North Sea Thread (2 Viewers)

I had a wee look via Google Images for Balearic Shearwater photos and the very first pic that came up (see below) has a pale hind-neck contrasting with the darker cap and wings, giving at least the impression of a collar. The bird in the photo is also a bit patchy looking, suggesting to me at least that the stage of moult the bird is at can give rise to an impression of a collar and patchy appearance on some individuals of the species. I suspect lighting will also play a big part in the overall appearance. In sunlight, differences in shade will be easier to see than in overcast conditions when detail is harder to pick out and colours are muddied. There were a few other photos with the hint of a paler neck showed up in the search but it certainly wasn't a consistent feature.

https://www.arkive.org/balearic-shearwater/puffinus-mauretanicus/

Reading Paul's description I can kind of see why it may have been recorded as Shearwater sp. Personally, I don't like writing descriptions as colours/shades especially are a minefield with so much variation in lots of colours (such as greys, greens and browns) to try to describe accurately not to mention getting the parts of birds exactly correct. Typing this up I wondered if there was any site online with a guide to writing accurate (and hopefully acceptable) descriptions for those with little experience of the process to make it a less daunting task. So I had a quick look and found this...

https://www.devonbirds.org/birdwatching/articles/tactical_description_writing

A few things set alarm bells ringing for me.

1 - a Balearic shearwater that far north, that far offshore and in May would be extremely unusual - so to be accepted you'd really want an absolutely watertight description.

2 - How far away was it? If you got really good, close views, you need to say so - especially with seabirds. Likewise, if you say it was over 1 km away and you describe seeing its feet projecting, that's a concern.

3 - There is no mention of the size or structure of the bird. If there were fulmars around, how did it differ from them, structually? While your description of the plumage is quite detailed, there's not an awful lot there to rule out a young gannet (not suggesting it was a gannet... just trying to highlight the importance of this).

4 - Your lack of any other experience with shearwaters. Not a criticism of course, just an unfortunate truth.

5 - Again, the description is detailed, but it would help if you explained things like 'species x was eliminated due to...'. Your description doesn't read too badly for something like a great shearwater, so it's useful to know why it wasn't one.

So - if I was reviewing this, I think I would reluctantly decide 'not proven'. I say reluctantly as it's clear you've put a lot of effort into getting to the right answer, and describing what you've seen. And it's also not clear that you've made a mistake - there are just some important details missing.

Key here is to understand that it's not personal, don't be disheartened, and see it as a learning process. Nobody ever gets everything accepted...

Good luck next time!

davercox said:

Gander

Personally I chicken out by having two columns on my list: they are almost identical, but one includes only records accepted by the 'relevant authority'.

Click to expand...

I like that idea. I may well use it.

Dmacaskill said:

Gander

I have two questions tho - 1- the collar i have not seen a BS with a collar (this does not mean that they don't ) did the bird have a dark cap? and you mention that the upper-parts were patchy even yellowish in parts, all those i have seen appeared to be a uniform dark brown .

Click to expand...

The collar was more an impression than anything clear cut. The yellowish patches were I believe caused by sun bleaching. I have read since the sighting that this is not uncommon with Balearics, but do not know if it is exclusive to them amoung Shearwaters.

Stonefaction said:

I had a wee look via Google Images for Balearic Shearwater photos and the very first pic that came up (see below) has a pale hind-neck contrasting with the darker cap and wings, giving at least the impression of a collar. The bird in the photo is also a bit patchy looking, suggesting to me at least that the stage of moult the bird is at can give rise to an impression of a collar and patchy appearance on some individuals of the species. I suspect lighting will also play a big part in the overall appearance. In sunlight, differences in shade will be easier to see than in overcast conditions when detail is harder to pick out and colours are muddied. There were a few other photos with the hint of a paler neck showed up in the search but it certainly wasn't a consistent feature.

https://www.arkive.org/balearic-shearwater/puffinus-mauretanicus/

]

Click to expand...

That photo rings a lot of bells, especially the way the collar area is, although I suppose it is more, as you said, an impression, caused by the hood. The bird was iseen in strong sunshine, and the brown tones looked a little warmer than the bird pictured, but the patchiness is right, except there were at least a couple of very distinct yellowish patches, that as I explain above, I now believe to be sun-bleaching. I'm going to try and find a photo I found at the time that was spot on for the bird. Won't prove anything, but it did include the yellowish patches.

Fat Paul Scholes said:

A few things set alarm bells ringing for me.

