Bird i.d. please!

Words · #1 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 09:38 PM

Not a great shot, but I snatched this while by the River Thames today, by Tower Bridge. Looks like a raptor, possibly a peregrine (not far from The Tate Modern where they do nest)... but I'm far from confident with that.

Phoebe · #2 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 09:56 PM

I think you are right with Peregrine and it looks like a juvenile too! Any more shots that might show a ring?

Well done getting this photo

Picidae · #3 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 09:59 PM

Looks like a Kestrel to me (the apparent wing formula is a bit misleading but I could put that down to primaries still growing). However, general wing shape and buff body tones combined with distinct spotting on breast and underwing pattern, makes this a reasonably good shout! Any more pics?

Jason Claxton · #4 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 10:04 PM

Yes I will venture, a Kestrel on this one,

Jason

Phoebe · #5 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 10:17 PM

It is confusing from the photo but to me the wings in proportion to the body look a bit to long for a kestrel

it could be the angle and foreshortening of the body. Could be kestrel

Words · #6 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 10:35 PM

I don't have any better shots (that's a 100% crop), but the upper wings seemed too dark for a kestrel on the very brief glimpse I got and the flight didn't look quite right. Still, I have to admit that kestrel is a possibility, so it may be difficult to confirm.

Not sure what the kestrel population of central London is like. The peregrine roost is about half a mile from where I got this, which is partly why I was leaning in that direction.

Picidae · #7 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoebe

It is confusing from the photo but to me the wings in proportion to the body look a bit to long for a kestrel

it could be the angle and foreshortening of the body. Could be kestrel

A Peregrine has broader wings than a Kestrel Phoebe and is a much heavier looking bird. I agree the wings look 'long' but this, as you say is just the angle of the shot and the flight position. A juvenile Pere has much denser spotting under the wing coverts and heavier streaking that reaches to trousers with a heavily barred tail.

Try these for comparison: (young peres)

Galleriet - Netfugl.dk

Galleriet - Netfugl.dk

Galleriet - Netfugl.dk

Kestrel:

Tarsiger.com

Picidae · #8 (**permalink**) 02-10-2009, 10:48 PM

Kestrel are fairly common in London and flight not dissimilar to other falcon species (except when hovering!). Younger birds (and winter adults) tend to be darker on the upperparts with general variation amongst individuals too (I've seen Kes's that are almost dark chocolate brown on their upperparts). Just doesn't look bulky enough for Pere imo (in fact it looks a better size for a male Kes rather than female) and what can be made out from the plumage isn't right for juvenile or an adult pere. However, photos can be very misleading as we all know as can our impressions of what we see in the field.

aeshna5 · #9 (**permalink**) 03-10-2009, 05:28 AM

It's a Kestrel for me!

Words · #10 (**permalink**) 03-10-2009, 08:59 AM

I'll go with "probable kestrel". I can see all the elements leading to that conclusion, but it still doesn't look quite right to me (I've 1000s of kestrel shot to compare it with). No worrries though! It was a long way off so it was aloways going to be tricky. Thanks!