A few Pipit questions--Italy

[sue-o]

Hi All,

I am on the coast in Italy, near Rome. Today I saw a pipit I am unsure of. It is probably a Meadow because that would be the most common, but it seems off. My Collins guide shows the Meadow with yellowish flanks (except worn summer), and the bird I saw was white flanks with black streaks. I also saw a reddish brown on the head in the light at times. The back (mantle) was heavily streaked but appeared to be white and dark streaking, not olive and dark brown as in my book. I thought it might be possible to be a Red-throated (but 1st year as the throat is not red).

1. Can a Meadow Pipit be white and black in the winter?
2. Would it be too far fetched to see a RT here at this time of year? I noticed that the book has them in the 'Heel" of Italy in winter.

I'm hoping some insight might allow me to id this bird.
I have some terrible photos. I was shooting into the sun at the end of the day, through a fence at quite a distance. Since either bird would be a lifer for me, I wanted to hold off posting photos until I can't possibly id myself. I will go back tomorrow now that I am better read about them, but I might not be lucky enough to see it again. Even so, I might still be confused. Any tips on what I should concentraqte on if I do see it again? It did some slight tail pumping, flew up about eight inches off the ground for a brief period twice, and was quite active in it's pecking on the ground.
Thanks for any help.

Edit: There was also a light black spot on the center of the breast (sort of like a Song Sparrow).
Sue

[AndyB]

Hi sue-o, pipits can be subtle and difficult. Your description could fit Red-throated and not sure how out of range it would be where you are at this time of year. Hopefully, someone with more local knowledge could chime in. In the meantime, here is a Red-throated/Meadow Pipit link to a forum discussion (http://surfbirds.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2891)based on photos that Jacqueline posted. It may be useful to you as it distills some of the key features. Otherwise, feel free to post photos if you want to double-check your ID. Best, Andy

[sue-o]

Thank-you, Andy, that was very informative. I have to lean towards RT after seeing those photos. The winter RT looks so much like what I saw. I will go tomorrow and hopefully get some better views. I was too far (and the sun was in my eyes) to see the base of the bill, but the streaking on the back was very noticable. I didn't see the rump.
Sue

[AndyB]

if you hear the call, that is very distinctive and strident and a good way to pick out a distant Red-throated - they often call when they flush.

[Brian S]

Sue-O

Andy has given you some help, but one of the last features you mention - the spot on the breast - is a good feature of Meadow Pipit....

Brian S

[sue-o]

Sue-O

Andy has given you some help, but one of the last features you mention - the spot on the breast - is a good feature of Meadow Pipit....

Brian S
Thanks, Brian. I thought that feature might help. It is most likely the Meadow, but I can't be sure enough to list it. I'm off now to try and find it again. The morning light might be better for me.
Sue

[macrourus]

Red-throated its regular wintering bird in Sicily but really scarce outside in te rest of Italy...

However few records do occur (fewer then actualy there are around as few birders go checking pipit in 1st w. plumage abd bother to listen te call any time)

it is a possibility

but take in mind that medow Pipit its horribly variable, with birds warm, other cold, birds browinish other looking greish washed or anything in bewteen when you really start closely look at them

From your description it could even be a Water pipit, why not, but with no photos we could ONLY speculate about

Go there and try to listen the flight call: pseee or pseeu (I do not if english traslation its ok), very soft but penetreting and high, often single or double its Red TH, psee, pesee, pseeepsee quick, fast, less high but noiser its for MP, similar, but more prrsee, psree, but in bewteen the two and harsher, more rough, as having sick throat, would be for WP.

But no mention about Anthus (r) joponicus :-) :-)
________
GOOD I INHALE IOLITE VAPORIZER REVIEW (http://www.vaporizers.net/)

[sue-o]

Hi,

Thanks for your insight, Macro. I did consider water pipit briefly, but I felt the heavy streaking on the back ruled it out. I have seen several other species with variable plumage, this is probably just another. I guess it must be a meadow, it makes the most sense. I will post some of terrible shots, but I don’t think anyone will be able to see well enough to id for me (but I have been amazed before by crummy photo ids). Hopefully, I’ll see it again and see it well enough to id and list it. I need a scope!

