• 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.

More bad photos for ID help, Wader (?) Nepal, Nov 28. 2023 (1 Viewer)


Well-known member
Hi, the wader (or possibly a duck?) in the attached 2 photos puzzle me. The photos were taken in the Phewa Lake wetlands, just outside Pokhara, Nepal (central Nepal) on Nov 28, 2023. The area is one of rice fields with a few creeks or natural "canals" running through it with some reeds.
The Great Cormorants give an idea of its size. None of the expected ducks have that kind of a breast or neck band I believe, so I think that leaves a wader. But it does seem large and plump, more duck like than wader.
But the only expected "waders" that occour there that have that sort of breast band are, I believe, Northern Lapwing and Green Sandpiper. However, I have no experience with Northern Lapwings, though its stance is more like a lapwin I think than a sandpiper. Or perhaps it is a Ruff? I clearly have no idea:)
There is, I think, a Goosander making an appearance in the lower left of photo 1 and 2 little egrets in the second photo.
Any comments, criticism or advice on the ID of this rather plump bird, if such is possible with such a poor photo, would be much appreciated.
thank you in advance


  • fullsizeoutput_1c3e.jpeg
    773.7 KB · Views: 77
  • fullsizeoutput_1c3d.jpeg
    530.9 KB · Views: 76
Thank you very much for that.
May i ask why you can say that without doubt please? This is for my learning, not that I doubt you:) I got close to that by elimination of what else is likely in this area at this time, but I am unable to get to a Northern Lapwing by construction.
thank you in advance
Last edited:
Basically Northern Lapwing is a species that is all but unmistakable with experience; the combination of jizz (shape and size impression), head markings and breast band add up to a unique impression; no need to look for fine details in the photo to eliminate confusion species, as there aren’t any!
Yeah... I'll post an actual photo of the illustration when I get round to it (a coloured version). Fingers crossed it would be fair use.
Thanks for the suggestion of Collins. I have realized, though, that the many very skilled birders on here are able to see things that I cannot see. It was rather humbling, to be faced with realizing that many people are just much more visually perceptive than me and that my birding skills will never match those on here who take the time to answer ID questions. But birding is still lots of fun:)
I am not phased by this:) but am amazed. It - bird identification - is, I suppose somewhat like math or art or other endeavours, involving both nature and nurture. So I agree that more practice will make one better, but also I am of the view that some have a natural talent upon which to build. I am not at all disheartened by this, just amazed in a very pleasurable way, somewhat similar to my feelings about how someone can produce some works of art.
A most heartfelt thank you to all who spend the time and effort helping others with their identification challenges.
Not necessarily so at all - in fact not likely to be so. It's far more a case of knowing what to look for and being aware of the subtleties of form and colour. This just comes with time and experience.
in a general sense agree—and especially here where with experience this will obviously be a lapwing.

In an absolute one though no: we know there are people who can perceive more (or fewer) colours, have greater or lesser resolving power, are more or less short-sighted etc. I have improved by practising but I realise I will never match the field skills of the best. Knowledge and experience help more when it comes to ID from static images: it's obvious the quality of the images imposes an artificial limit to visual perception. Even here, though, the debates about interpretation suggest fundamental differences in what people see.

Users who are viewing this thread