Paul Hammond wrote:

---

John

Like you I was sure what I was listening to and watching was a Tree Pipit. Not that my photos were as good as yours, looked dark when I took them so didn't bother to look at them till last night.

The hindclaw is totally evident in the photos but the bird in field sounded diffferent in display flight to the Meadow Pipits I'd watched displaying in Wales.

Learning ccurve here and will spend more time scrutinising birds and marking down in note book before passing judgement

---

hi paul nice meeting you monday,i even convinced you it was a tree pipitworse for me 30 years ago i used to do chat moss wi frank horrocks sometimes counting breeding tree pipitsthen again who needed pictures when mi mate frank was there.he could tell a tree pipit at half a mile through his jam jar bottom 1950 binswell thats what he told me they were
im sure somewere up there,he'll be havin a good giggle at me

John

Like you I was sure what I was listening to and watching was a Tree Pipit. Not that my photos were as good as yours, looked dark when I took them so didn't bother to look at them till last night.

The hindclaw is totally evident in the photos but the bird in field sounded diffferent in display flight to the Meadow Pipits I'd watched displaying in Wales.

Learning ccurve here and will spend more time scrutinising birds and marking down in note book before passing judgement

Dean Macdonald wrote:

---

JOHN TYMON wrote:

---

Dean Macdonald wrote:

---

John, I went on tues afternoon. Found the bird on the ruck and immediately fell into the trap 2 other birders with scopes where already looking at the bird, so i assumed that must be it. Didn't have my scope,took the camera instead. Didn't get a really good look but it did briefly fly up from a tree and sing. I'd been listening to the songs in the car on the way and while i wasn't convinced it was a Meadow Pipit, i also wasn't totally convinced it was a Tree Pipit.
But, and here's the rub, I went to see a Tree Pipit so a Tree Pipit is what i saw

I came away thinking i can't count that because i wasn't convinced in my own mind that i'd seen a Tree Pipit.

If Ian hadn't raised the doubts and everyone had accepted it as a Tree Pipit, would i have ticked it? A few years ago the answer would probably be yes. Today, thanks to this website and the people and information on it, the answer would be NO.

I'm still no expert but i've got to be able to id the bird myself before i can count it.

Being brutally honest, Dean.

---

being brutally honest dean-i should have gone to specsaversif after 35 years birding and the hours ive put in,i can't tell the difference between a tree and meadow pipitmust be my age or the cider is taking its toll on the braincells

---

Must be the cider John. A Tree is a big thing with branches and leaves. A Meadow Pipit is a small brown twit bird

---

crackingood job we can have a laugh about itone good thing come from it,it got a lot of people who never venture behond the horrocks hide/ buntin hide,to explore what is a underwatched side of the flash,maybe they will now start doing the full tour round like myself and ian have done for many yearsor at least to the west end.

JOHN TYMON wrote:

---

Dean Macdonald wrote:

---

John, I went on tues afternoon. Found the bird on the ruck and immediately fell into the trap 2 other birders with scopes where already looking at the bird, so i assumed that must be it. Didn't have my scope,took the camera instead. Didn't get a really good look but it did briefly fly up from a tree and sing. I'd been listening to the songs in the car on the way and while i wasn't convinced it was a Meadow Pipit, i also wasn't totally convinced it was a Tree Pipit.
But, and here's the rub, I went to see a Tree Pipit so a Tree Pipit is what i saw

I came away thinking i can't count that because i wasn't convinced in my own mind that i'd seen a Tree Pipit.

If Ian hadn't raised the doubts and everyone had accepted it as a Tree Pipit, would i have ticked it? A few years ago the answer would probably be yes. Today, thanks to this website and the people and information on it, the answer would be NO.

I'm still no expert but i've got to be able to id the bird myself before i can count it.

Being brutally honest, Dean.

---

being brutally honest dean-i should have gone to specsaversif after 35 years birding and the hours ive put in,i can't tell the difference between a tree and meadow pipitmust be my age or the cider is taking its toll on the braincells

---

Must be the cider John. A Tree is a big thing with branches and leaves. A Meadow Pipit is a small brown twit bird

Dean Macdonald wrote:

---

John, I went on tues afternoon. Found the bird on the ruck and immediately fell into the trap 2 other birders with scopes where already looking at the bird, so i assumed that must be it. Didn't have my scope,took the camera instead. Didn't get a really good look but it did briefly fly up from a tree and sing. I'd been listening to the songs in the car on the way and while i wasn't convinced it was a Meadow Pipit, i also wasn't totally convinced it was a Tree Pipit.
But, and here's the rub, I went to see a Tree Pipit so a Tree Pipit is what i saw

I came away thinking i can't count that because i wasn't convinced in my own mind that i'd seen a Tree Pipit.

If Ian hadn't raised the doubts and everyone had accepted it as a Tree Pipit, would i have ticked it? A few years ago the answer would probably be yes. Today, thanks to this website and the people and information on it, the answer would be NO.

