Buff-bellied Pipit

[macrourus]

Am I geteting looser and lazy or I can't really figure out how to distinguish japonicus from rubescens (something I think was easier for me in the past) ?

could anybody tell my why the recent posted photos of this bird from Ireland is not a japonicus?

I could see pale legs, not really booble-goom pink but jet paler than I know within rubescens variability, paler bill, quite obvious pale eye-ring, white wing bars, strong underparts streaking, reaching into lower flanks, brownish hue to upperparts, quite white underparts...

I can't see well malar stripe and tirangles

What is odd for me for japonicus is that I think the bill should be a bit stronger and longer and possibly heavier (as Water vs. Rock Pipit), the streaks should be darker than upperparts colour, blacker, the legs may be a bit paler ??, the supercilium may be whiter

so pale underparts could be in this bird due to sun-bleaching and abrasion?

I wonder that ...

And the legs'?

Help me please

Andrea Corso
________
GONG BONGS (http://glassbongs.org/)

[macrourus]

May be also the upperparts are not well marked enough, being more uniform as rubescens and may be is a bird going into summer plumage so that why so pale overall and pale legged
?
________
Medical Marijuana Vaporizer (http://www.vaporizers.net/)

[Harry Hussey]

Hi Andrea,
I can understand your questioning of the racial ID of the Buff-bellied Pipit based solely on the two pics on the Stop Press gallery: let me assure you that the underparts were buff-toned, though, in some lights, they looked whiter, and it is merely unfortunate that the two pics that I posted give the impression that the bird lacked buff tones entirely.
A series of twelve pics can be seen on my blog: http://corkbirding.blogspot.com/
In life, the buff tones to the underparts, relatively fine flank streaking (again, this looked less fine in some pics than others, and this feature was similarly variable in life, though the flank streaks were genuinely on the fine side), leg colour (the bright sunlight is making them look paler than they were, and nearby Rock Pipits showed a similar leg colour...I'd expect a japonicus to have paler 'day-glow' legs, like on many Meadow Pipits), lack of strong malar stripes, upperparts colouration (less olive-toned than Rock, but sometimes strangely difficult to pick out from them on this feature alone) etc all pointed towards rubescens, and the calls match those of the other Buff-bellied Pipits that I've seen here (all rubescens on plumage).
Sorry for the misunderstanding!
Regards,
Harry

[JanJ]

Nice one Harry!

Here´s a japonicus recently seen in Norway and refered to by Brian here - if you remember:

http://www.surfbirds.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3058

and the image he refered to:

http://surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20080123110152.jpg

and from the Norwegian site:

http://www.feltornitologene.no/cpg/displayimage.php?pos=-1907

JanJ

[macrourus]

Thanks Harry,

I knew that if it was identified as rubescens in Ireland (where many great birders) then it was indeed...

I just want to have more details to study better and learn more about these two taxa (different species? I agree with Brian)...

on 2 single photos is often difficult as oight effect and position could strongly influence (look at the Isabelline Shrike in Spain now in the different pics )

Thanks

Still waiting one in Italy for me... :-)

Ciao

Andrea Corso
________
Art On The Hill Condo Prathumnak (http://pattayaluxurycondos.com)

[Harry Hussey]

Hi all,
After a bit of searching in the Surfbirds archives, I have found two pics taken by the finder at http://surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery9&start=325. I trust that these pics will clarify the identification as rubescens even further...
Interestingly, note that the legs weren't exactly blackish even in late November: I have noticed some variation in leg colour between the four birds that I have seen, and features like flank streaking and malar stripe prominence have also varied, but all were outside of the range of variation of japonicus...I dare say that, if there is a japonicus in the UK or Ireland soon, a lot of people will be a lot more familiar with rubescens (for comparsion) after the events of last autumn.
Regards,
Harry

[Brian S]

Andrea

To give you a bit more information and maybe to confuse you, check this link to Martin Reid’s website. Here you will find a rubescens with pale legs - http://www.martinreid.com/Main%20website/pipit10.html

However, to confuse you even more, have a look at these images also from Martin’s site - http://www.martinreid.com/Main%20website/pipit01.html . The top image in particular would give some cause for concern if you saw it briefly, but the second image seems to indicate that the contrast may have been manipulated to enhance the japonicus-type effect. The legs are dark – good for rubescens – but the wing bars are undeniably pale, and the underparts pretty pale for rubescens.

Brian S

[AndyB]

I was also pondering Harry's photos when they first appeared as they showed some pro-Siberian Pipit features. Fortunately, Harry's links to the other photos show it in another light (I copied the links below so we don't lose them).

Buff-bellied Pipit, Cork, Red Barn Strand, Youghal 26th November 2007 © Michael O'Keeffe
http://surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20071126024828.jpg
http://surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20071126024645.jpg

Buff-bellied Pipit, Cork, Ireland, Redbarn 11th Feb 2008 © Harry Hussey
http://surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20080213104327.jpg
http://surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20080213104146.jpg

When we're scanning for autumn vagrants in California (rare vagrant, perhaps rarer than Red-throated so wish I had annual experience) amongst the American Pipit flocks, the clean white underparts, white wing bars, browner upperparts, thick black malar patch scream for attention amongst even the least buffy American Pipit. Hopefully it also has bubble gum pink legs which helps to lend itself that waterthrush look when its running around the buffy Americans.

The pronounced and unbroken eyering also seems to be a good feature and is well shown by the Norwegian bird (http://surfbirds.com/media/gallery_photos/20080123110152.jpg) but then there is more than one bird on the Surfbirds article page (http://www.surfbirds.com/ID%20Articles/Pipits3.html) that doesn't show this feature so well.

Martin's bird (http://www.martinreid.com/Main%20website/pipit01.html) although looking not out of range for a pale American Pipit does look similar to the Siberian at the bottom of the Surfbirds article (http://www.surfbirds.com/ID%20Articles/Pipits3.html) and just goes to show that we still have more to learn.

[Harry Hussey]

Hi all,
I have put some pics, taken yesterday, online on my blog at http://corkbirding.blogspot.com/2008/02/buff-bellied-pipit-redbarn-27th-feb.html. While not as sharp as the 'controverisal' ones (the bird didn't stay stationary for long enough), they do allow such features as the underparts colouration, the exact nature of the malar stripe, the relatively fine streaking etc to be seen, all of which prove that the bird is still identifiable as rubescens, even allowing for the fact that wear has, perhaps, made it slightly (but only very slightly!) less distinctive than when it first turned up.
Regards,
Harry