Redpoll ID based on a bird in W. Mids UK

[Bobolink44]

Dave Hutton and others have posted some fine images of a redpoll on the UK Scarce Gallery (http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery12). Bill and structure etc look like Common rather than Arctic but what a lovely white rump. Not so sure if undertail is completely unstreaked too. Any way good educational bird for would be searchers on both sides of the pond of Arctic/Hoary Redpolls.
:beer:

[Dave Hutton]

Dave Hutton and others have posted some fine images of a redpoll on the UK Scarce Gallery (http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery12). Bill and structure etc look like Common rather than Arctic but what a lovely white rump. Not so sure if undertail is completely unstreaked too. Any way good educational bird for would be searchers on both sides of the pond of Arctic/Hoary Redpolls.
:beer:

Hi Bobolink44 thanks for the link better images today on my webpage & also on Steve seals webpage at http://www.steveseal.fotopic.net/
follow the link for my pics :certifiable:

http://www.davehutton.fotopic.net/

[Josh Jones]

Bill shape and structure, heavy flank streaking, streaked UTCs all point towards this being a Mealy (which it undoubtedly is)... when there were quite a few Mealies around a couple of winters back I saw a number this pale, complete with unstreaked rumps - variation is huge.

An even paler, more Arctic-like bird can be found here:

http://www.kentos.org.uk/Photographs/06ArcticRedpollHartyFeb.htm

Not sure that was ever resolved but I certainly don't think its an Arctic... redpolls can be a nightmare.

[AndyB]

David Sibley's just put up some feeder photos comparing Arctic/Hoary and Common Redpolls - focussing on scapular and back pattern as a useful feature. You can see it here (http://sibleyguides.blogspot.com/2008/01/my-holiday-redpoll-photos.html)

[Brian S]

The W Mids bird looks like an Arctic to me

Brian S

[timmyjones]

I agree is this the same bird that has now been put on birdguides as an Arctic today

11:11 03/01/08 Arctic Redpoll W Mids Marsh Lane NR (PERMIT ONLY) 09:55
exilipes bird showing well along the old road with c.20 Lesser Redpolls, previously reported as a Mealy Redpoll. Permits available from the shop at Stonebridge Golf Centre, Somers Road off Hampton Lane in Meriden

[Josh Jones]

The W Mids bird looks like an Arctic to me

Ok, but would you care to expand on why?

Several features (such as the bill, the heavy flank streaking and 'dirtiness' in lower flanks) bother me, and I think there are a couple of faint streaks on the UTCs as well as the main one... so reasoning here would be of interest.

[Nathan Kipling]

Dave Hutton's now claiming it as an Arctic which to me was what it looked like. I didn't like to say, everybody disagreed. I don't know of a book that's brilliant on the group but that's what it matches in Paul Doherty's DVD.

[Brian S]

I am a little ambivalent about the bill, as there is overlap in the 'pushed in' quality to the bill on Arctic and Mealy.

Check out
http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=listpictures&species_id=814

Lots of images showing the variability in underpart streaking, bill projection, etc - unless of course you think the danes are getting it wrong

Also below birds from the surfbirds gallery - all Arctic

Brian S

[AndyB]

I'm having a hard time with how the bird seems to change from photo to photo.

eg the undertail here (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47452263.html) looks different from here (http://steveseal.fotopic.net/p47578387.html). On some photos the breast streaking looks quite heavy (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47452260.html) and the next photo less so (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47607754.html).

However, many of the photos appear to show a suite of characteristics you would want to see on an Arctic. I even think the bird does show what some might consider a classic Arctic bill shape (with that snout look, sloping forehead in to the bill) here (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47607748.html), here (http://steveseal.fotopic.net/p47578384.html) and also here (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47607750.html)

[Josh Jones]

I'm having a hard time with how the bird seems to change from photo to photo.

eg the undertail here (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47452263.html) looks different from here (http://steveseal.fotopic.net/p47578387.html). On some photos the breast streaking looks quite heavy (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47452260.html) and the next photo less so (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47607754.html).

However, many of the photos appear to show a suite of characteristics you would want to see on an Arctic. I even think the bird does show what some might consider a classic Arctic bill shape (with that snout look, sloping forehead in to the bill) here (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47607748.html), here (http://steveseal.fotopic.net/p47578384.html) and also here (http://lee111.fotopic.net/p47607750.html)


Hi Andy - there are two different birds. The bird in question is the paler, less-streaky individual. There was some initial confusion.

Here is the bird in question:

http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?v=1&f=157820&r=0&st=0&q=

http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?v=1&f=157817&r=0&st=0&q=


I genuinely don't believe Arctic can ever look like this - just look at the undertail coverts for one. A main streak, with several other faint streaks around it. The lower flanks are heavily streaked and buff, and really don't give the impression of Arctic at all from these images.

Brian, as for the three examples you have used there, none of them actually have that similar a bill. All of them are more Arctic-like, with the Marsh Lane bird's bill somewhat longer and more pointed. In addition, the extensive gallery on netfugl does show some variation, but certainly none approaching the extremity of the individual in the links I have provided above.

[Josh Jones]

http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?search=1&s=4796&rty=0&v=1

This might make things easy. A real range of shots here (hopefully most members are birdguides subscribers!).

The bird seems to go from looking like a Mealy to some poses looking more Arctic-like.....

Still think this is really well marked Mealy!

[Brian S]

Josh, if we concentrate on the bill

Let me give you some figures
Svensson gives bill tip to feathering
flammea male 8.2-10.4mm; female 7.2-9.7mm
exilipes male/female 7.0-9.6mm

depth
flammea 5.7-6.5mm
exilipes 5.6-6.3mm

BWP gives
flammea B>f male 7.9-10.4mm (av. 9.1mm); female 7.5-9.9mm (av. 8.8mm)
exilipes B>f male 6.8-8.8mm (av 7.9mm); female 6.3-8.5mm (av. 7.7mm) - note the 0.5mm (or more) difference between BWP and Svensson

depth
flammea 5.2-6.8mm
exilipes 5.3-6.4mm

On average, therefore we can see that exilipes will have a marginally shorter bill, but equally deep-based bill. Mind you there is a lot of overlap and so a long-billed exilipes will match all but the longest billed flammea.

Finally, are you saying that Arctic can't show undertail covert streaking? Again Svensson shows they can, though rare.

http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=4668

Interesting discussion.

Brian S

[jamesg]

Tricky bird.

It has a number of plumage features that are on the cusp between Arctic and Common. The undertail coverts and rump are certainly within range of both spp.

Perhaps the most Arctic-ish thing about this bird is the overall frostiness of the plumage throughout. However, I've seen more than one definite Common showing similar levels of frostiness (but always with one or more tell-tale feature, e.g. blotchy rump, red breast etc..).

For me, the killer features are the very dark brownish (rather than buffy) mantle and scapular feathers, contrasting strikingly with the bold white mantle braces. These scream out Common Redpoll to me. Likewise the lack of buff tones to the face and neck. The huge flank streaks and rose tint on the rump (visible in a few pics) also speak strongly for Common. Back-up features such as the big bill, big head and overall Common-ish jizz, suggest to me that this is an extreme-end Common Redpoll.

[Josh Jones]

Brian,

I accept there is considerable overlap but the overall impression of this bird for me is of Mealy Redpoll.

I agree, Arctic Redpolls can show streaking on the UTCs but surely not to the extent shown by the Marsh Lane bird. If it can be shown to this extent (several marked UTCs), then it must be very rare. Now, let us put that in to perspective - exilipes Arctic Redpoll is a rare enough bird in Britain. What are the chances of one of these extremely rare Mealy-like Arctics appearing in the UK? probably very small.

However, this is speculation - I still maintain everything is well within range of Mealy, as opposed to some features which could be within range of Arctic. Surely the safe conclusion is that this bird is Mealy Redpoll?!

[Brian S]

It's boring to be 'safe', sometimes it's good to push the envelope. I have seen many Mealies in my years birding with seemingly unmarked undertail coverts, so the safe thing is not accept any exilipes? (only joking ;-)). Also, let's not forget you can adjust the contrast in a pic which might affect the relative strength of any streaking - though I am not suggesting anything here....

