't matter whether you know about it or not, its still an offence so its your responsibility to inform yourself and take notice), or is that just for Schedule 1?

John
 

Similar threads

B
Birding in Portugal, Spain May june 2024
Replies
4
Views
451
brooke65
B
B
May - June birding in Europe. Guides?
Replies
1
Views
306
Fritz73
Fritz73
R
Red grouse near Buxton and anything else . Advise please
Replies
3
Views
319
simmojunior
S
T
30/03, Devon. Another (un)Common Buzzard?
Replies
10
Views
660
The Kerreran
T
SueO
Stories Behind Birds You've Photographed
Replies
18
Views
872
Joe H
Joe H

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 28 (members: 0, guests: 28)
Back
Top