• 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 Harrier (1 Viewer)

Is it really a Pallid? Yes it has a nice pale collar behind the dark face, but it lacks the dark boa behind the pale collar, so lacks the real dark/pale/dark striped effect I expect to see on Pallid. The mottled nape behind the pale collar is well within Monty's variation for me.

Compare the Norfolk bird to this juv Pallid here to see what it lacks.
 
Need to wait for Deborah and her measuring stick!

Bit beyond me without my books am afraid. The site mentions four pictures taken - even if they are poor the other two might help....
 
Difficult to say from the pictures I think. On the one hand, both pictures on BirdGuides of the Holme bird show pale tips on the trailing edge of the primaries, suggesting Pallid, but the dark boa doesn't appear as prominent as in other pictures of Pallid Harriers.
 
It doesn't have a dark boa at all. The nape and neck sides on this bird are streaked, not solidly dark.

The boa on Pallid can vary considerably, so too underpart colouration. No problem for Pallid on the Norfolk bird.

The dark cheek patch reaches the base of the bill, there is a white "tear" below the eye and no white above - classic Pallid "bandit" look. Invariably more white around the eye on juv Monty's.
 
I know its so hard to say from a few photos, good tho they are they do not show some key identifying features that can be diagnostic such as dark fringing to underwing tips thaat can clarify juv or immature Monty.

From these two photos profile and jizz may suggest monty, which to me are more tern-like and slender, but of course flight photos alone can be misleading.
 
The boa on Pallid can vary considerably, so too underpart colouration. No problem for Pallid on the Norfolk bird.

I disagree, in my experience the boa on Pallid is far less variable than the head pattern of Montys (which s we can see from this bird is highly variable). I've never personally seen a Pallid without a dark boa, and I know I'm not alone as Andrea Corso (who has greatly more experience than myself) has just said the same on Surfbirds (and from his handle on there he likes Pallid a fair deal).

Anyway, Mark has already linked to the new photo on Birdguides.
 
Palid means eliminating Montagu's as the likely ID

Absolutely agree Steve, that the head pattern of Montagu's harriers is variable. This from the modest numbers I have seen. Circumstantial evidence the bird is a Monty's.

It is far from straightforward to call this bird a pallid harrier given the above and the fact photographs may not accurately show the wing formulae.

This leaves out the consideration of a boa, prominent or otherwise and whether such a feature is diagnostic of pallid harrier.

More confident of Warham Green Norfolk 1995 harrier being pallid than this one. Clearer boa on the 1995, if my memory serves me right, not so sure with the Holme bird. 1995 bird deemed to be Montagu's. I am open minded on its ID.

In 1995 pallid harrier was a major blocker in the British List. Not so now.

Have seen two pallid harriers in Norfolk since then. Have not considered the Holme bird to definitely be a third record at all.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely agree Steve, that the head pattern of Montagu's harriers is variable. This from the modest numbers I have seen. Circumstantial evidence the bird is a Monty's.

It is far from straightforward to call this bird a pallid harrier given the above and the fact photographs may not accurately show the wing formulae.

This leaves out the consideration of a boa, prominent or otherwise and whether such a feature is diagnostic of pallid harrier.

More confident of Warham Green Norfolk 1995 harrier being pallid than this one. Clearer boa on the 1995, if my memory serves me right, not so sure with the Holme bird. 1995 bird deemed to be Montagu's. I am open minded on its ID.

In 1995 pallid harrier was a major blocker in the British List. Not so now.

Have seen two pallid harriers in Norfolk since then. Have not considered the Holme bird to definitely be a third record at all.

Happy memories of squelching around in the mud and freezing cold rain for that one. Everyone on site at the time was happy for it to be Pallid, and it was only when some photos were analysed that it became a very late Monty.
Only thing I managed to get that day was two weeks off with flu.
 
Last edited:
Really nice discussion. Anyone care to guess at how many people are now busy scrutinising photos of "... underwing patterns, especially that of the primaries....". Hundreds I would have thought.
 
Really nice discussion. Anyone care to guess at how many people are now busy scrutinising photos of "... underwing patterns, especially that of the primaries....". Hundreds I would have thought.

We did once. Submitted it (with photos) and it got rejected. I reckon if we submitted it now, it might have stood a better chance as everyone is more clued up regarding ID and there has been a marked increase in records despite the species being in decline (I believe).

How many were overlooked previously?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 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