I'm still no expert but i've got to be able to id the bird myself before i can count it.

Being brutally honest, Dean.

---

being brutally honest dean-i should have gone to specsaversif after 35 years birding and the hours ive put in,i can't tell the difference between a tree and meadow pipitmust be my age or the cider is taking its toll on the braincells

John, I went on tues afternoon. Found the bird on the ruck and immediately fell into the trap 2 other birders with scopes where already looking at the bird, so i assumed that must be it. Didn't have my scope,took the camera instead. Didn't get a really good look but it did briefly fly up from a tree and sing. I'd been listening to the songs in the car on the way and while i wasn't convinced it was a Meadow Pipit, i also wasn't totally convinced it was a Tree Pipit.
But, and here's the rub, I went to see a Tree Pipit so a Tree Pipit is what i saw

I came away thinking i can't count that because i wasn't convinced in my own mind that i'd seen a Tree Pipit.

If Ian hadn't raised the doubts and everyone had accepted it as a Tree Pipit, would i have ticked it? A few years ago the answer would probably be yes. Today, thanks to this website and the people and information on it, the answer would be NO.

I'm still no expert but i've got to be able to id the bird myself before i can count it.

Being brutally honest, Dean.

It was mainly singing from a lone, small, bare oak (no more than 6 foot or so tall) with only a single dead leaf attached although it also liked the fence along the track itself.

As for the photos going on line, they will appear at some point I'm sure but there is little point in lots of posts regurgitating what's already been said. John was right, there is an article in it and I've already started it!

Unfortunately none of the pipits were singing when I went there tonight, it was very windy and I am slightly deaf so that didn't help!
Ones that I did get close enough seemed more like meadows they had thick side streaking.
How big were the trees it was singing from?
Any chance of the photos going online?
Gutted I didn't see it but at least it has made me listen through my recordings.

dave broome wrote:

---

Ian McKerchar wrote:

---

No apologies are necessary from anyone though John. It's been educational. --

Definitely agree on that. It's been a sharp reminder, another ride on the old learning curve and has added interest to an otherwise average week. Ramsdale's Ruck is also well worth a visit at the moment anyway, as a beltin' site for Skylarks and Pipits

---

it is worth a visit,i got some crackin skylark shots sunday too,well i think they were skylarks
what id like to know is where apart from the few that have made comment,and really give a honest opinion,thanks ian/dave/brian and the others,are the other pack of birders who were constantly on rammies sunday/monday claiming it to be a tree pipit,they seemed to have all dissapeared.i have never been ashamed of admitting mistakes,id rather be honest,just ask ian how many yellow legged gull shots he got from me before i finally nailed one,and that was through really studying at home what i was looking for,and my patience and ians paid off with a cracking set of pics.
so a lesson to all of us look/listen and learn

Ian McKerchar wrote:

---

No apologies are necessary from anyone though John. It's been educational. --

Definitely agree on that. It's been a sharp reminder, another ride on the old learning curve and has added interest to an otherwise average week. Ramsdale's Ruck is also well worth a visit at the moment anyway, as a beltin' site for Skylarks and Pipits

I listened to the bird much, much better today although it only sang three or four times and to be perfectly honest I'm not entirely sure it's that much like a Tree Pipit. I'd be interested to hear why other think it sounds like a Tree Pipit but to me (and it is the same bird as others heard over the weekend so I'm sure it's the same one) it sounds like it's giving only a partial song. The opening notes are rather Chaffinch like at times and hence appear similar to Tree Pipit but if you listen to the full song of a Meadow Pipit sections of it to my ears have Chaffinch like qualities. The Pennington bird has never sung anything else other than this partial, repetative song. It is never fast and varied, has no trills or drawn out notes and lacks the beautiful quaility of Tree Pipit. It sings from it's perch and rises into the air whilst still singing then drops down again, unlike what we'd expect from Tree Pipit. It reacted positively (flying towards me) every time I played the song of Meadow Pipit, even though the two sounded slightly different even to me. The song of Tree Pipit did nothing for it!

In the field again today there were no plumage features I could attribute to Tree Pipit and again I'd be very interested to hear from those who saw different, two birds? I don't think so to be honest.

Pipits and Wagtails by Alstrom and Mild states for Meadow Pipit that "when uninspired, only the first part of the song is given".

