DOCSLIB.ORG

Mystery Photographs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mystery Photographs Mystery photographs "| /\Q Last month's four pipit photographs (repeated here as plates A \j*j 37-40) were taken by Dr Klaus Robin in Switzerland, where the bird was present for several days in December/January 1982/83. They are selected from a series of 12 black-and-white prints sent to the Rarities Committee by Dr Roland Luder for an opinion on the identity of the bird. 34 [Bril. Birds 79: 34-39, January 1986] Mystery photographs 35 37-40. Mystery photographs 109 (Klaus Robin) Brief accompanying notes referred to a cream-coloured breast, rather yellowish-brown upperparts, flesh-coloured legs, and a call resembling that of Dunnock Prunella modularis or Reed Bunting Emberiza schoeniclns. The choice was between Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis and Red-throated Pipit A. cervinus in one of its non red-throated plumages. There was strong initial opinion that it was a Red-throated Pipit (9:1 in favour on the first circula­ tion). The eventual clear majority view, however, was for Meadow Pipit: including the opinions of three international experts also consulted, the final votes were ten for Meadow, one for Red-throated (an unrepentant JTRS), and two undecided. It must be said at the outset that the severity of the problem set here is rather artificial. In the real field situation, Red-throated Pipit is almost always first identified by its flight call, which when heard fully is to some ears among the most distinctive of all bird noises: a very high-pitched, penetrating 'psssss', which starts emphatically and trails off to an almost inaudible finish, lasting a full half-second. Some observers apparently have trouble in distinguishing the call from that of Olive-backed Pipit A hodgsoni or Tree Pipit A. trivialis {Brit. Birds 73: 233; 74: 228-229), but at least it's quite unlike the short, squeaky notes of Meadow Pipit. The Dunnock- or Reed Bunting-like call described for this bird does not help: which of the varied calls of these species did it resemble? With a stretched imagination, this imprecise description could fit either Red-throated or Meadow. In the field, differences in colour tones would also be helpful. Red- throated always lacks Meadow's usually obvious yellowish-olive tones on the upperparts and ear-coverts, and is instead generally greyish, greyish- brown or obviously brownish-toned in these areas, much depending on the light. The 'rather yellowish-brown' upperparts noted for the mystery bird 36 Mystery photographs 41. Meadow Pipit Anlhuspratcnsis, Netherlands, April 1983 (ArnoudB. van den Berg) therefore seems to be a clear point in favour of Meadow. Also, the colour of the pale markings on the upperparts and wings, and—especially—the base-colour on the flanks and breast of Red-throated is usually obviously creamier or whiter than that of Meadow, which is usually pale buffy-yellow in these areas. The infrequent 'grey-and-white morph' Meadow Pipits (which may be familiar to observers who search pipit flocks in autumn: on Scilly, for example, something like one in 200 is of this type) can look like Red-throateds in these respects, however, with the result that it would take the sharpest of observers confidently to claim a Red-throated without hearing the call or seeing the diagnostic finely streaked rump (plain on Meadow). The mystery bird unhelpfully managed to keep its rump hidden in the whole 12-print series, but the 'cream-coloured breast' seems to be a contradictory point in favour of Red-throated. As an aside, it would be interesting to know what these 'grey-and-white morph' Meadow Pipits are. Perhaps the coloration is age-related, or that of a particular geographic population, or (in my view most likely) just the extreme of a cline of colour variation. In addition, Red-throated tends to look slightly heavier and shorter-tailed (especially in flight), like Tree Pipit, and Meadow has a very short projection of primaries beyond the tertials, which is tiny or lacking on Red-throated (plate 39 seems to show a Meadow-like wing-structure, but it is debatable). So, for silent, 'rumpless' birds (or black-and-white photographs) the best Mystery photographs 37 clinchers probably lie in the following differences in plumage patterns and tones: HEAD Differences are sometimes slight, but Red-throated tends to show a more darkly streaked crown, longer and more defined supercilium, more uniformly dark ear-coverts, bolder and 'cleaner' pale submoustachial stripe, and malar stripe ending in a larger dark patch at sides of lower throat. UPPERPARTS Red-throated shows pale stripes or 'tramlines' at the sides of the mantle, but, because they are whiter and are outlined with blackish stripes, they are more contrasting and obvious than the similar marks shown by many Meadow Pipits. The centres of the wing-coverts and tertials are darker, giving slightly greater contrast with the whiter fringes than is the case with Meadow. 