In the context of whether this will get accepted by the BBRC, you might possibly be right (time will tell), but in the context of a forum it is good to speculate and discuss. I have to agree that the bill does look a little long, but all I am trying to say is that in my experience it is variable.

Brian S

[Josh Jones]

It's boring to be 'safe', sometimes it's good to push the envelope. I have seen many Mealies in my years birding with seemingly unmarked undertail coverts, so the safe thing is not accept any exilipes? (only joking ;-)). Also, let's not forget you can adjust the contrast in a pic which might affect the relative strength of any streaking - though I am not suggesting anything here....

In the context of whether this will get accepted by the BBRC, you might possibly be right (time will tell), but in the context of a forum it is good to speculate and discuss. I have to agree that the bill does look a little long, but all I am trying to say is that in my experience it is variable.

Brian S


Good points Brian.

On the safety side of things, I certainly don't think this can be claimed as a definite exilipes because too many features don't fit. Those that fit, fit just as well (if not more) with a pale Mealy, based on the photographs we have seen. There appear to be a little too many streaks on the undertail coverts (and the thick streak on the longest UTC is perhaps a little too thick - but then to confirm this we need measurements!), the bill seems a tad long, and streaking is heavy and 'dirty'-looking in places. By my own understanding of current criteria, this is pushing the boundaries for exilipes and for one to show all of these unusual features would be rather remarkable (unheard of?! or am I just showing inexperience here...).

Of course contrast of images may be an issue (although I don't believe it is with the current photos), over-exposure is also a problem - certainly several initial images of the bird are over-exposed making it seem alot paler than it appears in the normally-exposed images.

Here is another image of the bird. Looks like a pretty normal Mealy here:

http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=119967&d=1199442206

It would be interesting to hear some other opinions!

[forktail]

excellent comments Brain, James and Josh. Hope this is an indication of what is to come on this forum.

Tricky bird.

It has a number of plumage features that are on the cusp between Arctic and Common. The undertail coverts and rump are certainly within range of both spp.

Perhaps the most Arctic-ish thing about this bird is the overall frostiness of the plumage throughout. However, I've seen more than one definite Common showing similar levels of frostiness (but always with one or more tell-tale feature, e.g. blotchy rump, red breast etc..).

For me, the killer features are the very dark brownish (rather than buffy) mantle and scapular feathers, contrasting strikingly with the bold white mantle braces. These scream out Common Redpoll to me. Likewise the lack of buff tones to the face and neck. The huge flank streaks and rose tint on the rump (visible in a few pics) also speak strongly for Common. Back-up features such as the big bill, big head and overall Common-ish jizz, suggest to me that this is an extreme-end Common Redpoll.

I'm sure most keen birders are aware of the variation in rump and utcs between the two 'species' but isn't the actual shape (and prehaps extent) of the utcs streak not as described in, for example the BB2001 review of identification, and also the Shirihai and Christie Macmillan, for an Arctic?. Am i reading too much into this point? Is it not as relevant as previously stated? I thought exilipes had a rather limited, but more even width, streak on the longest utc and only very limited marking on 1 or 2 others? - see the pic in BB2001 review of a probable extreme Arctic (pl 54 i think). There were at least a couple of Arctics in the last Norfolk influx with 'obvious' utcs streaks but they were pencil thin and grey looking in the field and i only saw one, possibly two streaks on any of the three presumed exilipes birds I observed.

Sibley has recently made a similar point to James, on his blog, re colour of mantle braces but the BB review points out that Arctics typically have a white central mantle too which would produce the braces?. So i'm confused there. The points made here and elsewhere about bill variation may be valid but the gen as it is filtered down to birders, has often emphasised the small, pushed in appearance of the bill, loose feathering, small head and buffy tones - which i can't really see here

perhaps the criteria are being refined?

excellent stuff, either way.

[jamesg]

I'm sure most keen birders are aware of the variation in rump and utcs between the two 'species' but isn't the actual shape (and prehaps extent) of the utcs streak not as described in, for example the BB2001 review of identification, and also the Shirihai and Christie Macmillan, for an Arctic?.

Remember that a small proportion of Mealies can show even pure white utcs, so I'm sure some can also show pencil thin streaks.
Regarding the mantle braces - it's not so much the braces themselves - as you say, these can be very clear on many Arctics - moreover, it's the darkness of the feathers around them. In particular, the very brownish tone and blotchy nature of the feather centres, which really look unlike anything I would expect on an exillipes. That said, in some shots these feathers look quite buffish, so perhaps there are some photo-effects going on in there.

We obviously all want to find a single truly diagnostic feature for these taxa, but I'm not sure one exists. Bill Oddie once described exillipes as "a bird not worth seeing" on account of the headaches they provoke. I think I'd agree with him in this case...

[Nathan Kipling]

I'm interested in whether we're 100% certain all Arctics south of their normal range are nominate C. e. exilipes since it explains the confusion if we're looking at C. e. hornemanni

[AndyB]

Thanks for the link to photos Josh. This bird is a bit of a chamelion and its helpful to see them all on one page. I'm glad to hear there are 2 birds being photographed because I was starting to wonder why it was looking so radically different between photos.

I have no agenda other than wanting to learn a little more about Redpoll ID.

Interestingly, this photo (http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=11246) of a flock of hornemanni in Greenland shows 3 birds (out of the 19) with quite a well marked undertail covert streak and 2 other birds with less well marked undertail covert markings (20% of the flock) - seemingly similar in marking to this photo (http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=157674) of the Marsh Lane bird. Here's another (top photo) from Michigan photographed by Tim Baerwald showing off its undertail coverts streak. (http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/search2.cgi?species=hoary+redpoll)

Trying to judge colours from photos on a computer monitor is not the wisest thing to do and nothing can replace seeing the bird in life but I've spent some time looking at the Sibley photos (http://sibleyguides.blogspot.com/2008/01/my-holiday-redpoll-photos.html) from his feeder cam in his yard. He obviously sees a variety of plumages of Arctic. He recommends starting with back colour first and stresses that bill size is not always obvious. There are some exilipes in his yard that are quite subtle and, assuming he's right and they are Arctics, could very easily be passed off as Mealy if we take the conservative approach to IDing Arctic. Indeed, the Marsh Lane bird appears frostier-backed and a better candidate than many of Sibley's birds. Eg compare Sibley's subtler birds to these photos from Marsh Lane:this photo from Dave Hutton (http://www.surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20080102110358.jpg) and this photo from Steve Seal (http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=157357).

Are we only going to accept that we can ID with confidence those classic snow balls (hornemannis?) that are instantly identifiable from a split second look at a photo or is there a danger we're missing and passing off subtler birds as Mealies?

Anyway, great discussion!

[Dave Hutton]

Dave Hutton's now claiming it as an Arctic which to me was what it looked like. I didn't like to say, everybody disagreed. I don't know of a book that's brilliant on the group but that's what it matches in Paul Doherty's DVD.

Nathan,
I'm not claiming it as such! Just playing Devils advocate!!! When Martin Garner put it out as Exilipes i posted a photo in the Rare birds gallery to see what sort of reacton we'd get!! & I must say we got plenty from home & abroad!! as discussed on the ID Q&A page ive already said my piece on the bird!!!

All the best,

Dave

[Josh Jones]

Thanks for the link to photos Josh. This bird is a bit of a chamelion

I don't think I could put it any better....


Are we only going to accept that we can ID with confidence those classic snow balls (hornemannis?) that are instantly identifiable from a split second look at a photo or is there a danger we're missing and passing off subtler birds as Mealies?

