En smuk 1K Steppehøg. Må have passeret i modlys lige over Kolabakken i nøjagtigt det spor en fugl tog ca. 1 time tidligere, da jeg har næsten dentiske fotos af fugl 1.
Undersiden ser utegnet orange ud, der er tydeligere hovedtegninger inklusive komplet hvidlig halskrave af lysere farve end resten af undersiden (godt kendetegn om efteråret - i mindre grad om foråret, hvor lyst på undersiden blegner), der er i god kontrast til mørkt halstørklæde, der hos denne fugl ser ud til at nå godt ned på halssiderne. Fugle har desuden Steppehøgens typiske tilspidsede hånd med kun meget svagt grå bagkant.
Det var vost den fugl, der blev dagens nr.5 på Nabben, der denne dag satte ny dagsrekord med arten - ventet efter at den gamle rekord på 4 flere gange var blevet tangeret i dagene før.
Det kan jeg sørme godt forstå....tak for de spændende billeder....
På afstand og i modlys bestemte jeg først denne fugl til Blå Kærhøg.
Se midterste foto i venstre række (stort ugleagtigt hoved og brede vinger med fem fingre)- men studsede dog over en meget spids hånd, da fuglen trak lige indover.
Fotografierne viser imidlertid tydelige Steppehøgekarakterer som markant halskrave og rustbrun underside, tilsyneladende uden - eller kun med ubetydelig - længdestribning.
Undersiden af vingen passer dog bedre på Blå Kærhøg, ikke sandt?
Er der hér tale om en hybrid?
My first impression of this bird was that it was a Hen Harrier (body looked quite heavy with broad and thick-set head, and it showed rounded wingtips with five visible fingers)
The photos clearly point to Pallid, however, because of distinct neck-collar and orange-brown underside with little or no streaking.
IMO the pattern of the underwing seems better for Hen, so perhaps this is actually a hybrid beteen the two species?
Any comments much appreciated....
Der skulle have stået 'midterste foto i HØJRE række'
Ser nu kommentaren fra Klaus...er undervingetegningen god for Steppe?
Tidspunket passer ganske rigtigt fint med dagens 5. Steppehøg, som sås på Nabben kl. 11.59.
Iøvrigt trak endnu en juvenil forbi Kolabacken kl. 12.52 men returnerede 12.57. Der må således have været 6 Steppehøge på Falsterbo denne rekorddag.
Another not-so-typical harrier. Again, as in my earlier comment today, regarding another harrier on this site, I would like to focus on the anomalies of this alleged Pallid Harrier. I agree that it looks like a Pallid, and would probably pass as a Pallid in field for most of us, but the oddities are too many to accept it as a Pallid. The wing-formula and underwing are again in my opinion the most important areas to focus on. The 5th finger is actually quite well developed and is sticking out from the trailing edge of the hand even in active flapping flight, which is something you don't expect to find in Pallid, sometimes on soaring birds,yes. In some of the images (e.g. lower left) you can actually make out the emargination on the outer web of p6, again something that you don't get in Pallid, which has no emarginations on p6 =the 5th finger. On the other hand, the wing-tip is not broad enough for Hen, the 5th finger being too short and poorly emarginated. Apart from the wing-tip, the banding of the secondaries is too fine and the general colour too pale for an average Pallid, being much more similar to the average Hen Harrier. Also the primaries are barred similarly to many Hen Harriers, while the trailing edge looks poorly defined for a Hen, but this may be caused by the strong backlight.The head shows a strong collar, but the boa is streaked like in Hen (can be similar in Pallid too) and there is a lot of white around the eye, which is more typical of Hen than Pallid. Furthermore I think I can spot streaking on the flanks and in the underwing coverts (this can surely be verified by lightening up the images a little more), more so than can be accepted for a pure Pallid.
Thus, to sum it up, based on wing-formula, banding of secondaries and primaries, head pattern and extent of streaking to flanks and underwing coverts, I regard this bird as a likely hybrid between Hen and Pallid Harrier.
And I guess there will be more...
Your comments fully confirms my puzzlement over this bird.