42. Red-throated Pipit Anlhus cervinus, Kenya, February 1973 (J. F. Reynolds) 38 Mystery photographs UNDERPARTS The breast-streaking on Red-throated is more strongly con­ trasting, better-defined, slightly bolder and—most important—more con­ tinuous than on Meadow, giving a more striped, less streaked appearance. On Red-throated, the breast-streaking usually extends down the full length of the flanks at the same strength (usually showing as two bold, black stripes), whereas on Meadow the flank-streaking is thinner and more broken than the streaking on its breast. The mystery bird's head pattern is better for Meadow, with subdued supercilium which also gives greater contrast to a pale eye-ring, and rather pale-centred ear-coverts. Allowing for photographic effects which can exaggerate contrasts, the mantle, wing-covert and tertial patterns of the mystery bird also seem well within the range of Meadow. Allowing for the fluffed-out breast-feathers in some photographs (e.g. plate 39), which exaggerates the thickness of the streaks, the breast does not seem suffi­ ciently boldly striped for a Red-throated; indeed, plate 40 (in which the breast-feathers are sleeked down) shows an unremarkable, Meadow-like pattern. On the flanks, the streaking is clearly thinner and more broken than on the breast, and does not show as two bold stripes (although caution is clearly necessary over how the feathers lie and how much of the flanks are concealed under the wing), and this is perhaps the strongest single pro- Meadow feature in the photographs. The Rarities Committee thanks Dr Luder for posing this hopefully instructive problem, and Per Alstrom, Jon Dunn and Killian Mullarney for their valued comments. PJG 43. Red-throated Pipit Anlhus cervinus, Kenya, February 1973 (/. F. Reynolds) Mystery photographs 39 44. Meadow Pipit Anthuspratensis, Dumfriesshire, summer 1975 (Robert T. Smith) 45. Mystery photograph 110. Identify the species. Answer next month .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Host Alarm Calls Attract the Unwanted Attention of the Brood Parasitic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Host alarm calls attract the unwanted attention of the brood parasitic common cuckoo Attila Marton 1,2*, Attila Fülöp 2,3, Katalin Ozogány1, Csaba Moskát 4,5 & Miklós Bán 1,3,5 It is well known that avian brood parasites lay their eggs in the nests of other bird species, called hosts. It remains less clear, however, just how parasites are able to recognize their hosts and identify the exact location of the appropriate nests to lay their eggs in. While previous studies attributed high importance to visual signals in fnding the hosts’ nests (e.g. nest building activity or the distance and direct sight of the nest from vantage points used by the brood parasites), the role of host acoustic signals during the nest searching stage has been largely neglected. We present experimental evidence that both female and male common cuckoos Cuculus canorus pay attention to their host’s, the great reed warbler’s Acrocephalus arundinaceus alarm calls, relative to the calls of an unparasitized species used as controls. Parallel to this, we found no diference between the visibility of parasitized and unparasitized nests during drone fights, but great reed warblers that alarmed more frequently experienced higher rates of parasitism. We conclude that alarm calls might be advantageous for the hosts when used against enemies or for alerting conspecifcs, but can act in a detrimental manner by providing important nest location cues for eavesdropping brood parasites. Our results suggest that host alarm calls may constitute a suitable trait on which cuckoo nestlings can imprint on to recognize their primary host species later in life.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Methods for the Field Survey and Monitoring of Breeding Short-Eared Owls (Asio Flammeus) in the UK: Final Report from Pilot Fieldwork in 2006 and 2007
    BTO Research Report No. 496 Developing methods for the field survey and monitoring of breeding Short-eared owls (Asio flammeus) in the UK: Final report from pilot fieldwork in 2006 and 2007 A report to Scottish Natural Heritage Ref: 14652 Authors John Calladine, Graeme Garner and Chris Wernham February 2008 BTO Scotland School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA Registered Charity No. SC039193 ii CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................v LIST OF APPENDICES...........................................................................................................vi SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... viii CRYNODEB............................................................................................................................xii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................................................xvi 1. BACKGROUND AND AIMS...........................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Meadow Pipit Scientific Name: Anthus Pratensis Irish Name: Riabhóg Mhóna by Lewis Gospel