I don't think we are passing any subtler birds off as Mealies (unless we are talking in US terms here as Sibley has perhaps just proved!), there is substantial difference between Arctic and Mealy Redpoll as to seperate the two. In Britain, both are scarce at the best of times (aside the occasional big irruption), so we don't have to contend with massive flocks to look through! Remember that structure is very difficult to ascertain from photos - the vast majority of images of the Marsh Lane redpoll have shown it in a bewildering variety of poses which have affected the appearance of its structure greatly, let alone plumage in different lights etc. Here's the bird giving an Arctic-like impression:

http://www.steveseal.fotopic.net/p47507601.html

The rump is over-exposed so appears paler than it ought to be (and makes it seem unstreaked as a result!), and the angle makes the bill seem more Arctic-like. Here's the same bird in a couple of different poses, looking like an Arctic, due to the angle the bill is held at in the first:

http://www.steveseal.fotopic.net/p47560278.html
http://www.steveseal.fotopic.net/p47578384.html

From these its no wonder there has been plenty of people vouching for exilipes. But here's some of it looking more Mealy-like:

http://www.davehutton.fotopic.net/p47580786.html
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=157490&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

And here's a great shot of the UTCs - three streaks clear in this one:

http://www.davehutton.fotopic.net/p47511329.html


Perhaps, just perhaps this one is best left unidentified... shame its being a real pain to see now, as more images would be great! As you can see the shots are so variable depending especially on light- those of it looking extremely pale seem to have been taken on a dull day, and make it paler than it seems. Still, who knows. I'm still in the Common camp, but where it has come from is baffling. Arctics usually stand out as being just that, and this bird doesn't have that initial reaction for me.

I'm currently playing with a three-bird theory...

[talkingpond]

It's boring to be 'safe', sometimes it's good to push the envelope.

So to push the question on a stage, if pale Mealies and dark exilipes Arctics are possibly indistinguishable with certainty, are we sure that the two forms justify specific status?

Jeff

[Nathan Kipling]

I apologise for any trouble caused, Dave. I have no motive as someone who's never met you!

:wideeyed:

[Josh Jones]

So to push the question on a stage, if pale Mealies and dark exilipes Arctics are possibly indistinguishable with certainty, are we sure that the two forms justify specific status?

I assume you mean just "indistinguishable"?

They are distinguishable, some birds are just difficult! Its' not all about plumage details - jizz, size, measurements, structure and so on all have their own parts to play in identification.

Plus the two species live sympatrically. Just where you draw the line with redpoll splitting/lumping is baffling to me, but I certainly think Arctic and Common Redpolls deserve to be seperate species without question.

[Jrhough1]

The undertail covert pattern of the Midlands bird, showing a dark central streak on the longest undertail covert and smaller, finer streaks on either side are fine for Arctic Redpoll.

I agree that some photos show a rather Mealy like shape to the bird, but others show a very Arctic like bird. The frosty plumage, especially the mantle and big white rump, that appears to be white and unmarked in the centre, are all pro-Arctic. I get the sense that the bird is an Arctic based on the current blueprint in my head based on Svensson etc, etc, but agree with others that the bird's bill does look a little long. However, individual variation is apparent in many photos, so I think conventrating on other features such as the rump and undertial coverts are likely to be more useful

If this is thought to be a Mealy then I'm not sure how you progress further with the identification, since most of the criteria separating Arctic from pale Mealies are matched, at least appears to be matched by this bird. I always thought that Mealies, however pale, never should show an unmarked white rump such as the Midlands bird. Coupled with the undertail covert pattern and paleness, it's hard not to identify it as an exilipes Arctic.

[Dave Hutton]

I apologise for any trouble caused, Dave. I have no motive as someone who's never met you!

:wideeyed:

Hi Nathan,no trouble caused,i should really have put a quote underneath the photo(Now done on the Birdguides photo) Anyone interested & who is on BirdForum theres been quite a complex discussion on the Q&A ID page from both home & abroad!! Josh def not 3 birds poss 2 at the start!! most photos posted are taken side by side of each other & the rump isnt as over exposed as you think!! when in flight it's almost like a Bullfinch!! Having said that i'm still pro Common Redpoll

Dave

[Brian S]

Julian

Thanks for your input and welcome aboard. I suspect you may have seen more than most, presumably in the US. This bird appears to be in the zone where Mealy and Arctic come close: some will go for Mealy; others for Arctic.

Redpolls are very complex and difficult, both in ID and taxonomy, and birds such as this will help us in the future. However, I like you feel that the plumage fits Arctic better, but the bill does seem a touch long.

All good stuff - keep it coming.

Brian S

[Josh Jones]

Hi Julian,

I agree that some photos show a rather Mealy like shape to the bird, but others show a very Arctic like bird. The frosty plumage, especially the mantle and big white rump, that appears to be white and unmarked in the centre, are all pro-Arctic.

Steve Seal's photos do seem to show what appears to be an Arctic Redpoll, and the more I look at them, the more I can convince myself that we are dealing with exilipes here. However, it is highly interesting to hear about the field observations (especially by John Oates on birdforum), which suggest that different postures can reveal or hide streaks on the UTCs. I am not sure whether it would be possible to an extent of revealing several clear streaks or not, and so a two bird theory has been creeping up in the back of my mind (although birders who have seen the birds in the field are adament that there is just the one bird). See:

http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?v=1&f=157755&r=0&st=1&q=

and

http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?v=1&f=157685&r=0&st=1&q=

Apparently the same bird, so it really is hard to judge from the available images on the true tones and colouration of the bird.


Coupled with the undertail covert pattern and paleness, it's hard not to identify it as an exilipes Arctic.

Again - had Steve Seal's images been the only ones, I'd probably agree. However, if this is the same bird that keeps cropping up in other photos, then I am not so sure! That bill really is quite hefty and the bird doesn't seem quite so pale as it does in Steves images.

[Brian S]

Josh

I have just spoken to someone with more experience than I and he states that the width of the longest undertail covert streak can be up to 3mm on Arctic; also the bill length is variable and the overlap quite great.

Where do we go from here?

Brian S

[Bobolink44]

Where do we go from here?



I'm tempted to just go and have a drink and forget this thread ever started :beer:

PS Any value in trapping the bird?

[Josh Jones]

Where do we go from here?

Good question!

In theory, maybe trapping would be a good idea, as suggested. Measurements could be handy (although from what Brian has just said, bill length is perhaps not particularly useful!)..

Now beginning to wish I'd seen this bird in the flesh. If only it was closer to south Lincs.

Really not sure where we go from here... do we let it get away or keep puzzling over it?

It is interesting that most of those who have seen it in the field seem to think it is a Common Redpoll (although even then, there seems to be confliction over just where it originates from)... I'm not sure I have alot more to contribute without seeing the bird in the flesh. Seeing Steve Seal's images of it looking wonderfully exilipes-like has confused me greatly, especially when compared to this:

http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?v=1&f=157820&r=0&st=0&q=

As Andy said... chameleon...

[AndyB]

Well it looks like Redpoll ID is a hot topic on both sides of the Atlantic right now!

Here's a photo (http://moumn.org/gallery/pictures/2244.jpeg) of a bird from Minnesota (where Arctic is regular) that Sibley is calling a long-billed Arctic. It also looks well marked on the flanks too. This bird would seem to be similar to the W. Mids bird in bill length. Here's another bird (http://www.grovestreet.com/jsp/onepic.jsp?id=1258116) from Michigan that reminds me of the W. Mids photos (at this angle both species appear to be small-billed)

However, now Sibley (http://sibleyguides.blogspot.com/2008/01/redpoll-questions.html) seems to be taking a more cautious approach about the birds he was IDing as Arctic and his recent thoughts seem to echo what is also being said in this forum over the past few days.

Sibley quote as follows

"We know that there is a continuum of variation from the palest Hoary to the darkest Common, and that in the middle there are some (many?) intermediate (possibly hybrid) individuals that simply cannot be confidently assigned to either species. The questions are: Where is the middle, and how far from the middle does a bird have to be before it is outside of the range of intermediacy and therefore safely identifiable?...

The birds in my photos are subtle, and I realize that if I had seen those birds in, say, California or North Carolina, I would be reluctant to accept them as Hoaries and would want a more thorough study of all features. In other words, I am not 100% confident that they are true Hoaries. But at that feeder, where I had seen one very pale and obvious Hoary, these few birds that were on the pale side and also somewhat fluffy and small-billed seemed like good candidates for Hoary and I was comfortable sticking that label on them. They are consistent with Hoary Redpoll, and match birds I have seen in northern Alaska. Whether they are pure Hoaries, or hybrids, or maybe even pale Commons, is an open question. I've revised yesterday's post to label them "Hoary-type" redpolls, which more accurately reflects how I think of them.

