please id this bird... (1 Viewer)

[tophillbirder]

No reply. Does this mean everyone has seen sense or is everyone bored. To be honest don't think I'll bother doing "please help with ID" again as I often feel like Stephen Hawkings discussing cosmology with Jade Gooding then some professor from an obscure university chips in with some theory never tested in the real world.

 

[Fast_falkon]

No reply. Does this mean everyone has seen sense or is everyone bored. To be honest don't think I'll bother doing "please help with ID" again as I often feel like Stephen Hawkings discussing cosmology with Jade Gooding then some professor from an obscure university chips in with some theory never tested in the real world.

I think no one could be bothered to tell you again that this is a REDshank.

 

[apbarr]

No reply. Does this mean everyone has seen sense or is everyone bored. To be honest don't think I'll bother doing "please help with ID" again as I often feel like Stephen Hawkings discussing cosmology with Jade Gooding then some professor from an obscure university chips in with some theory never tested in the real world.

What an arrogant A***:C

 

[nickderry]

It's a redshank, legs are red, variability in colour doesn't extend to a greenshank having red legs. Also, look at the greater coverts, bright white, no?

 

[durham giant]

Redshank is what the background bird. I asume woodpiper is in the foreground as green is rarer. The greenshank has an upturned bill and green legs- hence the name. A green shank wouldn't have a solid section of brown on its 'back' crown. It would be streaked, not shown in this bird. the yellow- orange legs is characteristic of a juvenile redshank.
IN conclusion it is a REDSHANK.
DG

 

[Fast_falkon]

Redshank is what the background bird. I asume woodpiper is in the foreground as green is rarer. The greenshank has an upturned bill and green legs- hence the name. A green shank wouldn't have a solid section of brown on its 'back' crown. It would be streaked, not shown in this bird. the yellow- orange legs is characteristic of a juvenile redshank.
IN conclusion it is a REDSHANK.
DG

It's a first winter

 

[tophillbirder]

The bill is too long, it's all grey. The lower flanks are unstreaked. If you've got Shorebirds compared plate 54 137 with 55 139. Yes the legs look red but look at the length of the toes. Did they look red in the field? Is it the lighting or a camera affect?

 

[bitterntwisted]

No reply. Does this mean everyone has seen sense or is everyone bored. To be honest don't think I'll bother doing "please help with ID" again as I often feel like Stephen Hawkings discussing cosmology with Jade Gooding then some professor from an obscure university chips in with some theory never tested in the real world.

That kind of attitude would be ridiculous if you were right. It's even more laughable when you're wrong, as you seem to be. I was going to wait until I got back home and had both Shorebirds and BWPi in front of me before composing a detailed reply, but this is just silly. Greenshanks do not have red legs. Redshanks often show very limited red at the base of the bill, as illustrated in the link already provided.

I think the bird in front can be conclusively identified (contrary to your position) as a Wood Sandpiper. As well as the obvious super and plumage tones, and the slender structure, I seem to remember that the marked undertail coverts may be the clincher, with Green Sandpiper being diagnostically unmarked, but I could very well be wrong about that. In fact, I could very well be wrong about many things, which is a healthy outlook I suggest you consider employing.

Graham

PS - I think you meant Jade Goody and Stephen Hawking.

 

[dddiver]

too much wine

 

[Nick Tanner]

I'm with dddiver on this, lighten up people it's Christmas

Nick

 

[phil baber]

Conclusively, in my estimation, Redshank and Wood Sand in the front.
Happy Season Thing!

 

[tophillbirder]

Agree with that sentiment at least. It's only a common wader not a Spoon-billed Sand. I still stick with may view on the back bird. I find front bird is not clear enough to be conclusive. But I think you're all too hung up on leg colour. Were they really like that in real life. I've seen plenty of early Coolpix shots which turned blacks into vivid blues and even in film different makes had a tendency to enhance reds or blues.
As far as the Big Brother reference it was only meant as a joke but language used by one contributor is very "Jade' so as they say if the cap fits wear it. Please don't call anyone that again. And yes I got Jade's name wrong but in defence I never watched anything she was in just read about her in the news.
And by the away I can honestly say I read "A brief history of time" and understood it but I did do A level physic back in the the dark ages! Anyway I'm not saying any more. it's just not that important but seriously do read you books.

 

[London Birder]

Redshank and Wood Sandpiper.

No reason to invoke 'photographic artifact' theory; nothing else looks oddly coloured, whatever variability Greenshank may show in leg colour, it doesn't extend to orange/red. Bill structure also all wrong for Greenshank and length fine for Redshank (see Roy's photo link, or lots of other photos).

Toe length? What's the significance of this?

Never did like the plates in Shorebirds.

 

[SteveClifton]

Just looked in on this now redundant thread and had a little chuckle to myself. All I can add is a prediction for 2009 that Tophill Low will give us a Greater Yellowlegs or Solitary Sand in the coming year, perhaps both together! Or perhaps something even better in the form of Britain’s first Willet; just don't all go rushing for the car keys until absolutely certain though. I would hate for everyone to have a wasted journey.

I’m going to nail my colours to the mast and call the front bird a Wood Sand, The ID of the other bird has clearly already been sorted.

Good birding to all in the New Year,
Steve

 

[mikfoz]

No reply. Does this mean everyone has seen sense or is everyone bored. To be honest don't think I'll bother doing "please help with ID" again as I often feel like Stephen Hawkings discussing cosmology with Jade Gooding then some professor from an obscure university chips in with some theory never tested in the real world.

Why so upset?

Loads of people have replied with the fact that the rear bird is a Redshank and there's no question about it.

I agree.

I'm not so sure about the other bird because I'm not all that familiar with it in the field but I'm sure the consensus in the thread is correct.

I'm really not sure what's got your pants in a knot here when people are working hard to ID birds in a friendly fashion.