    Bird Life Meadow Pipit Scientific Name: Anthus pratensis Irish Name: Riabhóg Mhóna By Lewis Gospel he meadow pipit is a small bird and is part of the pipit T family. As the first half of its name suggests it can be found in areas of wide open country. The second half of its name dates back all the way to 1768, when it used to be called a tit lark! It is a hard species to tell apart from others in the pipit family. If you look closely it has a thin bill and white, pale pinkish yellow legs with a hind claw at the back of the feet. This claw is a lot longer than its other claws. It mostly likes to eat on the ground and its favourite food in summer are insects and wriggling earthworms. In winter it likes to eat seeds and berries. These give it plenty of energy when other food is not as plentiful. Photos: © Robbie Murphy © Robbie Photos: How you can spot it! If you find yourself in any grassland, heath or moor listen out for a squeaky 'tsip'-like call as the Meadow Pipit travels in little flocks. Be sure to look where you are walking, as these little birds likes to nest on the ground. If disturbed they will rise in ones or twos, or in a little body or group. The Meadow Pipit looks a lot like its close relative the Tree Pipit, and in Ireland there is a subspecies called ‘Anthus pratensis whistleri‘ that is a little darker than the ones you find in other countries in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Bird Survey of the Peak District Moorlands 2004 Moors for the Future Report No 1
    Breeding Bird Survey of the Peak District Moorlands 2004 Moors for the Future Report No 1 Geoff Carr & Peter Middleton Moors for the Future is supported by the National Heritage Lottery Fund The Partners are: English Nature, National Trust, Peak District National Park Authority, United Utilities, Severn Trent Water, Yorkshire Water, Sheffield City Council, Peak Park Moorland Owners and Tenants Association, defra, Country Land and Business Association, National Farmers Union Project Research Manager: Aletta Bonn Moors for the Future Castleton Visitor Centre Buxton Road Castleton Derbyshire S33 8WP Tel/Fax: 01433 621656 email: [email protected] website: www.moorsforthefuture.org.uk 2004 Peak District Moorland Breeding Bird Survey 1 CONTENTS page SUMMARY 5 1. INTRODUCTION 6 2. THE STUDY SITE 7 3. THE PHYSICAL BACKGROUND 9 4. VEGETATION AND BIRD ASSOCIATIONS 10 5. METHODOLOGY 12 5.1 Bird survey census 12 5.2 Accuracy of survey methods 14 5.3 Accuracy of GIS records 15 5.4 Data Storage 15 6. RESULTS 17 6.1. Introduction 17 6.2 Species Accounts 18 6.3 Summary Statistics 41 7. DISCUSSION 44 7.1 National and international importance of breeding populations 44 in the Peak District 7.2 Long-term change in distribution and abundance of selected species 44 8. CONCLUSIONS 50 9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 50 10. REFERENCES 51 MAPS APPENDIX 2 2004 Peak District Moorland Breeding Bird Survey LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Distribution of Red Grouse across surveyed habitats Figure 2: Distribution of Golden Plover across surveyed habitats Figure 3: Distribution
    [Show full text]
  • The Field Identification of North American Pipits Ben King Illustrated by Peter Hayman and Pieter Prall
    The field identification of North American pipits Ben King Illustrated by Peter Hayman and Pieter Prall LTHOUGHTHEWATER PIPIT (Anthus ground in open country. However, the in this paper. inoletta) and the Sprague's Pipit two speciesof tree-pipits use trees for (Antbus spragueit)are fairly easy to rec- singing and refuge and are often in NCEABIRD HAS been recognized asa ogmze using the current popular field wooded areas. pipit, the first thing to checkis the guides, the five species more recently All the pipits discussedin the paper, ground color of the back. Is it brown added to the North American list are except perhaps the Sprague's, move (what shade?), olive, or gray? Then note more difficult to identify and sometimes their tails in a peculiarpumping motion, the black streaks on the back. Are they present a real field challenge. The field down and then up. Some species broad or narrow, sharply or vaguely de- •dentffication of these latter specieshas "pump" their tails more than others. fined, conspicuousor faint? How exten- not yet been adequatelydealt