1 - a Balearic shearwater that far north, that far offshore and in May would be extremely unusual - so to be accepted you'd really want an absolutely watertight description.

2 - How far away was it? If you got really good, close views, you need to say so - especially with seabirds. Likewise, if you say it was over 1 km away and you describe seeing its feet projecting, that's a concern.

3 - There is no mention of the size or structure of the bird. If there were fulmars around, how did it differ from them, structually? While your description of the plumage is quite detailed, there's not an awful lot there to rule out a young gannet (not suggesting it was a gannet... just trying to highlight the importance of this).

4 - Your lack of any other experience with shearwaters. Not a criticism of course, just an unfortunate truth.

5 - Again, the description is detailed, but it would help if you explained things like 'species x was eliminated due to...'. Your description doesn't read too badly for something like a great shearwater, so it's useful to know why it wasn't one.

So - if I was reviewing this, I think I would reluctantly decide 'not proven'. I say reluctantly as it's clear you've put a lot of effort into getting to the right answer, and describing what you've seen. And it's also not clear that you've made a mistake - there are just some important details missing.

Key here is to understand that it's not personal, don't be disheartened, and see it as a learning process. Nobody ever gets everything accepted...

Good luck next time!

Click to expand...

1 - Accepted. When I submitted my description, I was told by the recorder that there had been three recent Balearic sightings from the Scottish coast. Of course that was from the coast, not 90 miles out, and I don't know how accurate those sightings were.

2. Initially, it was pretty close in. I am not great at estimating distance over water, but I could initially see some plummage detail with the naked eye, so let's say a stones throw or two away (my descriptive abilities have not improved, have they)? :t:
I saw the feet projecting past the tail, almost as soon as I got the monocular on the bird. Likewise, I had a very good look at the bill through the glass).

3. I need to study up on how to describe bird structure/anatomy. My terminology is somewhat lacking. Even looking at my own description, I can now see the flaws.
When I got my first glimpse of the bird, my initial thought was juv Gannet, as that would be my default dark brown bird, but the thought was fleeting due to the bird being too small, and then the monocular revealed the detail, especially that bill. I still remember the excitment of seeing that bill.

4. Yes, this would have been a concern to the committee. I have since gained some experience of Manx (largely thanks to Stonefaction), and I am absolutely sure my bird was not a Manx.

5. I will certainly bear your comments in mind for future sightings. I can't remember now why I eliminated Great Shearwater, but I was sure at the time. In future, I will try to capture the whole thought process in any description.

Thanks to all for their input. Much appreciated.:t:

With only a few days left offshore this year, 2018 is fizzling out in the most underwhelming of ways. This is largely due to persistent strong winds from the south that have put a stopper on any decent winter birds turning up. Case in point is the non-show of any White-Winged Gulls.

Wrong winds have very much been the theme this year, with birding here having become a bruising experience for long periods, although interspersed with some great highlights that still made it worthwhile.

I am looking forward to 2019, and just have that feeling that it will be a great year. Who knows; I might even get a few passing flocks of Balearic Shearwaters. :eek!::-O

..... or even a Dodo!!!B

Thanks for this thread Paul - it's always an interesting read for those of us waiting for arrivals on the east coast of Scotland. We've had a pretty similar year to you in Aberdeen!

End of Year Report.

This morning, I carried out my last count of the year. It certainly didn't take long! Minimal numbers of GBBG, Herring Gull and Kittiwake present, but also my 6th bird species of the month in the form of a passing Gannet. It may not sound like much, but that Gannet means I've had a Gannet here in every calendar month of the year. A small victory, but a victory all the same.

Unless something totally unexpected turns up before I leave tomorrow morning, my final year list for the platform (46 species) can be seen on post #454. I have entered 760 records to the NSBC this year. Monthly breakdown can be seen below.

January - 60 records, 8 bird species, 1 mammal species
February - 50 records, 7 bird species, 1 mammal species
March - 50 records, 9 bird species, 2 mammal species
April - 96 records, 25 bird species, 2 mammal species
May - 85 records, 17 bird species, 2 mammal species
June - 36 records, 6 bird species, 2 mammal species
July - 26 records, 9 bird species, 1 mammal species
August - 128 records, 14 bird species, 3 mammal species, 1 butterfly
September - 85 records, 12 bird species, 1 mammal species
October - 39 records, 10 bird species
November - 44 records, 11 bird species, 1 mammal species
December - 61 records, 6 bird species, 1 mammal species

So if you are going to visit, come in April, but make sure you are gone by June.