I have hit the auto-correct for color on #3 because shooting into the sun may have caused a color problem, but the un-touched seemed closer to what I saw so all the rest are the original exposure.
Sue

[sue-o]

Oh, I wanted to say that another reason I wasn't sure about it being a Meadow was the prominent black patch on the lower throat-side, as mentioned in the Collins for RT. It doesn't show so much in the photos, but it did on the live bird. It was one of the things I noticed right off.
Sue

[sue-o]

Just a little bump. Can anyone say this is a meadow pipit for sure, or are the photos not good enough?
Sue

[AndyB]

Hi sue-o, your photos are intriguing because they do show some pro Red-throated features such as the malar patch, heavily marked back, prominent wing bars. But as Andrea says, Meadow Pipits are variable looking birds. I'd like to see what Brian and Andrea make of these photos. Do you have any larger ones that could be posted (esp of the side-on view)? Andy

[sue-o]

Hi sue-o, your photos are intriguing because they do show some pro Red-throated features such as the malar patch, heavily marked back, prominent wing bars. But as Andrea says, Meadow Pipits are variable looking birds. I'd like to see what Brian and Andrea make of these photos. Do you have any larger ones that could be posted (esp of the side-on view)? Andy

Hi Andy,
I guess you can understand why I had trouble with id on this bird. I think I got the best of the lot with the photos. I do have a few others, but I don't know what you mean by larger. I understood I could only post 600x200. I really am not good with the photo editing. I just cropped to stamp size and then hit edit to get a small web size in microsoft picture manager. Is there a better way? Also, the pictures are just not good. I was really far away and had the 12x zoom all the way out on my Sony DHC-H5. It was shot outside the fence at a small memorial garden connected to a Lipu sanctuary which was closed and locked at the time. Part of the wire fence had been pushed down, but I stayed outside even though I really wanted, NEEDED:laugh:, to get closer. The area is open most days from 9:00 in the morning to 1:00 in the afternoon. Of course there was no bird when I could get in the next morning. Yesterday evening I went by to check if he was there, and two cars pulled up. Five people got out, pushed down the low part of the fence, and went over and into the park. Where is that laugh/cry smilie?
I'll experiment with the photos and see if I have anything else to post. Thanks for your feed-back.
Sue

[Colin Key]

Sue,

Can you just clarify a couple (O.K. four!) of things:

1. Are you using your Sony DHC-H5 "bare" or is it a digiscoping setup (camera coupled to telescope)?

2. What format are you shooting in - JPEG or RAW?

3. Do you have any post-processing software (did you get any with the camera) or do you only use Microsoft Picture Manager (I've never used it but suspect that it is mediocre, and that is being kind!)?

4. Do you have a web-hosting account (such as Photobucket) where you can store photos and assign them a URL for embedding images into forum posts?

Colin

[sue-o]

Sue,

Can you just clarify a couple (O.K. four!) of things:

1. Are you using your Sony DHC-H5 "bare" or is it a digiscoping setup (camera coupled to telescope)?

2. What format are you shooting in - JPEG or RAW?

3. Do you have any post-processing software (did you get any with the camera) or do you only use Microsoft Picture Manager (I've never used it but suspect that it is mediocre, and that is being kind!)?

4. Do you have a web-hosting account (such as Photobucket) where you can store photos and assign them a URL for embedding images into forum posts?

Colin

Hi Colin,

I was just going to post another 4. In answer to your questions:

1. Bare, just the camera.
2.Jpeg
3.No post-processing software.
4.I think I am on flicker (or Yahoo?), but I got a notice some time ago advising me about a change and the need to re-sign up. I though I did, but it didn't say, ok, all done or anything. I'll have to check if I still am on.

New uploads. 2 and 4 are auto-correct because of sun.

[Colin Key]

Hi Colin,

I was just going to post another 4. In answer to your questions:

1. Bare, just the camera.
2.Jpeg
3.No post-processing software.
4.I think I am on flicker (or Yahoo?), but I got a notice some time ago advising me about a change and the need to re-sign up. I though I did, but it didn't say, ok, all done or anything. I'll have to check if I still am on.

New uploads. 2 and 4 are auto-correct because of sun.

Hmm,

We need to take things slowly and think a bit here.