I think people are being admirably conservative, and that such pale birds are well towards the pale side of redpoll variation and are safely identified as Hoary. It's understandable to wish for more certainty, but, if you can tolerate the uncertainty, I think there's a lot to be learned by looking for and studying the more subtle and intermediate birds."

Also, Sibley has created a Character Index (http://sibleyguides.blogspot.com/2008/01/character-index-for-redpoll.html). With this chart (http://bp2.blogger.com/_enizD6uzRhY/R4DH0S2v4XI/AAAAAAAAAQM/aM-zTSjn-z8/s1600-h/Redpoll_index_small.jpg) what would you score the W. Mids bird? Roll up. For female types, a score of 11 or higher gets you an Arctic! Seriously, the comments below the chart relate to Troy's 1985 paper and his "paleness chart" and also emphasises the unimportance of bill length.

I'd give it 3.5 for undertail coverts, 3.5 for flanks and 4 for rump = 11 (so would put it at low end for Arctic) - maybe rump would score a 5?

Would anyone score higher or lower in any of these categories? Am I being too generous in the undertail and flanks category?

[Dave Hutton]

Some more interesting birds photographed in Canada by ex Notts birder Mark Dennis on his blog of Mealy/Arctic & Greenland can be found at

http://qcbirding2008.blogspot.com/

P.s there is talk of trying to trap the bird

Dave

[Jrhough1]

Since I'm totally unfamiliar with Icelandic Redpoll, maybe someone can solidify if they really are more Hoary-like than flammea can be??

Ignoring this race and concentrating on whether the bird in question is Hoary or Mealy, I stopped by the Yale Museum on my way home. In the brief perusal of the non-adult male specimens (35+)not a huge sample size, but big enough) I didn't find any Mealy that had an unmarked white rump compared to the Hoary specimens (13)I looked at. While some mealies did have slightly paler ground color to the rump, any unmarked white areas were narrow and often more streaked at the top and bottom of the rump area. Even the palest-rumped Mealy still had brownish tones to the mantle whereas all the Hoaries had a cold brown-grey tone to the mantle, making it look paler and less warm. Pattern of the utc was hard to judge on the specimens and I didn't really spend time on that feature.

Based on this, the Midlands bird fits Arctic better than Mealy with it's rather large, white and unmarked rump and cold tones to the mantle.

The bill, which looks less classic, doesn't bother me as much when you consider the other features.

If Mealies (or Icelandic) birds can look like this without being a Hoary Redpoll, maybe some of the criteria needs to be reexamined?

PS Mark Dennis's link failed for me, it came up with some genealogy site???

[Dave Hutton]

PS Mark Dennis's link failed for me, it came up with some genealogy site???[/QUOTE]

Hi Julian,

Try this link for Mark Dennis

http://qcbirding2008.blogspot.com\\

for some reason the other link link only seems to work on this side of the pond!! the 1 above should be ok for you!! or you could try putting Quebec Birding 2008 into your search engine!!
also the Rump is marked (not heavily put there is fine streaking!) link to Birdforum ID page of it in flight (not the best pic i know!)

http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=119373&d=1199041708

Dave

[talkingpond]

They are distinguishable, some birds are just difficult! Its' not all about plumage details - jizz, size, measurements, structure and so on all have their own parts to play in identification.

Plus the two species live sympatrically. Just where you draw the line with redpoll splitting/lumping is baffling to me, but I certainly think Arctic and Common Redpolls deserve to be seperate species without question.

So which are the objective differences between exilipes and Mealy? Forgive my naive questions but if we can't be sure of the differences on external gross morphological characters how do we know they are separate species?

Are there measurable genetic differences? Are the differences in vocalisation (ref crossbills)? On what basis do we know that they exhibit non-random pairing in areas of sympatry?

Not trying to be difficult - genuinely interested.

[Dave Hutton]

So which are the objective differences between exilipes and Mealy? Forgive my naive questions but if we can't be sure of the differences on external gross morphological characters how do we know they are separate species?

Are there measurable genetic differences? Are the differences in vocalisation (ref crossbills)? On what basis do we know that they exhibit non-random pairing in areas of sympatry?

Not trying to be difficult - genuinely interested.

If i remember right in some other forums,there has been no known hybrids (interbreeds) recorded,& even if there was then we'd have to lump quite a few species especially the ducks!! Lets not go there :err:

[jamesg]

Are there measurable genetic differences? Are the differences in vocalisation (ref crossbills)? On what basis do we know that they exhibit non-random pairing in areas of sympatry?


Common Redpoll flammea and Arctic Redpoll exillipes breed sympatrically across much of their range, as a result of regular eruptions of flammea into the tundra zone. I'm not sure if there are any published studies of hybridisation rates, but the very fact that the two forms persist despite widespread and regular sympatric breeding suggests that they are reproductively isolated.

I witnessed a major eruption of flammea into a region of Arctic Russia last summer, and of the few nests I found (c. 5), there were no mixed pairs. The nests also appeared to differ in their construction - Arcitc using mainly lichens to line theirs, Commons using leaves and moss. Several experienced Russian ornithologists told me that this difference is also evident in museum collections, and that they believe hybridisation to be rare.

This situation appears to be similar to that of the Crossbills. In both cases, forms that appear extremely similar to our eyes (and ears) are actually good, reproductively isolated BSC species. This is perhaps unsurprising, given that birds see and hear the world in a completely different way to humans...

[CAU]

Forgive my naive questions but if we can't be sure of the differences on external gross morphological characters how do we know they are separate species?


It is important to remember that the 1st winter redpolls are usually the difficult ones, adult males are easier to separate. There are lots of other species where not all individuals can be identified with certainty, consider for example female Red-headed/Black-headed Buntings.

[Jrhough1]

To me, Steve Seals 3 photos in post#11 show an Arctic Redpoll. The head eye and small bill, color and rump lead me to no other option.If this is a photographic effect then I'm being mislead.
Subsequently, after looking at the many other photos of the allegedly "same" bird, I'm confused as to how many birds I looked at. Some shots don't give me the same impression as Steve's shots do. So, I've finally made a decision that, even though I was in the pro-Arctic camp, I'm not a stringent advocate of that id. Inversely, I'm not in the "just a "pale" Mealy" camp, since it's hard to explain away the paleness, rump and utc streaking.
Again, I'm judging the color on a monitor and never saw the bird in life, but this would be the palest Mealy I've ever seen.
The Midland bird is, I believe a first-winter. The tail feathers look pointed (central ones look slightly more rounded) and there seems to be subtle, but noticeable moult contrast in the greater coverts - the inner three being more charcoal and the outer feathers being worn and more brownish.

I managed to swing by Yale Museum, CT on the way home and take a quick perusal of 35+ flammea's and 8 exilipes. Of all the flammea's even the ones with the palest rumps seem to have streaking above and below the rump patch. Those that had the most unmarked (or least streaked) rumps had a smaller area more central to the rump and not extending up as high as Hoary. I saw none that had unmarked, extensively white rumps.
Even those flammeas with paleish rumps still had relatively warm brown tones to the mantle, not the cold brown-grey of Hoary. Again this was only a small sample size.

It would be fascinating if this bird could be id. in the hand!

I have some shots of an exilipes with flammeas that I took last week here in CT. I can post as soon as I get home and figure out how to attach photos.
To clarify, the id. issue on this side of the pond is similarly challenging.

Julian

[jamesg]

This has been a really instructive process - both in terms of Redpoll id., and also (once again) on the dangers of photo effects.

Here we have an amazing series of high quality photos of this bird, and we still can't decide what it looks like! (I should say, before we start throwing out all out cameras, that I'm certain that human perception in the field, mine included, is just as prone to misinterpretation as any camera ccd).

For me, it boils down to this:

Is this bird...
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=157357&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

the same as this bird...?
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=158415&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

The answer, unequivocally, must be yes! Look at the shape of the fringe on the middle tertial, the exact spacing of the primaries, etc. etc. They are the same.

Steve Seal's photo shows a bird that, as Julian says, cries out to be labelled an Arctic. But the frostiness and clean white rump are photo effects - the rump streaking and dark tones have been blown out by a trick of the light.