The marked difference in the imargination of p6 on the two species was new to me, and seems to be the clinching diagnostic when trying to identify possible hybrids.
Thanks a lot!
Thanks to DF for exellent explanation.
While I knew of the lack of emargination on p5 (counted inwards)I sometimes find it difficult to see this properly, even in some rather good pic, since p4 is covering this feture, although sometimes it 'shines' through.
However, it´s well shown in the other
bird commented by Dick.
Also this bird
swedish bird shows a good emarginated p5 and together with other features turned out to be a hybrid, as aproved by Dick.
Impressive Circus crowding at Falsterbo...!
Many thanks for comments:
We = I learn that nature's reality is not always simple.
With Niels BOHR: Clarity may be the opposite of
Kd. rgds ............. C.
I can see that the secondaries looks Hen-like here, but apart from this, the bird in the field would have looked perfect for Pallid, I guess.
Does Peter or Helge have any additional information on how the field impression was (jizz and flight set)? This will be of value to field birders who will never have a chance for seing feather characters such as primary emarginations in the field. Most Pallids in this influx are straightforward, but a few tricky birds had turned up now - however, hopefully harrier ID will not turn into a question of primary emargination, which will be a pity with so much of these aethical perfect birds around.
The identification of Herriers would certainly not rest on emarginations alone - which would be totaly impossible and beyond human ability.
However, it´s intended to be able to sort out the tricky individuals, which is sometimes already spotted in the field but perhaps more so later on in the image taken.
It requires,however,good sharp images.
As mentioned above, my first impression of the bird was of a Hen Harrier (the flight-mode, perception of general size, proportions and not least the owl-like head and broad tail, all summed up the typical jizz of Hen)
Earlier the same day I noted an approaching but distant harrier, and immediately announced it Montagus/Pallid solely based on it's jizz (because of poor light-conditions colours could not be ascertained).
When it came a bit closer the typical wing-pattern of an adult male Pallid became visible in the spotting-scope.
Not long after the bird discussed here had passed, a typical juvenile Pallid passed in perfect light.
Based on the field-impressions of the three birds seen yesterday as well as on the plumage-characters which are at odds with Pallid, I feel that the suggestion made by DF that the bird depicted here is indeed a hybrid, seems by far the most likely conclusion.
This is really interesting! This individual was seen from Nabben at 11.55-11.57, and we got the impression of a hybrid as well. Initially, when we got distant views of it, the impression was mixed between Hen Harrier and Pallid. The shape and proportions was more like that of a Hen, with shorter wings and a Common Buzzard-like flight action, like Hen Harrier. Later on, when the light was getting better, we got better views of the body colouration and head pattern, which was more like Pallid. When subsequently scrutinizing a series of crappy record shots (the bird was quite distant and the light was bad), the wing formula confirmed our thoughts. Have uploaded these crappy record shots here:
Great that Peter and David can confirm that jizz, flight set and structure differed from a pure Pallid. This still leaves the absolute majority of documented and seen-well birds as Pallids, although we probably must await relatively more hybrid-types later in autumn as Hen is a shorter distance migrant than Pallid.
We have a very good spring passage in Denmark of Pallids, with up to 4 on a day at Skagen (and unusually low numbers of Hen). These birds was probably part of a wave hitting Scandinavia where many could have bred; as Hen population was probably low, chances for mixed pairs was great - also giving the fact that Pallid ofte displays intensively towards other small harriers, as have been seen in lone Danish males.
Still, the influx of clean, nice Pallids is unsurpassed; birds with a combination of Pallid jizz, flight set and plumage characters should be as easy to ID as ever. With Peyer and Davids information, these hybrids even regarding flight set and jizz have intermediate characters.
A week ago at the Falsterbo Canal, a harrier, which to my eves showed wrong proportions for Pallid, caused much discussion; record shots showed Pallied characters apart from weaker head markings in head-sides than expected, but the seemingly broadish innerhand puzzled me.