with in the This tail motion is often referred to as sive are they? Then check for pale North American literature. However, "wagging." While the term "wag" does streaks on the back. Are there none, much field work on the identification of include up and down motion as well as two, four, many? What color are they-- pipits has been done in the last few side to side movement, it is better to use whitish, buff, brownish buff? Are they years, especially in Alaska and the the more specificterm "pump" which is conspicuousor faint? Discerningthese Urnted Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3 Passerines If You Want to Increase Passerine 1 Birds on Your Moor, This Fact Sheet Helps You Understand Their Habitat and Diet Requirements
    BD1228 Determining Environmentally Sustainable and Economically Viable Grazing Systems for the Restoration and Maintenance of Heather Moorland in England and Wales 4.3 Passerines If you want to increase passerine 1 birds on your moor, this fact sheet helps you understand their habitat and diet requirements. The species covered are the commoner moorland passerines that breed in England and Wales: • Meadow pipit • Skylark • Stonechat • Whinchat • Wheatear • Ring ouzel Broad habitat relationships The study examined detailed abundance relationships for the first five species and coarser presence/absence relationships for the last one above. Several other passerine species breed on moorland, from the widespread wren to the rare and highly localised twite, but these were not included in the study. Meadow pipit and skylark occur widely on moorlands, with the ubiquitous meadow pipit being the most abundant moorland bird. Wheatear, whinchat and stonechat are more restricted in where they are found. They tend to be most abundant at lower altitudes and sometimes on relatively steep ground. Wheatears are often associated with old sheepfolds and stone walls that are often used as nesting sites. The increasingly rare ring ouzel is restricted to steep sided valleys and gullies on moorland, often where crags and scree occur. They are found breeding from the lower ground on moorland, up to altitudes of over 800 m. Biodiversity value & status Of the moorland passerine species considered in this study: • Skylark and ring ouzel are red listed in the UK’s Birds of Conservation Concern • Meadow pipit and stonechat are amber listed in the UK’s Birds of Conservation Concern 1 Passerines are songbirds that perch 1 4.3 Passerines • Skylark is on both the England and Welsh Section 74 lists of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act of species the conservation of which will be promoted by the Governments [Note: Skylarks are red listed because of declines on lowland farmland largely, and stonechats are amber listed because of an unfavourable conservation status in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN BIRDS of CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, Trends and National Responsibilities
    EUROPEAN BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, trends and national responsibilities COMPILED BY ANNA STANEVA AND IAN BURFIELD WITH SPONSORSHIP FROM CONTENTS Introduction 4 86 ITALY References 9 89 KOSOVO ALBANIA 10 92 LATVIA ANDORRA 14 95 LIECHTENSTEIN ARMENIA 16 97 LITHUANIA AUSTRIA 19 100 LUXEMBOURG AZERBAIJAN 22 102 MACEDONIA BELARUS 26 105 MALTA BELGIUM 29 107 MOLDOVA BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 32 110 MONTENEGRO BULGARIA 35 113 NETHERLANDS CROATIA 39 116 NORWAY CYPRUS 42 119 POLAND CZECH REPUBLIC 45 122 PORTUGAL DENMARK 48 125 ROMANIA ESTONIA 51 128 RUSSIA BirdLife Europe and Central Asia is a partnership of 48 national conservation organisations and a leader in bird conservation. Our unique local to global FAROE ISLANDS DENMARK 54 132 SERBIA approach enables us to deliver high impact and long term conservation for the beneit of nature and people. BirdLife Europe and Central Asia is one of FINLAND 56 135 SLOVAKIA the six regional secretariats that compose BirdLife International. Based in Brus- sels, it supports the European and Central Asian Partnership and is present FRANCE 60 138 SLOVENIA in 47 countries including all EU Member States. With more than 4,100 staf in Europe, two million members and tens of thousands of skilled volunteers, GEORGIA 64 141 SPAIN BirdLife Europe and Central Asia, together with its national partners, owns or manages more than 6,000 nature sites totaling 320,000 hectares. GERMANY 67 145 SWEDEN GIBRALTAR UNITED KINGDOM 71 148 SWITZERLAND GREECE 72 151 TURKEY GREENLAND DENMARK 76 155 UKRAINE HUNGARY 78 159 UNITED KINGDOM ICELAND 81 162 European population sizes and trends STICHTING BIRDLIFE EUROPE GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGES FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION.
