I am still fairly new to birding. Yesterday I was on a field trip with about 20 birders. At least 10 were experienced birders. I spotted a hawk in a tree and asked if anyone could identify it and no one could. Maybe two people out of the group had field guides which were Sibley's. I had a Kaufman mainly because it fits in my back pocket. I looked in the Kaufman and it had a very close match of the spotted breast of the hawk we were looking at. It appeared to be an immature Red Shouldered hawk. The Sibley's did not display a picture of an immature with the spotted breast we were seeing. The Sibley's did however point out patches on the outer wing which helped us confirm our i.d as it flew away. My point is that all these experienced birders may never have identified the bird if two different field guides hadn't been around.
-
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.
Why are field guides taboo in the field? (7 Viewers)
- Thread starter Doug
- Start date
Hey, I'm not proud. My theory is that if you know how many field guides you own, you don't have enough of them. I usually have 2 with me in my bag. Also a small notebook to jot down impressions of briefly seen birds. I also keep a couple of field guides in the car with a handy pair of small binos. I have no real favorite among the field guides. Each one is unique in it's approach.
matt green
Norfolkman gone walkabout
still using a secondhand edition of 'the birds of britain and europe'by heinzel fitter and parslow,its a bit battered,cost me only 20p from a charity shop.my new little collins guide is still so clean and tidy on the shelf but it's only a matter of time before the 1976 copy 'gives up the ghost'.matt
Grousemore
Senior Member
lvn600 said:
'Experienced' is a relative term.
R-S Hawk ID would not be difficult for my understanding of an experienced birdsr.
Colin Trotman
Col
lvn600 said:
Heaven forbid! , I'm sure none of the experts using this forum could possibly mistake any ornithological example! - the continuation of this thread simply exemplifies that MOST of us will admit to be learning all the time; whether you take a field guide or prefer to sketch is neither here nor there, the enjoyment you get out of a day out is what counts - identification is not the only use for a guide remember, habiat & characteristics of what you've been looking at can also have its benefits. Do what you feel easy with, don't be put off by any 'expert' who has his head so far up his own backside, that he has the temerity to tell YOU what's right or wrong! B
Allen S. Moore
Well-known member
A great point! I have been birdwatching for 40 years, and there is always more to learn than time available in which to seek the answers.lvn600 said:
ColinD
Well-known member
Field guides are not tabboo as far as I'm concerned. The only reason I don't carry one is the same reason I don't normally carry a scope, i.e. I can't be bothered carrying them, because I don't use them enough.
I'm by no means an expert, but most of my birding is at my local patch which I visit almost daily throughout the year, and have done for nearly 20 years. This means that I know before I get there 99% of what I am likely to see. I see a new bird at my local patch maybe once every two years, and even then they're not always that difficult to identify. For example, in February I recorded my first Long-tailed Duck at the mere. I knew instantly what it was, I've seen hundreds before elsewhere, so no need for a look in a field guide.
You could argue that the field guide would help me age / sex the bird, but then which field guide would I take? Usually I find that no one guide is good enough. If I see a bird I'm not familiar with, I often refer to several guides, back issues of British Birds and the internet. Small pocket guides are ok when your a beginner and looking for your first Brambling or Grey Wagtail, but when you've been seeing those sort of birds for years, you don't need to look in a guide to id them. The sort of birds I need a guide for are the more obscure species such as leaf warblers and Calidris Waders, and in my experience pocket guides are next to useless for these species. Having said that I do have a brilliant pocket sized guide which I think might be out of print now called "The MacMillan guide", which soley concentrates of identifying difficult species, and completely ignores commoner and easy to identify species.
But none of this would stop me carrying a field guide, except that because of what I have explained above, I wouldn't know which one to take, and probably I'd have to take more than one, just on the off chance that today might actually be the day when I see something different. That sounds too much like hard work to me! I prefer to risk it and if I do see something different, take a few notes to refer to at home, and maybe go home for the scope and the books hoping that the bird stays where it is.
Colin
I'm by no means an expert, but most of my birding is at my local patch which I visit almost daily throughout the year, and have done for nearly 20 years. This means that I know before I get there 99% of what I am likely to see. I see a new bird at my local patch maybe once every two years, and even then they're not always that difficult to identify. For example, in February I recorded my first Long-tailed Duck at the mere. I knew instantly what it was, I've seen hundreds before elsewhere, so no need for a look in a field guide.