Kunne en reelt fjerkyndig, som Peter Sunesen, forklare forskellen mellem indskæringerne på de mellemste håndsvingfjer hos Blå kærhøg og Steppehøg for Netfugls mindre indforståede læsere? Det villevære værdifuldt, også så disse småkendetegn kunne testes i Netfugls store galleri af arterne.
Ved nogen, hvor sikre smådetaljer som indskæringer er til bestemmelse af den ene art fra den anden? Alle andre kendetegn varierer, så derfor ville det være værdifuldt, om en erfaren ringmærker kunne bidrage med information, meget gerne i en seperat tråd.
Desuden ville det være fint, om nogle kunne gennemgå Zoologisk museums store skindsamling af kærhøge (og der er mange...) for uafhængigt at undersøge de angivelige forskelle mellem form og indskæringer på håndsvingfjerene hos de to kærhøge. Jeg ved, at museet meget gerne stille samlingen til rådighed, hvis resultaterne senere offentliggøres.
Could anyone in details explain the value and difference in emargitaions etc. in the mid primaries between Hen and Pallid Harrier. This will be of large value for the readers of Netfugl.
Could an experienced ringer confirm, that wing formulars, emarginations etc. are less valuable than other characters? again, this will be usesul for less experienced birders - and could best be made on a seperate thread here on Netfugl.
Finally: there is a very large harrier material at Zoological Museum in Copenhagen. It will be very valuable witn an independent study of the shape and emarginations in the mentioned primaries on Hen and Pallid Harriers, etasbling the possible variation and usefullness of these characters. I know that the museum are positive towards investigations in their skin collection, as long as the results are published - which could be done here at Netfugl.
Every ringer knows that Chiffchaffs and Willow Warblers, as well as Blyth's Reed and Marsh Warblers are easiest to tell apart by their wing-formulas. Raptors are no different. Every bird species has a diagnostic wing-formula, and for a reason. There may be small variations between different age-groups, and sometimes between different age-classes, but as a rule the wing-formula is very constant. This is nothing new. Look up Witherby's or Glutz et al., or even much older German handbooks from the early 1900's, and you will find drawings of the wings of Montagu's, Pallid and Hen Harriers, with pointers on emarginations and notches, telling how the species differ from each other. I used these handbooks as reference when I went true the collections in Zoologisk Museum in Copenhagen in 1980, and there was never a problem to tell any Pallid Harrier from any Montagu's, or Hen Harriers for that matter.
However, our modern fieldguides seem to have overlooked this important knowledge altogether. Painted plates, even of the most respected fieldguides, are often most unreliable when it comes to fine, yet important details like the wing-formula. Only photographs are truthful in this respect.
But, indeed, wing-formulas, emarginations and notches are very accurate characters, also for raptors.
Truly spoken by DF - but then again Chiffchaffs and such are often enough catched for ringing and often displayed with a nice close up of the wing. This we usually don´t have any problems with in the process to gain the correct identification. Regarding the subject species, we mostly have to rely on good photos (and of course field characters),to even be able to obtain a fair glimpse of the notches and emarginations - which indeed differ among Hen, Montagu´s & Pallid, with seemingly varies intermediate features in hybrids. These days with huge numbers of photos, of which many many are superb ones, there´s a good chance to spot the mentioned characters.
In the end of the day, all features put together...and what fun!
Many thanks for the KICK ......... Yours C.
Enhver med interesse for bestemmelse af kærhøge har naturligvis anvendt aftenen og natten på en kritisk gennemgang af de udmærkede illustrationer på side 347 i bind 4 af "Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas".
Witherby har jeg slet ikke, og den eneste nyere referance, der nogenlunde detaljeret tager såvel formel som indskæringer op er "Rare birds of Britain and Europe" (Alström m.fl.) fra 1992. Forsmans "Raptors" fra 1996 har vingeformel, men ikke detaljer om indskæringer. "Rovfugle i felten" nævner det ikke, da bogens formål mere er feltbestemmelse, og jeg selv finder anvendelsen af de nævnte fjerkarakterer vanskelig, ikke mindst da de enkelte fjers tegninger besværliggør en effektiv aflæsning.
