Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
I have never seen a Redpoll before as I am new to birdwatching. Can you please tell me if this is a Lesser Redpoll or a Common Redpoll. I saw it today in my neighbours garden in Snowdonia, Wales, U.K. Thank you so much for your help š
I think the evidence is they're best treated as forms (i.e. not even subspecies), but if not that then subspecies. We can see this in some of the photos people post: there's clearly a bit of a cline going on, especially for "arctic" redpolls---the photos often show a mix of characters
. . . and - as ever - there is no 'officially': you pays yer money and takes yer choice. If you think you can spot a received/mainstream view, and if you happen to like mainstream views, go for it. Personally, they always have been, and remain, 'redpoll'.
Personally I have always called Lesser as Common as it is more 'common' and Mealy as the less common subspecies as it is 'scarcer' - back to the drawing board.....
The only thing āofficialā about Redpolls is speculation!
If you look at the images of the two birds on the feeder you should see two completely different birds, the choice might appear to be down to the individualā¦.lump or split.
As far as Iām concerned regarding my images, bird on the left is Lesser and bird on the right is (and Iāll name it) Sub Arctic Redpollā¦.because it looks nothing like the other birdā¦and I donāt give a fig, whether they can hybridise or not.š