I have no experince of the camera you are using but in general anything above x3 (optical zoom) is going to be digital zoom which reduces image quality enormously - at x12 the deterioration is enormous.

Do you have a telescope, and if so which model?

If you are able to shoot in RAW format you should (that might not be possible with your camera, I don't know).

You must have SOME PP software. If you got nothing with the camera (on CD?) then try Photoshop Elements.

Ditch Flickr - totally useless. Go to Photobucket and set up an account with them.

I have, on a few occasions, managed to make "silk purses" out of "sow's ears", but it is not easy.

Stick with it, and come back with more info.

Colin

[AndyB]

I can understand why you are having problems with this bird. A couple of shots appear to show clear Red-throated-like mantle braces.

[sue-o]

Ok I got few larger. Some I've already posted I think. #3 has auto correction applied.

Edit: oops, not any better! Well, I kinda thought they wouldn't be good enough. Maybe I'll get another chance at either or both pipits some day.o :)
Thanks everybody.

[sue-o]

Hmm,

We need to take things slowly and think a bit here.

I have no experince of the camera you are using but in general anything above x3 (optical zoom) is going to be digital zoom which reduces image quality enormously - at x12 the deterioration is enormous.

Do you have a telescope, and if so which model?

If you are able to shoot in RAW format you should (that might not be possible with your camera, I don't know).

You must have SOME PP software. If you got nothing with the camera (on CD?) then try Photoshop Elements.

Ditch Flickr - totally useless. Go to Photobucket and set up an account with them.

I have, on a few occasions, managed to make "silk purses" out of "sow's ears", but it is not easy.

Stick with it, and come back with more info.

Colin


:) :) Colin, you’re talking to somebody who is so low tech she has to heat her water on the propane stove or in a solar shower! I am considering a scope, but it has to be small and tough. Life on a sailboat is not for delicate things. When we are at anchor somewhere and I go ashore to bird, I wrap the camera and bins in plastic bags and stuff them into my backpack to keep them dry during the ride ashore. I chose the camera I have now because I needed a decent zoom camera I could easily carry. I mainly wanted it to help me id birds. I might only see something once and may not take in all I should in one sighting. My camera is a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H5, it has 7.2 mega-pixels, a 12x OPTICAL zoom, image stabilizer and a Carl Zeiss lens. I don't think it does raw. It’s not a camera all you really good photographers would have, but it is great for me under the circumstances. I really can get some fairly good distance shots, these were just too far away and the bird is so tiny. I didn't even get great views with the bins.

You were right about a disk coming with the camera. I got curious and dug out all the stuff that came with it. I bought the camera two years ago so I forgot about it. The instructions said that if I had windows xp, the disk wasn’t necessary so I guess that’s why I never used it. Anyway, thanks for trying to help me. I did sign up for photobucket but I haven’t done anything yet. I am extremely computer and electronically challenged. If I do end up using photobucket, I’ll probably get it figured out just about the time we leave the marina and lose internet capabilities until the next winter berth.

I am posting a couple of hand-held 50 feet away shots so you can see that some distance shots are ok 'bare' ;)
Sue

[Colin Key]

Hello Sue,

Since you clearly have a strong interest in birds (and a wonderful lifestyle roaming the oceans) I would have thought that a decent 'scope would enhance your enjoyment immensely. If you do decide to take the plunge, and let us know what your budget is, I'm sure you will get a lot of advice on here.

The smaller (62 or 65mm) HD models from Leica, Zeiss or Swarovski are very portable, waterproof and built to withstand some harsh treatment. Coupled to a relatively cheap P&S camera you can get some decent shots of distant birds and some excellent shots of closer birds. I have a tiny Panasonic DMC-FX9 (3x optical zoom) which I still carry around and can manage to get decent shots through my scope just by holding the camera up to the eyepiece without a fixed adapter.

Colin

[Bobolink44]

Hi Sue-o, this may be the bird that was. there are some nice looking shots that could make a convincing red-throated pipit. hard to commit as we know it would be rare where you were so you have to err on side of caution. it will make the next one even sweeter especially if it's a nice red spring bird! do try and listen for the call if you do get another chance just as Andrea describes.

