Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Somewhat Facetious Question; But .....

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Somewhat Facetious Question; But .....

    Say ye've been picking through a standing flock of gulls for an hour or two and then took a photo of them, for what ever reason.

    A week later, ye showing this shot to a friend when he gasps and blurts out;

    " OMG! Look at the secondary's on that one ~ third from the left. Two lines down! That's a Larus catcharat! Mongolian Spratgobbler Herring Gull! It's a MEGA for East Slough!!! "

    What do ye do? It is Indeed a catcharat. It's a First. You'd obviously have laid eyes on it that day, because ye eyeballed every bird in that group ~ even if ye didn't happen to suss what it was ..... Now ye have enough evidence for it to sail past the BBRC. It's rock solid. The bird was there. Ye even have the local branch of Etams, clearly visible in the background, clinching the location.

    Moral dilemma: Do ye Tick it?

  • #2
    Well those Finns who got a pic of a Pacific Diver with a Great Northern have exactly that dilemma! And the Swede who took a pic of an "Ortolan" which turned out to be a Grey-necked . . . two national firsts, only id'ed after they'd gone

    Never happened to me, but that's because my photos are ....

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes, I was thinking of those 2 recent examples. The Bunting had obviously been studied, so I would have less worries about ticking it other than the annoyance of not IDing it sooner. But the Diver must be a really unsatisfactory tick if you weren't even looking at it, just happened to swim past in the background. I guess you tick it because you did see it but it has to go on the "must go for another one if it turns up again" list.

      Comment


      • #4
        I wouldn't count either and would be annoyed at having passed them over.

        If you have a very difficult bird and someone gets a photograph to settle the identification, then fair enough but I'm sure there is an upsurge in photographing birds and then identifying them at home. And there's nothing wrong with that, it's just not how I enjoy the hobby. I do think there's more achievement in finding and identifying something through skill, diligence and patience in the field, rather than photographing every half-interesting bird and looking at it on screen to identify it. Just my opinion though.
        OBC John Peel Awesomeness
        The little things they make me so happy, all I want to do is live by the sea...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by forktail View Post
          I wouldn't count either and would be annoyed at having passed them over.

          If you have a very difficult bird and someone gets a photograph to settle the identification, then fair enough but I'm sure there is an upsurge in photographing birds and then identifying them at home. And there's nothing wrong with that, it's just not how I enjoy the hobby. I do think there's more achievement in finding and identifying something through skill, diligence and patience in the field, rather than photographing every half-interesting bird and looking at it on screen to identify it. Just my opinion though.
          I am of the same opinion, but each to their own.

          Neil.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by forktail View Post
            I'm sure there is an upsurge in photographing birds and then identifying them at home.
            In some ways, that's going back to how it used to be done in the 18th-19th centuries - someone would go out, shoot every bird they saw, and then bring them all home for identification.

            Should add, that is not a method I approve of!

            Comment


            • #7
              I've just 'suffered' from similar circumstances. Photos I took of a striking 'sub-adult male Hen Harrier' seen on a cold day over Durham's moors over a year ago have turned out to be almost certainly a 3CY Northern Harrier. Delighted with the reidentification - yes! Disappointed at not being alert enough at the time to realise that the plumage was inconsistent with a sub-adult male Hen Harrier - most definitely, gutted in fact... To tick or not to tick - don't really care!

              With the rapid increase and advancement of digital photography, there'll be many more tales to come of re-identifications and birds missed first time round. But I agree, the slipping standard of birding and the reliance on images to ID birds once back home is not something to be happy about.

              Mark

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mark Newsome View Post
                Photos I took of a striking 'sub-adult male Hen Harrier' seen on a cold day over Durham's moors over a year ago have turned out to be almost certainly a 3CY Northern Harrier.
                Thing that baffles me most about this one - how did it manage to escape being shot by the gamekeepers?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MichaelF View Post
                  Thing that baffles me most about this one - how did it manage to escape being shot by the gamekeepers?
                  It did what every decent raptor should do in Durham - spend a few minutes hunting then get the hell of of there...! It lingered for about 5 mins over moorland on the north side of Selset Res., then headed quite strongly SW over Lunedale and probably towards the Cumbrian border. Maybe Bowland would have been more attractive if it managed to reach there.

                  Mark

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    How many people have Amur Falcon on their list having seen what they thought was a Red-Foot...?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hmmm. Morality is a slippy thing. If the bird was species A when you saw it and since then has become species A + B - tick. If the species is one of those total ba****rds ( i.e. large gulls ) and someone more knowledgable i.d's it - tick ( no different from someone saying " Have you seen XXXXXXXXXXXX over there" ). If you took a photo before i'ding the bird, "'cos it looked interesting / different" and then have it fly off - tick. As long as the identification is correct, then the methodology is rather irrelevant ( barring blowing the poor little bu**er out of the sky )

                      Chris

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I know that post trip identification is an area for some debate, but for those of us who are new to the hobby (no pun intended), going through any photographs we may have taken and comparing them to field guides at home is the best option we have.

                        Can I say though how grateful I am to those birders I meet on my excursions who are, almost without excpetion happy to help with identification and pointing out birds that I have missed etc. True one gets the odd miserable sod, but they are outnumbered 100/1 by those who recognise in another the confusion they once saw in themselves.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X