You could argue that the field guide would help me age / sex the bird, but then which field guide would I take? Usually I find that no one guide is good enough. If I see a bird I'm not familiar with, I often refer to several guides, back issues of British Birds and the internet. Small pocket guides are ok when your a beginner and looking for your first Brambling or Grey Wagtail, but when you've been seeing those sort of birds for years, you don't need to look in a guide to id them. The sort of birds I need a guide for are the more obscure species such as leaf warblers and Calidris Waders, and in my experience pocket guides are next to useless for these species. Having said that I do have a brilliant pocket sized guide which I think might be out of print now called "The MacMillan guide", which soley concentrates of identifying difficult species, and completely ignores commoner and easy to identify species.
But none of this would stop me carrying a field guide, except that because of what I have explained above, I wouldn't know which one to take, and probably I'd have to take more than one, just on the off chance that today might actually be the day when I see something different. That sounds too much like hard work to me! I prefer to risk it and if I do see something different, take a few notes to refer to at home, and maybe go home for the scope and the books hoping that the bird stays where it is.
Colin
Mouldy
skywatcher, dragonhunter
Experience is relative, if you feel you need one then take one I say.
I used to succumb to the 'use of a fieldguide in the field is punishable by death' brigade and so rarely took one out with me for fear of ridicule.
Trouble is, in the early days I really needed one as when I checked my notes at home I would find that the one piece of information needed to confirm the identity of my mystery bird was missing and still have many unconfirmed birds in what I call my X-Files.
So nowadays I always have a guide with me (The New Birdwatcher's Pocket Guide to Britain and Europe - Hayman & Hume) which is great, only half inch thick and 3 1/2 x 7 1/2 so fits easily in the side pocket of my 'field-bag'.
I find I don't need to use it in Britain now but always have it 'just in case', but it's dead handy when birding on holiday abroad. :flyaway:
I used to succumb to the 'use of a fieldguide in the field is punishable by death' brigade and so rarely took one out with me for fear of ridicule.
Trouble is, in the early days I really needed one as when I checked my notes at home I would find that the one piece of information needed to confirm the identity of my mystery bird was missing and still have many unconfirmed birds in what I call my X-Files.
So nowadays I always have a guide with me (The New Birdwatcher's Pocket Guide to Britain and Europe - Hayman & Hume) which is great, only half inch thick and 3 1/2 x 7 1/2 so fits easily in the side pocket of my 'field-bag'.
I find I don't need to use it in Britain now but always have it 'just in case', but it's dead handy when birding on holiday abroad. :flyaway:
peterpiper
Well-known member
As another new to birding, I always carry a field guide, some hides I visit have pictures of most seen birds on the walls, so no problem, but what about when I'm on my own, far from anybody, or far from a hide, as most of my birding is, my artistry is non-existant, memory the same, more than one unusual bird brings confusion, so a litle tick in the collins does the job.
Yes I have been on the receiving end of those scornful looks, but so what? I do my thing, let others do theirs, may they enjoy it as much as I do
pete
Yes I have been on the receiving end of those scornful looks, but so what? I do my thing, let others do theirs, may they enjoy it as much as I do
pete
senatore
Well-known member
Hi Mouldy,Mouldy said:
I carry this guide with me all the time as it's size makes it easy to take with you.
I was amused earlier in the year when 4 experienced birders in a hide I had entered were scoping a Pipit that they could,nt agree on.Being top birders none of them carried a guide so when I took my guide out I soon lost possession of it as they all poured over it.They decided in the end it was a Rock Pipit but not without my guide.
Max.
StevieEvans
Well-known member
ColinD said:
I agree.
Perhaps the fear of ridicule has come about with people wrongly believing that the sole purpose of Field Guides is Identification.....?
I take my Collins along every time i go to watch an unfamiliar species or sub species eg. Greenish Warbler, that way i can see why it is a Greenish & not just because birdline & the assembled crowd say so.
Last year i did a bit twitching (it doesnt compare to real birdwatching, but enjoyable all the same) & was astonished at the number of times people quite happily walked off with a tick & a smile after watching the wrong bird !! eg Booted, Dusky & Greenish Warblers...
Another thing i noticed was almost as soon as you begin studying the species in question in the F'Guide, then other birders will break their necks to have a look.
This occured at the Edinburgh "Mongolian Plover" & Bempton Western Bonellis.
I also have the Mitchell Beazley pocket guide (a beginners book maybe ? used by a day-tripper at a RSPB reserve..?)
But looking at it closely, theres a lot of easily digestable info how to seperate M & F Waxwings by their wingtips, sex Avocets in flight, tell Male from female in Cuckoo & Moorhen etc.
I guess if im looking at a bird & i know why it is what it is, that doesnt stop me using my fieldguide there & then to appreciate it all the more.
SteveE.
Similar threads