Looking beyond the numbers, yes it has been a challenging year, but I have had some excellent highlights. Those that spring to mind are the huge flocks of Blackbird in the Spring and Redwing in the Autumn, along with the sightings of Woodcock, Pied Flycatcher, Puffin and Long-Eared Owl. The real low points of the year were the fnding of dead Water Rail, Wryneck and Spotted Flycatcher.

Looking ahead, the NSBC have announced that there will be no annual report for 2018 due largely to a lack of bird reports this year. Instead, the next report will be in 2020 combining 2018 and 2019 reports. That is a pity because the annual report was something I really looked forward to. I suspect the underlying reason is not a lack of birds, despite poor migration seasons this year, but a lack of spotters. North Sea platforms are now starting to be decommissioned and some of the ones with a good history in bird reports have now gone. The work force is shrinking which does not help. And some spotters only only record the highlights, leaving the counting of the day to day birds to a very few. From what I am picking up from the NSBC it is strongly hinting that it will call it a day in 2019 when it hits 40 years of age.

I however, will soldier on for as long as I'm out here, even if it means that I am only reporting to the readers of this thread. That said, I have a cunning plan that I will be putting to the NSBC next year, but more of that later.

So, from the middle of the North Sea, a very happy Christmas to you all, and a bird filled New Year when it comes.

Merry Christmas G, hope your on terra firma soon.
P

A very interesting read Paul - many thanks lad.

I do so like 'cunning plans' good luck with that one!

Happy Christmas to you and the family.

2019 under way

So today is my first day back in 2019. First bird seen was a GBBG, viewed from the chopper as we landed - No surprise there. My second bird was a Kittiwake, spotted as I exited the accommodation block, then seconds later my third bird flew into view and landed on the water just off the platform. Number three was a very welcome Iceland Gull.

A quick circuit of the platform gave me a total of 33 GBBGs, 19 Herring Gulls, 3 Kittiwake and the lone Iceland Gull. I'll settle for that as a start.:t:

2019 Platform List

1. Great Black-Backed Gull
2. Kittiwake
3. Iceland Gull
4. Herring Gull

We're off!!:-O

delia todd said:

We're off!!:-O

Click to expand...

Yes. Hoping for a Song Sparrow. 3

Can't wait to see your picture of it Paul!!!

Very few birds about since Tuesday, with no further sightings of the Iceland Gull. Strong north winds today, so I'm hopeful they might freshen things up.

Unsurprising addition to the year list this morning with a couple of Fulmars.

2019 Platform List

1. Great Black-Backed Gull
2. Kittiwake
3. Iceland Gull
4. Herring Gull
5. Fulmar

Killer Whales

This afternoon, I spotted my first ever offshore Killer Whales. It has taken me 26 years to finally see one here. They have been spotted in previous years by others, but I've always managed to miss them, sometimes by as little as 10 mins.

It looked like a group of five, including a young one.

Oooh!!! Nice one Paul. They're wonderful to watch, aren't they.

The only ones I've seen were off the Fair Isle coast... quite a bit ago now.

Spectacular!

Rob

Great Stuff,Paul........and you get paid for this as well

A few more photos of yesterday's Orcas.

I am taking steps to try and identify the family group, and will post any info that I get.

No sign of the whales this morning. No sign either, of the Grey Seal that I saw a couple of hours before the Killer Whales arrived. Oh dear! |8.|

Oystercatcher

Getting descriptions of birds seen from non-birders, can be problematic. Yesterday was a case in point. One of the guys reported that he had found a large-ish black and white bird, with a very long straight beak, sitting on one of the walkways. He walked within a few feet of the bird, that flapped away along the deck, appearing pretty exhausted.

No problem identifying the bird you would think. It's an Oystercatcher you would think? Was the beak orange/red I asked? No it was all black came the answer. Now you see my problem. My spotter insists that the beak was all black, with no red/orange at all, and definitely was not mud covered. He also did not see any white on the wings when the bird flapped away.

I went over his description a few times with him. Went through the wader section of my Collins guide with him. Everything was right for Oystercatcher, except that beak colour, and the possible lack of white markings on the wing, but what else could it have been? I'm leaning towards reporting it as an Oystercatch based on the description I received, and the lack of confusion species. Adding it to the year list at the moment, but will review later. Any thoughts???

Apart from the probable Oystercatcher, it has been very quiet. A few days ago, I was down to a total count of 5 Kittiwakes and a single GBBG.

2019 Platform List

1. Great Black-Backed Gull
2. Kittiwake
3. Iceland Gull
4. Herring Gull
5. Oystercatcher* (under review)