Vince Garvey's shot shows it for what it really is - the dirty dark centres to the rump feathers are genuinely there... Ok, they might be accentuated by underexposure, but their presence certainly adds fuel to the fires of suspicion. Couple this with the dark brownish centres to the mantle / scaps, the heavy un-broken flank streaks, the lack of buff tones to the face/neck, the long bill, big head, etc. etc....

I'm not confident at all with ageing Redpolls, but for me, enough of the features are outside the range of even 1w exillipes to make it unnecessary to know for sure in this case.

The lesson - even a large series of high quality photos can be misleading. And some birds are extremely hard to identify!

James

[JanJ]

I agree with James, def. the same bird on the pattern of the middle tertial and some perhaps more uncertain characters, such as the outer lesser coverts and the shape of the white tips to inner greater coverts.
In this image of the same individul:

http://www.birdguides.com/birdnews/docs/OR157280.jpg

the outer brownish greater coverts are in obvious contrast to the blackish inners and therefore could make up as a moult contrast - which then (if not a photographic effect, a trick of the light) suggests a 1st winter. Ageing by tail tip shape is difficult - although outers looks pointed enough while the middle looks more rounded.

JanJ

[Josh Jones]

This has been a really instructive process - both in terms of Redpoll id., and also (once again) on the dangers of photo effects.

Here we have an amazing series of high quality photos of this bird, and we still can't decide what it looks like! (I should say, before we start throwing out all out cameras, that I'm certain that human perception in the field, mine included, is just as prone to misinterpretation as any camera ccd).

For me, it boils down to this:

Is this bird...
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=157357&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

the same as this bird...?
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=158415&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

The answer, unequivocally, must be yes! Look at the shape of the fringe on the middle tertial, the exact spacing of the primaries, etc. etc. They are the same.

Steve Seal's photo shows a bird that, as Julian says, cries out to be labelled an Arctic. But the frostiness and clean white rump are photo effects - the rump streaking and dark tones have been blown out by a trick of the light.

Vince Garvey's shot shows it for what it really is - the dirty dark centres to the rump feathers are genuinely there... Ok, they might be accentuated by underexposure, but their presence certainly adds fuel to the fires of suspicion. Couple this with the dark brownish centres to the mantle / scaps, the heavy un-broken flank streaks, the lack of buff tones to the face/neck, the long bill, big head, etc. etc....

I'm not confident at all with ageing Redpolls, but for me, enough of the features are outside the range of even 1w exillipes to make it unnecessary to know for sure in this case.

The lesson - even a large series of high quality photos can be misleading. And some birds are extremely hard to identify!

James

Well summed up James - I think this is what I was trying to say but you have done so comprehensively - it seems Steve Seals images are in fact highly misleading, and this is just a well-marked Mealy Redpoll...

[Martin Garner]

Some thoughts on the Marsh Lane ‘Arctic –like’ Redpoll.

My understanding has been informed, partly, by finding an apparent Arctic Redpoll in South Yorkshire a couple of years ago, which caused quite a few headaches, of the same nature as the Marsh Lane bird is causing, and it lead to much investigating and carefully examination of many Redpolls (including over 100 Mealy Redpolls) in the UK over the next few months. I went to see the Marsh Lane bird on 2nd and 3rd January and came to the conclusion that the plumage and structure of this bird was outside of my understanding of the range for Mealy Redpoll. I was particularly interested to test the idea that had already been promoted that the bird might be an Icelandic Redpoll. By seeing the bird in the field, especially in regard to its size, I feel that such a claim, while entirely understandable may be something of a distraction (although others will no doubt disagree!). I conveyed to Chris Batty at RBA on the 3rd that I certainly felt that in my experience it was not simply a ‘pale Mealy’ and while I did not know for sure what it was, I felt it fit the ‘exilipes Arctic box’ much better. I said the same to Nick Barlow (site manager at Marsh Lane) a couple of hours later. I think the bird is probably a 1st winter based on the tail feathers shape, wear/ pattern on the small tertials, and possibly some moult contrast in the greater coverts (though I am not totally convinced of the latter) and some pink in the cheeks. I definitely think there were two birds (the second, a fairly ‘normal’ Mealy Redpoll) due to a number of clearly observable differences in the photos taken on 27th Dec and all other photos of the ‘target bird’. It is also conceivable that some of the Lesser Redpolls may be of Scandinavian origin.

The issues I have with the Marsh Lane Redpoll are as follows:

1) The ‘rump patch’ (which really includes the lower back and small uppertail coverts) can be described, based on field views as an overall fairly extensive white patch (more so than some normal Arctic Redpolls). Often through binoculars at reasonable range it looks pretty much plain white. In flight it is quite striking and again extensive looking. At closer range the dark bases to some of the rump feathers are visible producing a vaguely grey streaked effect. The lower section of the rump/ upper small uppertail coverts has a tawny wash. My experience and understanding is that this pattern is within normal range for Arctic Redpoll (including the pattern of streaking) for female/ immature birds, The presence of greyish streaking ‘showing though’ the white rump area on some Arctic Redpolls is normal and has been well documented for some time e.g. “Many but not all adult female and immature exilipes have lightly streaked rumps” (from ID of Arctic Redpoll. BB. Vol. 84, No.2) and from BWP: 37% of 1st winter males examined and 49% of first winter females have rumps with 1-2 cm of “white with dusky streaking”. This is usually most apparent in the hand, but with the particularly close views and the quality of photos which can now be obtained of birds like this; enables such be seen in the field and recorded. So I would call the rump area of this bird overall an ‘Arctic Redpoll-like rump’ Conversely I haven’t seen a Mealy Redpoll with a rump like it apart from adult males, which are also aged and sexed by obvious reddish tones over the rump and breast; nor have I encountered any data that suggest that Mealy Redpoll in non-adult male plumage could have such a rump pattern. I have heard lots of anecdotal evidence about people seeing ‘pale Mealies’ with a rump pattern like this but as yet this is not backed up by convincing photographic evidence or data showing such birds exist. That is not to say they don’t of course, but real hard data would be good. The photos of the bird’s rump on the Internet are variously both over exposed/ under saturated and under-exposed/ over saturated, bringing some confusion especially for those commenting on the photos that have not seen the bird.

I will post some photos showing the bird’s rump. There are plenty of Arctic Redpoll rumps illustrated on the Internet, compare the Marsh lane bird, for example with this one:

http://www.pbase.com/upupa/image/65586144

and here:

http://www.praktejder.se/images/0411/Snosiska1MN-041106.htm (scroll to bottom)


One specific feature in relation to the overall ‘rump pattern’, which has not been discussed, is the small uppertail coverts. Most Redpolls show a set of long rather dark brown feathers with thin pale fringes immediately adjacent to the tail. These are the 'long' uppertail coverts. Then there are a number of small uppertail coverts (which I find it hard to know where they end and the rump feathers begin). There are some general differences (maybe not diagnostic but perhaps indicative) between most flammea and exilipes in the colour and pattern of the first row of small uppertail coverts next to the long dark uppertail coverts.

In flammea the pattern is of buff feathers with a generally large dark feather centres. This makes the region of small uppertail coverts look clearly rather dark with obvious buff/ brown fringes and blackish feather centres.

In exilipes the first row of feathers is white, with more limited blackish feather centres (thus making the white rump area appear 'larger').

The Marsh lane bird has first row of feathers white with limited blackish centre, than next row of feathers more buff tinged, but lacking the stronger brown and buff effect with larger dark centres usually found on flammea.


2) The undertail covert pattern is seemingly within the normal range of variation for Arctic Redpoll albeit at the more strongly marked end. It may also be within range of pattern for non-adult male Mealy Redpoll. I don’t know. Adult male Mealies can vary from well marked to unmarked undertail coverts. The COMBINATION, however of rump and undertail coverts is, I would argue is of Arctic, rather than Mealy type combination. Again, it would be interesting to see hard data, which demonstrates that Mealy Redpoll in non-adult male plumage can show such a rump pattern/ undertail covert combination.

3) The flank streaking is quite extensive and dark, though I think within the range of variation for exilipes Arctic Redpoll. A minor observation is that in the field was that the streaks (overall) tended to appear as rather isolated, thickish ‘wisps’ and apart from the upper breast sides (tawny washed), on a relatively white background. While variable, typically on Mealy Redpoll the flanks streaking is more joined together in longer ‘cat’s claw’ streaks with a black feather centre on dark brown background. Again Mealy may appear like this but overall I felt the flank pattern was reminiscent for an Arctic type, albeit at the heavily streaked end.

