BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KnockerNorton" data-source="post: 1256772" data-attributes="member: 66452">Show me yours and I'll show you mine <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />  This is getting silly though. The bird has a longish tail, no gape flange, no obvious juvenile features. It is clearly not a very young (growing) bird. It may be a short-billed individual, but then we're getting into talk of aberrant features to make the bird fit our arguments, rather than identifying the bird by the features shown. I could just as easily claim that the bird is a young Garden Warbler, hence the bill doesn't fit the shape that you say it should (even though it looks fine for GW to me - blunt and stubby). Again, you use that link of a bird facing towards the camera! Of course the bill will look shorter, as you're looking at a more acute angle!! And I can see clear traces of gape in pics 1 and 3. It seems that CAU is certain in his own mind as to what the bird definitely is (not sure if anyone else on the thread is), although his arguments fail to convince me that it is undoubtedly a Reed Warbler. It may well be a Reed Warbler, but I'm far from convinced. It looks more like a Garden Warbler to me, but from the information (pics) available, i don't think anyone can mount a watertight case either way. When identification hinges on bills not being grown on full-grown birds and the colour of the underneath of the hind toe, I think it's time to call it a stalemate.</blockquote>

Verification