Falcon ID - Addis Ababa, Ethiopia May 28 (1 Viewer)

[Andy Adcock]

Well I am not author of the said post you are relating to, so I don't understand your point? I can't justify words that are not mine, can I? Especialy so since I don't even know what thread/post you are referring to?

.

My point is that great emphasis is being placed on the apparent tail length of this bird, in the infamous 'London Raptor' thread, the perceived long tail of a Buzzard was discredited as a product of the moult, how much can it be relied upon.

 

[AlinoVegano]

My point is that great emphasis is being placed on the apparent tail length of this bird, in the infamous 'London Raptor' thread, the perceived long tail of a Buzzard was discredited as a product of the moult, how much can it be relied upon.

True, especially that, here, compared to the body instead of moulting wings, tail is not that long.

 

[Tib78]

My point is that great emphasis is being placed on the apparent tail length of this bird, in the infamous 'London Raptor' thread, the perceived long tail of a Buzzard was discredited as a product of the moult, how much can it be relied upon.

Ho God, THAT thread...

Don't take it personnaly but there is not a chance in the world I'll go back and look for a specific post within the, what?, 5 pages it contains. I have had a vague look a few days back and that was enough...

But anyway I feel like I have already adressed your point in post #16. (and so as Tom in post #15).

 

[tconzemi]

My point is that great emphasis is being placed on the apparent tail length of this bird, in the infamous 'London Raptor' thread, the perceived long tail of a Buzzard was discredited as a product of the moult, how much can it be relied upon.

again in the infamous 'London Raptor' thread this was not consensus but the point of many contributors was that the tail length was perfectly normal for a second cal. bird. In very poor pictures margin artefacts can change the overall silhouette though, especially if there are only a few pixels showing the bird, as is so often the case in the London sky

 

[AlinoVegano]

Justin, can you please post a crop of the last pic with the bird stooping? I guess it's already cropped but it's worth a try.
I was having a bit of fun with lightroom when I noticed some nice rounded spots on the breast sides of your bird and when one increases the saturation, there is a nice rufous tinge that appears on the cheek. To me that pretty much puts the final nail in the coffin of the peregrine theory but let's see if a different version of the pic allows a better evalution of these details.

Actually, some rufous we can get in adding saturation will not prove anything, as come calidus can have a rufous tinge, unless this bird not properly identified.

http://orientalbirdimages.org/images/data/peregrine4.jpg


Regarding face pattern, our op birds is similar to this one imo.

http://orientalbirdimages.org/images/data/peregrine_falcon_calidus_3143_vd.jpg

Amazingly, more I look to argue with you, more I find convincing the bird is really a peregrine; hope we can reach a conclusion at some point ! o

 

[Tib78]

especially if there are only a few pixels showing the bird, as is so often the case in the London sky

:clap::clap:

 

[Andy Adcock]

:clap::clap:

???

 

[Tib78]

Actually, some rufous we can get in adding saturation will not prove anything, as come calidus can have a rufous tinge, unless this bird not properly identified.

http://orientalbirdimages.org/images/data/peregrine4.jpg

Well I definitely would not call this a typical calidus but who knows...

Regarding face pattern, our op birds is similar to this one imo.

http://orientalbirdimages.org/images/data/peregrine_falcon_calidus_3143_vd.jpg

My remark on the shape applies to the face pattern too: both species are not a million miles away from each other in this matter and less than perfect pictures are often fraud by subjective interpretation. However the moustache of the OP bird look thinner (less "full" especially at their base, if that makes more sense) to my (subjective) eyes.
And this picture do show remarkably well the long and slender toes of peregrine, while they look shorter and thicker on the OP bird...

Personnaly I feel there is too many wrong things for a Peregrine (moult, shape, phenology and some finer details) that on the other hand, conveniently and perfectly fit Lanner.

 

[jstanleyg]

I'm happy to provide some shots with further cropping. I'd say that we're approaching CTO status here (cropped to oblivion), but it's worth a shot. The last shot from my original post is the first one posted here. I'm looking forward to seeing how this 'helps' the discussion! :t:

 

[Tib78]

It helps as it shows that the underparts are almost plain with just a few spots on the breast sides (and the same spot patterning appears on the wig coverts). The underparts are also buff and contrast with a paler throat and gorget. The last pic also shows a relatively short P10. All this perfectly fits Lanner and does not fit a calidus peregrine at all. Not to mention all the others features highlighted along the thread.
I rest my case.

 

[AlinoVegano]

"It helps as it shows that the underparts are almost plain with just a few spots on the breast sides"

Who talked about wishful thinking? We don't see that at all, the photo is so cropped that the spots you see are just the pixels. We see a whiter throat, the rest of the body being darker, probably because it is barred, but we cannot, unfortunately, know if the body is really barred of spotted.

I cannot identify this bird with certainty, of course, but I favor Peregrine.

 

[tconzemi]

one last post from my side: Lanner is VERY common in the Ethiopian highlands, minor Peregrine widespread but much scarcer and this bird is not a local Peregrine, callidus type adult Peregrine in Summer in Ethiopia must be unusual least say. And I see what seems to be spots on the flanks, but also agree that photo artefacts are much more common than adult callidus in summer in Africa o

 

[jogresh]

I'm really struggling to see a bird which resembles Peregrine, jizz-wise. The structure and proportions seem all wrong, but look spot on for Lanner.

 

[AlinoVegano]

Regarding the colour, the poor quality pictures can have strange results... this calidus (unless wrongly identified?) looks much more rufous than our op bird.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a-P41dsyw...regrinus+calidus+++-+Adult+in+flight_2648.JPG

Jogreh, regarding the jizz, we are influenced subjectively by the long tail impression discussed above, but look at the proportion arm / hand.