4) The bill is undoubtedly at the larger end of the scale, though also quite deep-based and is not the somewhat caricatured tiny ‘pushed in’ bill of many Arctic redpolls. That some Arctic Redpolls do have larger bills very similar to this bird is also not in doubt as can be seen in photos of bird taken in Scandinavia (see also BB Vol 84 plate 40). Also check out the variation and especially the last bird on this page as others have indicated:

http://web.telia.com/~u15702529/faltbestamning/nabben/siskornas_nabbar.htm

and the second bird down on this page

http://www.tarsiger.com/gallery/index.php?lista=ok&species=88780&family=&sp=search&lang=eng&manner=&sel=2&sex=0&age=0&year=&photo=&pic_method=0&pic_type=0&country=&place=&order=lisays_paiva+DESC&sel=2


5) The scapulars in the field are of a tawny/ sandy tone, at the pale end of the range for many Mealies, and I would say within normal range of many Arctic Redpolls. The colour of the upperparts of the Marsh Lane bird as represented in a number of the photos on the Internet is too monochrome/ grey/white…though they are amazing photos!

6) The wing bars are generally very white looking, though with slight tawny wash on outer greater coverts. I think notably the white tips of the median coverts are particularly broad and clean white, perhaps more Arctic-like than Mealy like in width and whiteness, though the point is probably debatable.

7) Icelandic Redpolls. The bird could be an Icelandic Redpoll. For that matter almost any white-rumped, streakier Redpoll seen in Britain could be promoted as a pale Icelandic Redpoll. However I do have reservations about this argument:

a) I don’t think the bird was ‘long-bodied enough’ for typical North Western Redpoll, though some pale Icelandic Redpolls are arguably smaller.
b) The streaking was too ‘wispy’ lacking the more typical 3 lines of ‘cat’s claw’ streaking of (even most pale) North Western Redpoll
c) My main reservation is that there is no evidence of the normal plumage types of e.g. rostrata reaching well inland in England. The vast majority of NW Redpolls reaching the Northern Isles do not look like this bird. Many are also particularly large and would be noticeable in the field and in the ringer’s bag. None have been recorded inland ever in England as far as I know. Further the plumage of the Marsh Lane bird seems exceptional even for some pale Icelandic Redpolls according to both Icelandic and Shetland observers. I think I would rather work with the more likely scenario, that this is a bird lies in the ‘problem zone’ between Mealy and Arctic. There have been 2 other claims of Arctic Redpoll from late autumn in England, both apparently photographed: at Berwick-on-Tweed, Northumberland on 15th November and at Langham, Norfolk on 18th November (the latter with Lesser Redpolls only).


In summary I sympathise with the ‘pale Mealy’ view because of the streakiness and particularly rather large looking bill and sometimes I do feel like throwing in the towel and just calling it a pale Mealy! However I am unable to demonstrate that Mealy Redpolls in 1st winter plumage can show the rump pattern like this bird in combination with this undertail covert pattern. A number of other features of the bird including its bulkiness, upperparts tone, width and whiteness of wing bars and (to a limited extent) flank streaking have, for me, an ‘Arctic Redpoll- like’ aspect to them. Like most other commentators I don’t like the bill for Arctic. If the bill was small and ‘pushed in, would it not be just passed off fine as an Arctic?

I think I can demonstrate that all of the features which my be construed as extreme can nevertheless be found on examples of Arctic Redpoll, including the bill, flank streaking, rump pattern and undertail coverts. The unanswered question for me is whether they can all be found in one individual, such as this one!

Still learning ‘bout Redpolls!

Martin

P.S. will try and post some photos showing the rump, which I feel portray reasonably accurately its appearance in the field.

[Martin Garner]

Showing my incompetence: I have uploaded 4 images of the Marsh Lane Redpoll split between Rare birds and ID discussion pages. They are small images and I don't have the image editing skills. If someone can make them larger without increasing the file size I will send the images and you can swop the one I have put up

Martin

Edited by admin to add 4 of Martin's photos

[jamesg]

Good points Martin.

I can agree with your statement about the rump being within the range of first winter exillipes. However, I also think it is within the range of flammea – certainly it is of adults, and I see no reason why pale first winters can't be similar. On that point, I'm still not totally convinced about the ageing as first winter - the tail tips in your first photo (Redpoll-1, above) look very rounded!

We may have now exhausted all the "classic" features, and found most of them to be within the range of both taxa (although we could still probably argue about the bill, head shape and flanks…).

That leaves us with weighing up the "secondary" features, and it’s now down to personal choice as to which way the balance is tipped.

I’ve already mentioned in previous posts how the dark brownish mantle and scaps give me the impression of a flammea on this bird. There’s one more thing that I think may be important, although I’m wading deeply into the waters of uncertainty here:

If this bird truly was a first winter exillipes, it would certainly be one at the dark (and streaky) end of the spectrum in terms of flanks, rump and undertail. Given that, would we not expect the head, mantle and wings to also fall at the darker / streakier extreme for an exillipes? That being the case, the face and breast would surely have to be very buffy, and the mantle would be covered with dense, fine streaks. On this bird, they appear extremely whitish (except for the chocolatey-brown centres to the scaps and outer mantle feathers…).

On the other hand, if we were to imagine an archetypal flammea at the pale end of the spectrum, we would perhaps expect to see whitish fringing throughout the plumage, including the mantle and head. It would probably look very white overall, but perhaps with a few tell-tale features like bold utcv streaks and a fine, streaky rump.

For me, the pale white tone and crispness of the head and upperpart fringing makes me think this is a “pale end” redpoll, whatever form it is. The fact that this snowball-effect is combined with a streaky rump and bold flank / utcv streaks makes me think this is unlikely to be a “pale-end” exillipes, and much more likely a flammea.

Maybe I’m wrong – this has become very subjective and probably not of much use to anyone.

A final point about NW Redpolls before I get my coat – I would guess they probably penetrate inland Britain as frequently as exillipes do, based on their relative frequency in the Northern and Western Isles. Their occurrence is bound to be clouded by the fact that they are “just” a subspecies (currently!), and therefore there is less incentive for birders to report them.

J

[Josh Jones]

I'm not also totally convinced of the diagnosis of this as a first-winter bird, especially based on feather shape. However, if this is an adult male, then the pink is remarkably restricted.

Both Martin and James have made some good points here, but I am still inclined to go with what James has said regarding the streaking as well as the base colour(s) of this bird, and that this is most likely to be a pale Mealy Redpoll.

As James says though, this is quite subjective and arriving at a conclusion on this bird is going to be extremely difficult - I think it would be a real shame if this bird was accepted as exilipes, but then again writing this bird off as Mealy could also be the wrong thing to do...

Really enjoying reading through this one!

[jamesg]

Just to try and illustrate what I mean about “pale-end” characteristics, here are a couple of examples of pale Commons (not all adults) from www.tasiger.com:

http://www.tarsiger.com/gallery/index.php?pic_id=digimies1175062586&lang=eng
(note the very white face, plus the utcvs pattern)

http://www.tarsiger.com/gallery/index.php?pic_id=william1099549861&lang=eng
(this one seems to be a first winter, and still has a very white, but streaky, rump)

http://www.tarsiger.com/gallery/index.php?pic_id=muu1104354731&lang=eng(note the similarity of the second image to the Marsh Lane bird in shape, plus the tone of the head and mantle).

These pale individuals tend to show a combination of very white rump/utcv feathers and very whitish faces, as a result of their pale overall nature. This combination is shown by the Marsh Lane bird (but not most 1w Arctics, which tend to have very buffy faces).

I did, however, find this example of an Arctic…
http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=4928
… which shows the combination of a very whitish face and bold dark flank streaks. So maybe my point about “pale end” individuals doesn’t add up to much.

In any case, I’ll sign off now, agreeing that the Marsh Lane bird *could* be an exillipes, but the cumulative effect of the multiple dodgy features - the bill, the streaky flanks/rump/utcvs, the brownish blotchy mantle/scaps and the lack of buff on the head – all add up to a level of doubt that is beyond the point of 'acceptability' for me...

