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="Andrew Whitehouse" data-source="post: 3522938" data-attributes="member: 3550">I'm rather acutely aware of birds that I've heard but not seen.  I'd quite like to see them at stage, I guess.A few years ago as a sort of 'thought experiment' I tried to work out which birds (at least within Britain) I'd seen but not heard.  It's not something I'd ever thought about before, which maybe suggests how ingrained my concern to see as well as hear birds was.  Lots of people will say they need to see things, some will say they will count things heard or seen but it's pretty unusual to count a bird that's been seen but not heard.  I suppose the only exception is when you need to hear the bird to clinch the ID. Even then most people would want to see it as well as hear it.There are a few quite common birds I've seen frequently but have never really heard.  Red-breasted Merganser is remarkably silent most of the time, for example.</blockquote>