Peregrine with similar position (and plumage) than our op bird.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nTqOLkqPsvw/VDwuilMqcbI/AAAAAAAABkA/YH7Hb6v4BXg/s1600/IMG_1879b.jpg

You can see arms being less than half of hand.

On Lanner, as here, arm is about 70% of hand
http://www.hbw.com/sites/default/fi...outh_africa_20120725_4_1600.jpg?itok=FDAilHYf

So on wing shape alone, the op bird is by far more similar to Peregrine than Lanner.

 

[P.Sunesen]

Regarding the colour, the poor quality pictures can have strange results... this calidus (unless wrongly identified?) looks much more rufous than our op bird.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a-P41dsyw...regrinus+calidus+++-+Adult+in+flight_2648.JPG

Jogreh, regarding the jizz, we are influenced subjectively by the long tail impression discussed above, but look at the proportion arm / hand.

Peregrine with similar position (and plumage) than our op bird.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nTqOLkqPsvw/VDwuilMqcbI/AAAAAAAABkA/YH7Hb6v4BXg/s1600/IMG_1879b.jpg

You can see arms being less than half of hand.

On Lanner, as here, arm is about 70% of hand
http://www.hbw.com/sites/default/fi...outh_africa_20120725_4_1600.jpg?itok=FDAilHYf

So on wing shape alone, the op bird is by far more similar to Peregrine than Lanner.

But calidus is ALWAYS wrongly identified in the field. Being able to tell calidus from the nominate is one of the TRULY diehard myths of modern field ornithology!

And all kinds of tricks are used to keep this silly little idea alive. Such as the lenght of tail(!) and the width of the moustachial stripe.....http://youtu.be/vrTCKXvXSUY

Please make it go away:

NOW

How do you expect a (very vaguely) defined subspecies, which is not, I repeat not, possibly to identify in the hand, to be so in the field? 333

Now go and read what the Grand Old Man of Raptors, Dick Forsman, has to say about the subject.

And take it with you - and to the bank

Peter

PS no, I'm not gonna join the dogfight whether the present bird is this or that, as long as I can vent my pet peeves B

 

[AlinoVegano]

But calidus is ALWAYS wrongly identified in the field. Being able to tell calidus from the nominate is one of the TRULY diehard myths of modern field ornithology!

And all kinds of tricks are used to keep this silly little idea alive. Such as the lenght of tail(!) and the width of the moustachial stripe.....http://youtu.be/vrTCKXvXSUY

Please make it go away:

NOW

How do you expect a (very vaguely) defined subspecies, which is not, I repeat not, possibly to identify in the hand, to be so in the field? 333

Now go and read what the Grand Old Man of Raptors, Dick Forsman, has to say about the subject.

And take it with you - and to the bank

Peter

PS no, I'm not gonna join the dogfight whether the present bird is this or that, as long as I can vent my pet peeves B

:king: funny message. Btw, I've never said I would identify the sub-species on plumage or jizz in the field, I just see a Peregrine, some others see a Lanner. That's it. Now, if we can exclude the small, dark and compact minor, which is a distinctive subspecies indeed, remain ONLY calidus on the Ethiopian list...

 

[P.Sunesen]

:king: funny message. Btw, I've never said I would identify the sub-species on plumage or jizz in the field, I just see a Peregrine, some others see a Lanner. That's it. Now, if we can exclude the small, dark and compact minor, which is a distinctive subspecies indeed, remain ONLY calidus on the Ethiopian list...

I know you didn't and I know said subspecies visit Africa by and large.

 

[Tib78]

"It helps as it shows that the underparts are almost plain with just a few spots on the breast sides"

Who talked about wishful thinking? We don't see that at all, the photo is so cropped that the spots you see are just the pixels. We see a whiter throat, the rest of the body being darker, probably because it is barred, but we cannot, unfortunately, know if the body is really barred of spotted.

I cannot identify this bird with certainty, of course, but I favor Peregrine.

So...the camera managed not only to erase the peregrine traits of this bird but it also made up Lanner-like artefacts... It is really unfortunate that on top of that these spots are the right shape and situated exactly at the right place (i.e pale Lanners have spots confined to the breast sides and vent/tights area). The camera even managed to recreate the same spots at the same place on two different images. Justin, my friend, that is one tricky camera that you have!

Ok, so we now have an explanation for the presence of an adult calidus at the end of May in Ethiopia (it's a sick bird) and for the spots and buff underparts (it's the camera).
We still have a bunch of features to debunk. Let's start with 2 of them: the short and thick toes and the short P10. I propose dwarfism.

 

[AlinoVegano]

So...the camera managed not only to erase the peregrine traits of this bird but it also made up Lanner-like artefacts... It is really unfortunate that on top of that these spots are the right shape and situated exactly at the right place (i.e pale Lanners have spots confined to the breast sides and vent/tights area). The camera even managed to recreate the same spots at the same place on two different images. Justin, my friend, that is one tricky camera that you have!

Ok, so we now have an explanation for the presence of an adult calidus at the end of May in Ethiopia (it's a sick bird) and for the spots and buff underparts (it's the camera).
We still have a bunch of features to debunk. Let's start with 2 of them: the short and thick toes and the short P10. I propose dwarfism.

I thought we all agreed those shots we unidentifiable. Well, you focus on details that cannot be honestly judged on the poor shots we have. I don't say you are wrong, I say we don't know. Wings proportions (length of arm compared to hand) are those of Peregrine, not Lanner, and this doesn't seems a result of the shots. It is not enough to be sure, just saying we leave it unidentified. Lanner is more likely in that place in that season, no one denied that. I don't want you to say it is a Peregrine, but just admit it is not possible to totally exclude a Peregrine. Nothing more.