[JanJ]

Regarding ageing of Redpolls, is it true that British Redpolls seldom shows any moult limit in greater coverts?
The one I linked in post 44 which appears to be the same individual as the above mentioned bird, does appear to show a moult limit - rather obvious in this image:

http://www.birdguides.com/birdnews/docs/OR157280.jpg

but due to different angle and light situation less obvious seen here:

http://www.birdguides.com/birdnews/docs/OR157759.jpg

again slightly more obvious here:

http://www.birdguides.com/birdnews/docs/OR157490.jpg

Tail feather shape is often (always?) regarded as the only reliable ageing character in Redpools.
According to Svensson (1992) tail feathers in adults after the complete autumn moult "may be rounded or rather pointed" while in 1cy only central tf, if moulted, shows rounded tips. This would make the use tf as a mean of ageing Redpolls not especially reliable. However the subject Redpoll shows little wear in tf and primaries - which would be expected in adults as opposed to 1st winters, which would show obvious wear in these parts at this time of year.

JanJ

[Martin Scott]

A lot of very interesting discussion on Redpolls, on various groups/forums, to which I’d like to add a couple of points, while trying to keep this a short posting.
Arctic’s with ‘ghosting’ of streaking on rumps is nothing new and they have been acceptable as such for several years- since late 80’s
UTC: having been involved with the handling of many redpolls one thing is clear, undertail coverts can appear white – you then gentle blow on the feathers to displace them and they can appear remarkably streaked.
Face pattern: I suspect that the amount and pattern of black on the face of some birds may be useful re species identification – but this needs further exploration
Scapulars. This also needs further investigation but it is worth noting the colour of the scapulars in the area above the median coverts. If these are pale fringed on the lower edge this can often indicate Arctic. The lower scapulars towards the rump can often be pale in both Mealy and Arctic
Bill: can an Arctic really ever show anything other than a “squat” deep based bill?
On Lewis we see many redpolls pouring through, especially in early autumn. Some points are:
Where do they go after here? They never seem to get noted elsewhere (like Icelandic Redwings)
Calls are different from Lesser. As with Xbills this may be a way forward in separating the more northern complex.
In some years some loiter to bred in NW Scotland – but spring identification is a totally different issue to autumn. However talk of hybridisation in Scotland is, I believe, erroneous.
I have posted on Surfbirds ID discussion page three different redpolls that were together in mid Nov this year on Lewis. The tailless bird is a Mealy, but the other two could be troublesome, but I believe are Icelandic. If the current English bird is an Arctic however perhaps the ‘fluffier’ bird here then makes the grade?
Out of interest would BBRC accept a ‘non-snowball’ Arctic Redpoll now on field notes alone?

[Brian S]

Martin

I think that the two 'Icelandic' birds you have posted are the same - I am sure this is just a simple mistake. They show two small black spots on the bill in the same place and the streaking on the lower breast (before it gets ruffled) is the same.

Brian S

[eosuser]

For me, it boils down to this:

Is this bird...
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=157357&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

the same as this bird...?
http://www.birdguides.com/pictures/default.asp?f=158415&r=0&st=0&v=1&q=

The answer, unequivocally, must be yes! Look at the shape of the fringe on the middle tertial, the exact spacing of the primaries, etc. etc. They are the same.


This is surely not the same bird, look at the dark ark of feathers behind the eye, steve's picture shows a dark ark close to the eye, in the other it is clearly further away from the eye!!!! How can this be the same bird when such clear plumage variation is visable in that area????

[Dave Hutton]

This is surely not the same bird, look at the dark ark of feathers behind the eye, steve's picture shows a dark ark close to the eye, in the other it is clearly further away from the eye!!!! How can this be the same bird when such clear plumage variation is visable in that area????

Hi eosuser,
Ive been saying the same for weeks now on the BirdForum link,even spoke to Martin Garner about it on the 2/1/08!! Not dismissed by Martin but by several other photograpers & forum members (Theres No way you'd have 2 similar looking birds, but not showing at the same time!!) Well i think there is 2 birds & it seems now quite a few are in that camp!! Steve Seal & myself were stood next to each other throughout (Lee & Bobs from Dec seem to show a diff bird)
Links to the birds......
http://www.davehutton.fotopic.net/ BOTH THE SAME BIRD
http://www.steveseal.fotopic.net/
http://www.lee111.fotopic.net/ Photos from December (seem to show a diff bird?)
http://www.bobduckhouse.fotopic.net/
Best wishes,

Dave

[Josh Jones]

With all due respect Dave, the links you have posted are not much use for clearing up the confusion here - you have merely linked us to four homepages rather than the birds themselves...

[Martin Scott]

Martin

I think that the two 'Icelandic' birds you have posted are the same - I am sure this is just a simple mistake. They show two small black spots on the bill in the same place and the streaking on the lower breast (before it gets ruffled) is the same.

Brian S


You may have a point Brian

This also then illustrates the difficulties when dealing with a "flock" of three, and not a larger mobile group!

It would also show how variable one bird can be in different shots seconds apart.............

Again it perhaps goes to show how birders are relying on images and not field notes, and how much more pictures are being scrutinsed than field notes ever could or are.


MSS

[Dave Hutton]

With all due respect Dave, the links you have posted are not much use for clearing up the confusion here - you have merely linked us to four homepages rather than the birds themselves...

Yeah i realise that Josh!!!
Not the best on getting all the links to the actual photos but if you go to Lee Js & Bob Duckhouse's photos Dec photos you'll get the idea!! either that or go to the BirdForum ID page & follow that thread!!! Then decide for yourself wether we're looking at 2 diff birds

Dave

Check these out!!!

http:www.davehutton.fotopic.net/p47580787.html
http:www.steveseal.fotopic.net/p47518543.html
http://www.lee111.fotopic.net/p47456222.html
http://www.lee111.fotopic.net/p47452264.html
http://www.bobduckhouse.fotopic.net/p47456785.html

[Brian S]

Lee Evans has requested that I post a comment from him:-

'Hi Brian/Martin

Can you kindly submit this response to the Surfbirds Identification gallery forum - I can't suss out how to operate it


I am delighted at seeing Martin Garner's submission and his excellent interpretation of the Marsh Lane bird on his two visits to the site. I am also pleased to read his acknowledgement of the presence of at least one exilipes at High Hoyland Church in February 2006, although the individual I recorded there (amongst an influx of redpolls including at least 43 Mealies) was a more clear-cut bird than that being discussed here.

I have not been to see this particular bird yet but have studied an excellent array of images of it kindly provided by both Steve Seal and Dave Hutton, and have discussed the bird in detail with several of those observers that have seen it. I cannot see any differences between this bird and one of two well-marked Mealy Redpolls currently wintering at Joes Lane Allotments in Greenfield, Flitwick, in Bedfordshire. In my view, this is a fairly typical well-marked Mealy Redpoll - and an individual which I have recorded in Britain on many occasions before, particularly in the 2006 invasion of redpolls that involved over 8,000 birds.

I believe that a suite of characters previously mentioned place this bird within Mealy parameters (eg, long, pointed bill, heavily streaked flanks and sides, insufficiently cloaked tarsi, Head and neck colouring, markedly streaked undertail-coverts, noticeable rump streaking, etc) and that Scandinavian Arctic as an option is less likely. Although I accept that these features individually could quite easily occur on typical exilipes, I find that the argument that all of these features in one bird could fit as totally ridiculous.

In a winter when not one genuine (and undoubted) Scandinavian Arctic Redpoll has occurred in Britain, it seems most likely that an individual on the absolute extreme of variation should be discovered in central England. It is not even a good year for Mealies, with perhaps only 40 birds being reported from around the country. In my three visits to Finland last winter, I managed to see and study many redpolls, both exilipes and flammea, and birds such as the Marsh Lane individual were fairly commonplace. What I would call typical exilipes were scarce, and only at one site did I record a flock of them (of eight birds). Many birds I considered Mealy (on bill structure, tarsi feathering, plumage, etc) possessed what appeared in flight to be noticeable white rumps (a feature I also noticed on several of the Tyttenhanger GP birds in the influx year) but other than that, they were typical Mealies.