[macrourus]

I just think the bird is NOT identifiable with 100% of confidence... even if there seems to be several pro cervinus (Red TH) characters, such as mantle pattern, malar triangle and stripe, etc. I see other not really ok as the wholly white fringing to tertials (usually white at tip and more rufours or brownish on the rest of the fringing), face pattern etc....

Also, with such photos, any characters could appear influenced by photgraphic, light, posture effect. As for ex., the flanks streaks seems to be bold in some, while in other there it seems to be no streaks on lower flanks and belly, that its ok for Medow but not for Red Th.

SO, I would leave it unidentified. Just go and listen the call

As final note regarding Red Th.: this autumn was so far in my memory the best ever with hundreds migrating over Sicily and Italy, and the best wintering record ever too (but for 1 winter in 2001 when we recorded a single flock of 31-33 together).

Regarding Water Pipit: of course soon from your original descrition was clear that the strikingly streaked mantle eliminate Water, I was just over-enphatising (?? right word in English??) that without a picture, with simple description, we could have only speculae about a bird ID.

Ciao

Andrea Corso
Sicily
________
Paxil side effects (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/paxil/)

[sue-o]

Hi All,

Thanks for the responses, I don’t feel so inept now. Glad to see you pop in Bobolink. I had already come to the conclusion that this would be a bird that was; it’s happened before and it will happen again…c’est la vie. :) I try very hard to list only birds I am absolutely sure of, and that is why I couldn’t just go by range and say, ‘Oh, this has to be a Meadow.” TICK ;) Personally, I lean to a R-T, and did from the beginning. However, the range, consideration of plumage variation and the fact that I’ve never seen either species made it impossible for me to be certain; this was one I needed help with. I knew the photos were bad, but I hoped that someone very familiar with both birds might be able to call it in spite of the distant views. Andrea, I know what you mean about the variation of the streaking on the flanks in the photos. I tried to post views to allow for comparisons, but in life, the bird had white flanks with fairly heavy black streaking. Oh, I should say the bird never made a sound. I have gone back four times to see if I could spot him (or hear him) but haven’t had any luck. I may not get to list this, but it has been a learning experience and I enjoyed seeing the bird anyway.
Thanks again,
Sue

[Brian S]

Sue-O

Despite my earlier posting as Meadow Pipit, I would feel pretty much swayed by your photos that this is most likely a Red-throated. The upperparts show (in a couple of shots) nice black and white mantle braces,; the underparts seem quite clean and relatively white, with neat black streaks (Meadow seems to have more buff coolour than this in winter); the wing-bars also look white; the black triangualr malar area; the head pattern just seems right (hard to put my finger on why, perhaps the supercilium shape).

I feel as if I am digging myself out of one hole, only to dig myself into another....

Brian S

[Colin Key]

I would have to agree with Andrea,

On the basis of these photographs it is not possible to identify this bird. This could be a difficult call with better photos, with what we have there is simply not enough digital data to go forward. You can argue as long as you like, but the info is just not there (and what is there might well be misleading).

Colin

[forktail]

Sue-O

Despite my earlier posting as Meadow Pipit, I would feel pretty much swayed by your photos that this is most likely a Red-throated. The upperparts show (in a couple of shots) nice black and white mantle braces,; the underparts seem quite clean and relatively white, with neat black streaks (Meadow seems to have more buff coolour than this in winter); the wing-bars also look white; the black triangualr malar area; the head pattern just seems right (hard to put my finger on why, perhaps the supercilium shape).

I feel as if I am digging myself out of one hole, only to dig myself into another....

Brian S

There's a lot here to agree with. As with many photos it isn't perhaps possible to be 100% but there are several good pointers towards a Ripit. Brian has made many of them above so I won't repeat them.

I would add that the tertial edges of Ripits often appear much paler in photographs than in field guides - just check a few images. I wouldn't read too much into the 'too pale' edges in the pics as it seems to me to be typical. The lack of buff on the flanks and breast is helpful as is the very pale ground colour of the underparts - it's a 'clean' looking bird. And as Brian said, the head pattern looks good too. I think it would be difficult to find an image of a Meadow showing a similar set of features...? They are said to appear shorter-tailed and often 'fat' looking but I don't really pick up on that in 'real life' or these pix!

F.