Peter Sunesen refererer ofte til Lehn-Schiølers bog - er der noget her, der kunne refereres? Igen et værk, meget få har adgang til.
Selv ved jeg udmærket at vingeformler m.v. er en konstant karakter - nogle år på f.eks. Falsterbo Fågelstation samt erfaringerne med langvarige skindstudier har sat sine spor. Aflæsning af vingeformel er let i hånden, men forekommer sværere på fotos, hvis fuglen ikke er i en helt perfekt position til aflæsning, som f.eks. når fuglen er vist fra siden.
Hvad jeg ønskede var at nogle kunne berette pædagogisk om den praktiske anvendelighed af forskellene. Det er ikke sket. En gammel fuglepædagog som Murmann kunne måske have gjort dette i stedet for at anvende sig af "morsomme" og overflødige ordspil. Det kan nåes endnu.
The only recent publication, which takes up both wing formula and emarginations is "Rare birds of Britain and Europe" (Alström et al. 1992). "Raptors" (Forsman) have rawings of the wing formula only. I guess that very few - especially of the younger birders - have the possibility to check "Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas" (those who can might like to check the drawings on p. 347 in volume 4).
I know from previous work that wing-formulars are rather constant features. I also know that establishing this in photoes might be tricky if the bird is not in perfect position, as a bird in the hand will be.
I hope someone with experience in the usefullness of the wing-formulars and emarginations in harriers can explain exactly WHAT is the essential to look for. This would be very useful for the readers of Netfugl. Alternatively the material is large and someone could put the entire harrier gallery on a test and shows us what to look for in certain photoes.
Jeg har fundet Schiøler frem og arbejder på sagen.
The well-known differences between Hen-and Pallid as regards wing-formular and primary-emarginations are expertly illustrated in an older Danish work :"Danmarks Fugle bd.3" by E.Lehn Schiøler. Will try to upload the relevant images ASAP.
Det ville være virkeligt flot hvis du kunne gøre det! Også "Handbuch" har illustrationerne, og jeg kan affotografere dem - men er i tvivl om retningslinier og ophavsret til den slags.
Som sagt: hvad jeg mest fiskede efter var at nogle med intensivt fjerkundskab kunne FORKLARE de nævnte forskelle (frem for blot at referere litteratur, ingen stort set kan få fat i hurtigt)- det ville være nyttigt for Netfugls mange læsere, hvoraf en betragtelig del fotograferer eller interesserer sig for feltornitologiens finere madlavning..
A few years back DF wrote an identification piece for Dutch Birding, namely 'Field identification of female and juvenile Montagu´s and Pallid Harriers (Dutch Birding 17: 41-54, April 1995. On page 51 there´s a drawing of the wings of the three sp showing wing-formula with notches and emarginations.
As mentioned by Klaus here, it´s good to sort these features out to be able to put them on Netfugl
They are after all, as already been mentioned, important characters.
Affotografering er ikke noget problem for E. Lehn. Schiøler:
Ophavs-rettighederne forsvinder 70 år efter opretshavers død.
Der er gode håndtegninger - med kommentarer, også om
visibility - af primaries hos Hede-, Steppe- og Blå i
P.A.D. HOLLOM :
'The Popular Handbook of RARER BRITISH BIRDS'
Witherby Ltd., Ld., 1960, p32-3.
Det synes dog vanskeligt at skelne ml. Hede- og
Steppe- i felten og feltfotos, ud fra de udmærkede
Som for visse sangere;
Mere nyttige for fugle i hånden, død el. levende,
uanset evt. gastronomisk formål §§§(:-)]]]
Above, a ref. to fine line-drawings of Harrier
primaries by Hayman, in HOLLOM 1969,
incl. lengths and emarginations.
- It appears quite HARD, to distinguish betw. MONTAGU's
and PALLID in the field or by field photos,
by form/length of the primaries.
OK for handheld birds, live or dead. I.e. much like
some Phyll. species.
Best rgds .......... C.
|Nye kommentarer til dette billede er ikke muligt.|
|Bemærk: at alle billeder har copyright og må ikke anvendes uden accept fra den respektive fotograf.|