Confirmation before Gallery upload.

[willing to learn]

Perhaps Grayham can confirm, Willow/Marsh. Before I load in the Gallery I am 90% but could be wrong
Regards
Colin

[SusieBee]

Oooo I'd say willow again but it's a difficult one & would wait for the experts....lol

Lovely pic btw

[glsammy]

I'd say a Marsh Tit.

I find the easiest way to tell is to look at the beak. If it's not pure black, such as yours, then it's a Marsh. So far that's proven to be reliable. I find most of the other pointers very difficult to judge as the birds posture, the lighting on the bird etc are always different and seeing the small differences is ni on impossible.

[bob.phillips]

Good tip Graham. So if the beak is pure black then is it a willow??

I assumed that this one I took is a Marsh tit and as it does not have a pure black beak then it fits with your suggestion.



Thanks,

Bob P.

[SusieBee]

Oooops Sorry.

I've just been looking through Wab Gallery images and even more confused.

I was going by my books identifications. Not a mention of the beak differences. Thanks will make a note.

[Foz]

Marsh for me as well.
I used to go on other features as printed in the books but the local ringers alway go by the pale patch on the beak.
Funny thing is Ive been trying to get a photo of a pair on my feeders this morning.......

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by bob.phillips

Good tip Graham. So if the beak is pure black then is it a willow??

I assumed that this one I took is a Marsh tit and as it does not have a pure black beak then it fits with your suggestion.



Thanks,

Bob P.

Yep. Here's a Willow example so you can see the difference in the beak.


I really must tidy up my Gallery images, I've just notices at least two named incorrectly..

Just to show how difficult it can be, look at this one:



At first glance it looks like a Willow, but notice that very slight mark near the base of the beak. That's enough to confirm a Marsh, plus I know this bird well and I've heard it many times.

I've now renamed four of mine. I'm going to spend a couple of hours checking the Gallery.

[Picidae]

Originally Posted by glsammy

I'd say a Marsh Tit.

I find the easiest way to tell is to look at the beak. If it's not pure black, such as yours, then it's a Marsh. So far that's proven to be reliable. I find most of the other pointers very difficult to judge as the birds posture, the lighting on the bird etc are always different and seeing the small differences is ni on impossible.

Both Willow and Marsh can show pale edges to mandibles and light/abrasion on bill can give impression of 'pale' bills and pale cutting edges, so this is usually a more reliable feature when bird is in the hand. Btw. If anyone was confused on this thread, the 'diagnostic' 'spot' would be on the proximal end of the upper mandible only below the nostril - Bull neck and flank colour are not reliable and both can also show pale wing panels according to moult conditions. While cheek contrast is a good feature, both sp. can show some contrast but (according to more recent reviews) Marsh never show warm buff on neck sides. Voice continues to be the most reliable feature but there's still work to do in that area as well!

Recent reviews here:
http://blx1.bto.org/pdf/ringmigratio...broughton1.pdf

and some good references here if anyone wants to do any reading!
Richard K Broughton

While the pale spot feature is about 98% reliable all relevant features should be used to ensure reliable identification.

Willing to Learn's photo is clearly a Marsh Tit using all available feature references.

[Picidae]

Originally Posted by glsammy

Just to show how difficult it can be, look at this one:



At first glance it looks like a Willow, but notice that very slight mark near the base of the beak. That's enough to confirm a Marsh, plus I know this bird well and I've heard it many times.

Yes a Marsh but also note the clear 'Marsh' cheek pattern.

[nigel_b]

Willow for me, slightly lighter panel on the wing.