As I have stated on numerous times before, identification of such subtly different species should be judged on structure, and not necessarily on plumage appearance. The Arctic Redpoll is a bird of the taiga forest and the far north and therefore adapts to its surroundings, often spending much of its time feeding on the ground. Mealy Redpoll is more of a Birch forest species, and although also a ground feeder, does not require such heavily cloaked plumage and small bill. The shape and size of the bill is tantamount in the identification strategy, with exilipes Arctic predominantly possessing a short, squat, pinched-in bill, clearly emphasised by nasal feathering. Equally, neck feathers and tarsi feathering are more densely clustered, giving a somewhat bull-necked appearance and trousered effect. Such features are not shared by our Marsh Lane bird.

There is no question of this Warwickshire bird being considered as an exilpes Arctic Redpoll by the UK400 Club as to do so, would merely open the floodgates for future claims. The set requirements for a minimum acceptable Scandinavian Arctic by the aforementioned organisation is a bird that shows a suite of recognised features, including correct bill shape, feathered tarsi, a white rump typically unstreaked for at least 10 millimetres, a whitish forehead, generally fine and sp....ly streaked on flanks and sides and unstreaked on the undertail-coverts (although the presence of a dark central streak or two is not uncommon). Had this bird appeared during an invasion year of exilipes then Martin and others could be forgiven for highlighting such an individual, as it could be argued that this was a very extreme individual. As it is however, I feel it is unhelpful to change the parameters of Arctic Redpoll identification on this highly contraversial first-winter.

From a personal perspective, I feel very uneasy about redpoll taxonomy and actually consider them to be a clinal species of ONE, ranging from small and dark in the south to large and pale in the north. They are best treated as one superspecies, as the amount of variability between the five commonly encountered forms suggest that they almost certainly intergrade in large numbers.

Lee G R Evans'

[jamesg]

From a personal perspective, I feel very uneasy about redpoll taxonomy and actually consider them to be a clinal species of ONE, ranging from small and dark in the south to large and pale in the north. They are best treated as one superspecies, as the amount of variability between the five commonly encountered forms suggest that they almost certainly intergrade in large numbers.

Lee G R Evans'


Regarding taxonomy (originally posted on birdforum.net):

Common flammea and Arctic exillipes are not "clinal", as they breed sympatrically throughout much of their range. The zone of sympatry varies in line with periodic northward eruptions by flammea - sometimes they are wholly sympatric during the breeding season.

Basic logic tells us that if two apparently stable forms breed sympatrically throughout their range, they must be good BSC species. However, the situation is a bit more complex than that...

There is virtually no mtDNA divergence between flammea and exillipes - see this paper (http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0014-3820(199510)49:5%3C962:MDHITP%3E2.0.CO;2-J)by Seutin et al.

The authors suggest that the lack of difference in DNA means either that the two forms diverged very recently, or they are not fully reproductively isolated, such that some hybridisation is occurring.

Various studies have analysed differences in morphology, aiming to determine whether the two forms are fully diagnosable using in-hand biometrics, plumage and skeletal differences. Some were successful, e.g. this one (http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-8038(199310)110%3A4%3C832%3AMVIRFC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P)and this one (http://ardeajournal.natuurinfo.nl/ardeapdf/a78-441-458.pdf), others less so, e.g. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-8038(198501)102%3A1%3C82%3AAPAOTR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A.

Most of the detailed studies found that a proportion of individuals are intermediate in morpholgy (including skeletal structure), and this has prompted some authors to suggest that they should be lumped, e.g. Troy (1985).

However, the fact that they breed sympatrically across huge parts of the range, and yet remain apparently stable (i.e. they do not degenerate into a massive hybrid swarm) suggests this would be unwise.

This is a fascinating and possibly unique situation. We know that stable hybrid zones can exist in the contact zone between two recently diverged species (e.g. hooded and carrion crow), but these tend to be in small, temporally static areas. In the redpolls, the zone of potential hybridisation is huge, and varies from year to year. If hybridisation can occur, why has it not swamped the variation between the taxa across the whole of the range?

Presumably there must be some level of reproductive isolation. This could be through different vocalisations, as in the crossbills, or through differences in breeding phenology (timing, habitat etc.). Apparently Arctic Redpolls breed earlier than sympatric Commons, and have different nest construction. There may also be consistent plumage or morphology differences that are percieved by the birds better than they are by us.

[Sean Cole]

There's no doubt in my mind that the two photos JamesG posted links to are the same bird.

Check out the median coverts, the primary spacings and the outer two primaries (worn cf the next five), the dark vertical bar on the malar area, the shape and size of the red cap, the dark feather on the lower rump, tertial shape and pattern, even scapular feathers and mantle pattern is the same.

The crescent of dark around the rear ear coverts is the same, but in a different position on the two photos because of the angle and the way the bird is holding its head.

As Lee and others have pointed out, this bird must be a Mealy - to me, a bird that is not "obvious" generally turns out not to be one.

Whether there are two birds present of course I cannot comment, but I've not seen evidence in any photos yet that there are.

[Greg Neise]

I've put together a collection of redpoll images from the Chicago
Botanic Garden (Illinois, United States) that show a lot of the variety within what I believe are
all common redpolls...
...plus side-by-side comparisons with the hoary redpoll. Take a look:

http://www.ilbirds.com/index.php?topic=2147.0

Cheers,

-greg neise
Berwyn, IL

[AndyB]

Hi Greg and thanks for the link to those photos. These are interesting because your bird shows some similarities to the contentious bird in the UK that has generated a lot of discussion. The question seems to be if there is any overlap between the plumage features of a dark Hoary/Arctic and a pale Common. Can we only ID the classic "obvious" birds and everything is less unidentified or are we overlooking less well-marked Hoaries?

The bird in your first 4 photos and last 2 photos (appears to be the same) would be a good candidate for Hoary/Arctic on rump and upperparts (we cannot see undertail but looks like it might have some streaking). Sibley mentioned features from his yard birds such as back color and frosty surround to the ear coverts as pro-Hoary/Arctic features which your bird has. Your bird also has a tawny wash to the face and breast again touted as pro-Hoary/Arctic. The other feature of small "pushed in bill" which is being discussed as variable is hard to see well and photos can give an illusion but the 4th photo down could give you that impression. However, flank streaking is heavier than a classic bird. I'd urge others to see if they can get any more photos of this bird.

Unfortunately, as we've seen from photos of a contentious bird in the UK, it's hard to trust the photos. One minute, the rump looks shocking white and unstreaked and the next heavily marked! That coupled with whether 2 similar looking birds are at the same site, has it made it very difficult to trust photos.

Was your Hoary photo in the tree from this weekend at the Botanic Gardens?

Best, Andy

[Greg Neise]

Andy, I think you are right...I've updated that thread with a Photoshop mashup showing more photos of what I think is the same bird, taken the day before (those pics were the reason we went out there in the first place). If it is the same bird, then it has virtually no streaking on the undertail. But that's a big if...I've gotten one reply from one of Illinois' most competent birders who says he's not sure if they are the same bird.

You are correct about the bill...bill proportion on any bird can be very difficult to ascertain from a photograph. I got great pictures of a ring-billed gull this winter that I was positive had to be a mew gull...in part based on looking at my own pics. Never mind that the jizz was wrong and the mantle too light. Had some crow to eat that week.

Especially with birds that have conical bills, if they turn even slightly, the bill can look considerably shorter.

The hoary in the tree was at the same location, at the same time...about 1 hour and 50 yards apart. If the birds photographed on Saturday and Sunday are not the same, then there is one definite hoary, one very likely and very interesting bird at this location.

There have been about 20 records of hoary redpoll in Illinois, with only 3 in the last 10 years...so to potentially have 3 at one location is unprecidented.

Cheers,

-greg

link: http://www.ilbirds.com/index.php?topic=2147.0

[AndyB]

Let us know if you get more photos of any of these birds. Either way, the bird in the tree looks great. Just wish these birds were around over the Xmas break. I was in Chicago and would have love to have seen some Redpolls. Still smarting from not seeing the Montrose Saw-whet and Snow Buntings! :cry: