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="erwin" data-source="post: 1257016" data-attributes="member: 3436">Well it doesn't look like plumage detail analysis is going to give important clues either way.Then it's back to basics. A resonably experienced birdwatcher like me is supposed to be able to tell the difference between two familiar species like garden and reed in a 2 second view of the quality of the first pic.In this case it took me a few seconds more, because I had to compensate for the wet breast feathers and the not so obvious environment.I will also include the additional info provided by Ekopa from now on.A birdwatcher walks in a forest towards a lake edge. Two greyish medium sized warblers fly out and make it to the canopy. One stays in view. It makes a checking sound and sits in an alert horizontal stance on a flat lying reed stem. It's breast looks wet so it problably had a bath. It looks grayish with little contrast, round headed and only has light face markings except an eyering. It has thick dark grey tarsi and a short stubby bill. Our birdwather thinks w t h  oh Garden Warbler. Then the bird shows it back, where we note a warmer color rump, and disappears. The birdwatcher checks his Collins guide for the warmer rump, says yep, notes 3 GW and moves on.Did our birdwatcher make a mistake? Maybe, maybe not. But if we look at  that bill: Not only the lenght but also the color pattern and the thickness are wrong for RW in my opinion. There is a ca. 30 degree angle between the upper and lower edge, while the reference RW with short bill from CAU just has a short pin of a bill.So while the single aspects of this bill are debatable, the combination of the three aspects is pretty hard evidence IMO.</blockquote>

Verification