    [Show full text]
  • Nest Record News April 2010 • No 26
    Max Crop Min Crop Nest Record News April 2010 • No 26 Passing on your nesting knowledge elcome to the 26th edition of Nest Record News, which this of open-nesting passerine species. This year we would also like to Wtime round is arriving on your doorstep as the breeding offer new NRS participants the opportunity to meet and train with season begins to gather pace. As I write, the first reports of Robin another recorder in their own locality. To this end, we are planning and Blackbird chicks are appearing on the NRS forum and the to set up a network of NRS ‘mentors’ — experienced nest recorders Long-tailed Tits around the Nunnery are busy lining their nests. I who can spend one or two hours on their home patch each season hope that the articles in this newsletter, which include a number of showing beginners the basics. Even an hour spent learning how to useful nest-finding tips, inspire you to get out and about in 2010. find the nests of common species like Blackbird and Robin can be a We’re very grateful to everyone for your contributions in 2009 – in real encouragement to a new nest recorder, of which there are now addition to finding and monitoring nests, an increasing number of many. Over 20 Quickstart Guides are currently sent out each month you are submitting photographs and articles, inputting historic data and 68 new participants sent records to the NRS in 2009. and providing essential training for new recorders. So, if you’re interested in becoming a mentor, please get in touch The end result of all this is an effective tool for helping the at [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • The Newsletter of the Nest Record Scheme
    The newsletter of the Nest Record Scheme Issue 30 MAY 2014 InsIde thIs edItIon 02 news roundup 03 dAvId glue 1947–2014 04 A recorder reFlecTs 05 All-TIMe Top recorders 06 A 13,000 pAge suMMArY 07 Treecreeper boxes 08 nrs AnnuAl Totals 10 nrs MenTorIng 12 moorlAnd MonITorIng 13 runway plovers 14 rockIT scIence 15 nrs latesT resulTs 16 spoT The nesT This season sees the official launch of NRS mentoring. See the article on page 10, and visit www.bto.org/ volunteer-surveys/nrs/taking- part/nrs-mentoring to find your nearest mentor (screenshot below). Top: Bernard Pleasance, John Dries, Tony Davis, Josh Marshall and Richard Castell at the NRS 75th anniversary conference. Left: Veteran recorder David Warden photographing a nest box in 1949. Right: A young nest recorder checking a Song Thrush nest with a mirror in 2011. 75 years of nesting he Hatching and Fledgling year, 80 such volunteers came to the Inquiry was started by the BTO Nunnery for a day of celebrating the T in 1939 to collect information on success of NRS and looking forward facets of basic breeding biology, such to its future. It was thrilling to see as incubation and fledging periods. In like-minded ornithologists from all the first five years, 1,988 nest record over the country meeting up to talk cards were sent in by c.20 participants. about nest recording. We enjoyed Seventy five years on, the Nest Record talks from speakers including David Scheme (NRS) has c.660 active Warden, a recorder since 1948, and recorders and an amazing 1.6 million Josh Marshall, a recorder since 2013! nest records have been collected, an NRS mentor Mark Lawrence gave The NRS mentoring scheme invaluable dataset that has been used a talk to mark the official launch of is generously sponsored by for scientific study far beyond the scope NRS mentoring (see p 10), which of the original inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Material
    Anthus pratensis (Meadow Pipit) European Red List of Birds Supplementary Material The European Union (EU27) Red List assessments were based principally on the official data reported by EU Member States to the European Commission under Article 12 of the Birds Directive in 2013-14. For the European Red List assessments, similar data were sourced from BirdLife Partners and other collaborating experts in other European countries and territories. For more information, see BirdLife International (2015). Contents Reported national population sizes and trends p. 2 Trend maps of reported national population data p. 4 Sources of reported national population data p. 6 Species factsheet bibliography p. 10 Recommended citation BirdLife International (2015) European Red List of Birds. