Wader (Central Spain) (3 Viewers)

[Valéry Schollaert]

A common sand is a common sand whether we've got democracy or not in our ID rounds.

Yes, and a Green Sandpiper stays Green even if the highest expert believe it is a Common

 

[Valéry Schollaert]

green sand would surely never show this breast pattern....dark breast sides with white in the mid section

We have shown you regular Green Sandpipers with this pattern above, it is very usual. Do you read other post before commenting ?

 

[apcdave]

dont wish to start a fight but you have " shown " me nothing - its just I have never seen a green with this breast pattern

 

[dsmith77]

Well in 20 years of watching a site with a average of 4 pairs of common sandpipers I’ve never they were that difficult
For me this is a common sandpiper, leg length is ok shape is good

Vegans will always argue be aggressive it’s the lack of meat I think

 

[coaltit]

Looks quite a rotund looking bird and well set in appearance does not go without a meal thats for sure.

 

[dsmith77]

dont wish to start a fight but you have " shown " me nothing - its just I have never seen a green with this breast pattern

Vegans seem to love been aggressive in nature,

 

[PYRTLE]

Come on guys, let's stop this please and not get personal......no need for it, just agree to disagree.
Thanks.
Pat

 

[Valéry Schollaert]

dont wish to start a fight but you have " shown " me nothing - its just I have never seen a green with this breast pattern

Now you have seen one :

http://orientalbirdimages.org/images/data/green_sandpiper_copy7.jpg

And OP bird, that's 2.

Let's go for 3

https://www.vogelwarte.ch/assets/images/voegel/vds/artbilder/700px/2110_0.jpg

Now, you've learned something :t:

 

[apcdave]

nope still not getting that common sand feel

 

[Valéry Schollaert]

Vegans seem to love been aggressive in nature,

Yes, you are very right.

Either you are not conscious that...

Billions of animals are violently killed and suffer... for nothing
http://thevegancalculator.com/animal-slaughter/

Most naturalists, supposed to be the first to act to protect biodiversity, are resisting to the facts, even when proven by science.
http://science.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aaq0216

Human behave so bad, that some warn than the biosphere itself is threatened.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11018

Now, either you are psychopath and don't care. Either you care and then necessarily vegan... and angry against all so-called naturalists, conservationists and ecologists claiming to act for nature but destroying the World.

Well, I forgot one word. Environmentalists. Here is a great video that tell why Environmentalists are wrong. Very very... wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlTBC91L-x0

Yes, that makes me nervous ; glad I'm still alive...

 

[nobbyball]

Getting back to the bird... Check out the join between the shoulder of the wing and the breast markings. If you have a quick google of Common Sandpiper (or even check your field guides they all show a white 'notch' (or 'peak' as described in Shorebirds) between the wing and breast markings - even on perched birds. Green Sandpiper does not, or rarely. The bird in question does not appear to show the notch. Any other feature seems unclear to me and could be either or. Based on the lack of white 'notch' I would lean more to the Green Sandpiper camp.

Ian

 

[P.Sunesen]

Well in 20 years of watching a site with a average of 4 pairs of common sandpipers I’ve never they were that difficult
For me this is a common sandpiper, leg length is ok shape is good

Vegans will always argue be aggressive it’s the lack of meat I think

Fully agree with you:t:

Peter

 

[Valéry Schollaert]

Finally, bird identification is really like politics. It is easy to know which member will argue in a way or another according to their affinity with other members or "opposition", and not according to features we can see... or not, on the photo.

Normally, every one looking honestly should see as Nobbyball said perfectly

Check out the join between the shoulder of the wing and the breast markings. If you have a quick google of Common Sandpiper (or even check your field guides they all show a white 'notch' (or 'peak' as described in Shorebirds) between the wing and breast markings - even on perched birds. Green Sandpiper does not, or rarely. The bird in question does not appear to show the notch. Any other feature seems unclear to me and could be either or. Based on the lack of white 'notch' I would lean more to the Green Sandpiper camp.

In addition to all others details I've given earlier. Much time lost for a simple Green Sandpiper.

Finally, may be we should try to convince ourselves that it is a Solitary Sandpiper ? That would be even more fun.

 

[Earnest lad]

I'm not voting for democracy - I'm voting for Common Sandpiper

 

[birdboybowley]

Common Sand

 

[Valéry Schollaert]

Green Sand

 

[Mark Lew1s]

Birdforum at its worst.

Aggressive arguments, unnecessary unpleasant statements about people’s lifestyle choices, snide comments.

It’s a shit photo (no offence). It’s not the end of the world that some of us disagree with others on the ID. Are we not all supposed to be on the same side?

 

[CARERY]

Birdforum at its worst.

Aggressive arguments, unnecessary unpleasant statements about people’s lifestyle choices, snide comments.

It’s a shit photo (no offence). It’s not the end of the world that some of us disagree with others on the ID. Are we not all supposed to be on the same side?

Well said!

I really don't care whether it's a Common or Green. Sometimes it's just better to back off. To spent so much time on basis of a photo like this disproportionate to say the least.

 

[johnallcock]

I'm sorry, you should have another look.

No need to apologise, you are entitled to an opinion. Following your suggestion I have taken another look at the photo, and still consider that (in my personal opinion) it looks like a Common Sandpiper.

It is exactly like this one, the first I found on Google Image.

Personally I don't agree. I fully agree with your point made here and elsewhere that Green Sandpiper can show a paler centre to the breast (although I would usually consider that it is not as clear-cut as on the subject bird). However, on Green Sandpiper the darker sides to the breast cut directly across to the flanks, rather than creating a 'bulge' on the sides of the breast as on the subject bird (reminiscent of eg a Sand Plover or Kentish Plover).

May be in UK, but generally speaking, it does more than Common Sandpiper.

Please check carefully who you are responding to. You will see that the location given in my brief profile lists my location as Hong Kong, not the UK (I was originally from the UK but have lived here for 15 years). Both species are common migrants and winter visitors here, I easily see 10-15 per day when in the wetlands. I am referring solely to my personal experience, and personally I see very few Green Sandpipers perched (actually I don't remember seeing one perched, but I may be wrong) but see this regularly with Common Sandpipers.

Well, we clearly see the legs, no reason that tail wouldn't be seen.

It is a perfect Green Sandpiper, and you prefer to imagine the legs, clearly visible, cannot be judged, and the tail miraculously concealed to lead to a Common Sandpiper... very strange.

The legs are easily visible because they are silhouetted against a pale background. The tail (if it is present) would be against a dark background. The two are therefore not comparable.


Overall I personally still think that the bird looks most like a Common Sandpiper, and others clearly agree with me. You are perfectly entitled to disagree, and the image is fairly poor for judging with absolute certainty either way. Personally if I were the observer, based on these comments, I would leave this as an unconfirmed 'sandpiper sp.', but that is their personal decision to make.

 

[Valéry Schollaert]

Well said!

I really don't care whether it's a Common or Green. Sometimes it's just better to back off. To spent so much time on basis of a photo like this disproportionate to say the least.

I agree with you totally.. what a lost of time indeed !