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: 3483718" data-attributes="member: 3550">There has been a dialogue about the identification in which various species have been put forward.  The last two people to post on the identification have agreed that these are a Surf Scoter on a Black Scoter.  No one has since come along to argue against this, though they are still welcome to do so. Often (but not always) this is how identifications are reached here on BirdForum.  This doesn't mean they are always correct or will be accepted but there is a process of discussion that tends to move towards a conclusion.A Rarities Committee would not be tearing their hair out because they, like us, can see a picture and have an account from the field by the OP.  They can draw their own conclusions on the accuracy of the proposed identification.  Being scientific in their approach, they appreciate the use of evidence, such as photographs.Numerous rare birds have been identified on this forum over many years (including some firsts for Britain) by the same process, in which the OP was not sure of the ID or had misidentified the bird.  That is often how rare bird identification works these days.  If you hope that birding doesn't work this way then you would presumably be asking for the first British record of Eastern Crowned Warbler to be struck off the list because it was identified on this forum from a photo after the person who had taken the picture misidentified it.Sorry if all this means that you are a pickled egg.</blockquote>

Verification