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Further information http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/info/euroredlist http://www.birdlife.org/europe-and-central-asia/european-red-list-birds-0 http://www.iucnredlist.org/initiatives/europe http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/redlist/ Data requests and feedback To request access to these data in electronic format, provide new information, correct any errors or provide feedback, please email [email protected]. THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™ BirdLife International (2015) European Red List of Birds Anthus pratensis (Meadow Pipit) Table 1. Reported national breeding population size and trends in Europe1. Country (or Population estimate Short-term population trend4 Long-term population trend4 Subspecific population (where relevant) 2 territory) Size (pairs)3 Europe (%) Year(s) Quality Direction5 Magnitude (%)6 Year(s) Quality Direction5 Magnitude (%)6 Year(s) Quality Andorra 0-10 <1 1999-2001 poor ? ? Armenia 15,000-35,000 <1 2002-2012 medium ? ? Austria 500-700 <1 2001-2012 medium - 30-50 2001-2012 poor ? Belarus 180,000-230,000 2 2000-2012 medium 0 0 2001-2012 medium 0 0 1980-2012 medium Belgium 4,000-7,000 <1 2008-2012 medium - 8-47 2000-2012 medium - 80-89 1973-2012 medium Czech Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Breeding Biology of the Buzzard
    Notes on the breeding biology of the Buzzard Geoffrey Fryer uring the 1970s and up to 1985, I made casual observations on the D breeding behaviour of the Buzzard Buteo buteo. Most of these were in the southern part of the Lake District, Cumbria, but others made elsewhere during the same period are also referred to here. Although various aspects of the breeding behaviour of the Buzzard are well documented (e.g. Melde 1971; Picozzi & Weir 1974; Tubbs 1974; Cramp & Simmons 1980), my observations revealed several apparently little-known or undescribed facets. Nest-site marking by crag nesters The habit of'decorating' the nest with fresh sprays of green leaves is well known, but some generalised statements are not always factually correct and its significance is still subject to debate. The repairing and maintaining of old nests in seasons when they are not in use is also well known. What seems not to be recorded is that actual sites, at least crag sites, may be marked by depositing green material there, even though no nest is constructed. In 1971, a pair of Buzzards nested on a crag in a Lakeland valley and raised one chick. This site was not used from 1972 to 1975, but, apart from noting the fact, I paid no attention to the nest ledge save recording that, on 26th April 1974, the nest was 'a wreck and not repaired at all'. On 21st April 1976, however, several shoots of holly Ilex aquifolium had been placed on the site. No attempt had been made to rebuild the nest, of which no more than a few old sticks persisted on the ledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of the Suffolk Coast & Heaths
    Birds of The Suffolk Coast & Heaths Holiday Report 22 - 25 May 2017 Led by Ed Hutchings Greenwings Wildlife Holidays Tel: 01473 254658 Web: www.greenwings.co.uk Email: [email protected] ©Greenwings 2017 Introduction The county of Suffolk, like the rest of East Anglia, is a gem for birding. Few have mastered its diversity. From the River Stour in the south, to the River Waveney and the Broads in the north and from The Brecks in the west to the coast in the east, the county provides something for everyone. The Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is a stunning landscape, packed full of wildlife within 155 square miles of tranquil and unspoilt landscape, including wildlife-rich estuaries, ancient heaths, windswept shingle beaches and historic towns and villages. Birding in Suffolk is a joy as the landscape of the county is diverse, and so is the range of wildlife that inhabits it. This bird holiday would focus on spring birds in the wonderful habitats found on the Suffolk coast. Group members: Nigel Baelz, Stuart Barnes and Louise Rowlands. There now follows a summary of the activities and highlights from each day, a photo gallery, and a bird species list at the end. Day 1: Monday 22nd May 2017 The guests were met on a hot sunny day at the Westleton Crown by their guide Ed Hutchings for an introduction and a quick bite to eat. The Westleton Crown is a friendly hotel on the Suffolk coast and would be our base for the break. After checking into the hotel after lunch, we headed south to North Warren RSPB near Aldeburgh for the afternoon.
    [Show full text]