No apologies are necessary from anyone though John. It's been educational. Yes, I do think we are all too often carried away with getting that all important image first before we really look at a bird and often the only time the bird is actually studied is off photographs, which DO lie Sometimes we're guilty of taking others word for it, they know what they're looking at right? Mistakes are what makes us better birders so long as we learn from them

I'm glad the photos weren't put on the galleries either way, as then you have a large discussion develop judged mainly off the images and not field descriptions. That is rarely helpful in my experience and everyone's an expert beind their computer monitors surrounded by field guides

-- Edited by Ian McKerchar on Wednesday 15th of April 2009 12:34:01 PM

While i was watching it Monday,not in the area its been seen regularly,but about 300 yards towards plank lane,it was taking off from small trees,singing as it rose to about 150 feet circling still singing like a canary then slowly parachuted while circling back to the same small tree or more often than not a dead dock plant.Some of its songs were lasting up to 2 minutes.
At that time there was only me watching,i tried to film it but my camera doasn't auto focus when anything moves while doing movies so i packed in with that,and spent the next hour trying to get a good shot without disturbing it,not to say that while knelt down i had a rodesian ridgeback dog trying to mate with me at one pointits owner telling me it wouldnt do me any harmSo my time was spent with it trying to get a good shot,and really as Ian says until you see the pictures,the daupt didn't appear for me.even when i saw my pictures,i was still convinced,after seeing the singing it was a tree pipit as far as i could tell and without these pictures i daupt that anyone would have taken it as anything other than a tree pipit,expecially the ones at the weekend who saw it singing like me"did anyone see it singing like me"?Its 20 years since i last heard a tree pipit sing,and at that point i have no daupt that if me and paul had come across it on the rucks doing what it was doing monday,it would have been recorded as tree pipit then,so im starting in hindsight which is a great tool ,to think how many similar things in the past all over the county/uk have been identified wrongly before digital cameras where the norm,as without the camera if the bird had flown before it was photographed,it would have gone recorded by about 30+ birders as tree pipit
anyway as Ian says get down and see for yourself,and when my pics get shown,google tree pipit images,and compare to mine and you will see,the hindclaw is more or less the only difference,and as that is diagnostic,it seemingly is a meadow,but still looked and sounded like a tree to me at the time,and until paul got back to me yesterday,and said the hindclaw was much too long for tree,i still thought it was a tree pipit.maybe i should get myself a british birds sub and start learning again?instead spendin me time behind the cameraand forgetting to identify the bird correctly.
It would be great to have some oppinion from the other birders who saw it 24 hours + before me,and the ones since,penny was full of regulars SUNDAY/MONDAY who come on here who all claimed it as tree pipit,it would be nice to get the oppinion from them,as to why they thought tree pipit,as i have stated why i did.and sorry if i convinced anyone i met monday that it was a tree pipit as at the time i was convinced it was a tree pipit

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Wednesday 15th of April 2009 06:57:44 AM

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Wednesday 15th of April 2009 09:08:51 AM

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Wednesday 15th of April 2009 09:20:22 AM

Now everyone has their doubts

Those who are unsure of what I mean by the hind claw should check out this great link, scroll down until you get to the in-hand pipit photos (August 2008).

http://www.britishringers.co.uk/blog/index2008.php

To answer a few questions and statements made on this thread though:

The bird is not a Tree Pipit (okay only my opinion!). It shows no plumage or structural features I attribute to Tree Pipit. I saw it today in a flat light, undoubtably the best for viewing just about anything and perhaps the bright sunlight it has been viewed in since it's arrival has assisted in making it appear rather more Tree Pipit like on occasion? Clearly John's photos seem to show the bird different in several of them. Either way, it's not a Tree Pipit that looks like a Meadow Pipit.

But I agree that it's song does appear unlike that we expect of Meadow Pipit whilst still not quite there for Tree Pipit. It's difficult sometimes not having heard Tree Pipit for a year or so or even not having heard them singing for even longer and how many of us really listen to Meadow Pipits singing anyway? I have every bird song of the Western Pal. on my phone and so could listen to Tree Pipit on it whilst listening to the bird sing (and no it didn't reply to the song!) and it's just not there. It's clearly different enough to make your heard turn, it did me when I first heard it and said to myself 'there it is' but as soon as I clapped eyes on it and one you listen to it's full song...

I wonder how many of those who saw it really grilled it? I was lucky, I'd seen the photos and already had my doubts and so went armed with scope and determination to check all the features but on a bright sunny day with all the disturbance of a bank holiday weekend going on, things could be different.

As for the Chinatown warbler John, that's a definate 'you had to be there' bird and I don't know any sane birders there who really grilled it in the field and have sinced changed their minds. Another death by internet photo and forum discussion chalked up

The Pennington pipit is still clearly worth seeing or rather hearing atleast. Anyone got decent sound recording equipment?

I'm off down there again tomorrow hoping to get a better listen anyway

brian fielding wrote:

---

so we either have a meadow pipit which displays and sounds like a tree pipit or a tree pipit that looks like a meadow pipit!

---

Why all the discussion-there is your answer, but which one is it!

I was interested in seeing this bird as, like John and no doubt many others, Tree Pipit is not something I come across. Other than last year's bird at 12 Yards Road, my experience of this species over the past decade has been restricted to a handful of calling migrants overhead. It's a long time since I saw them on breeding sites. A few autumn migrants at Spurn, Sandwich Bay, etc, in the 1990's aren't that relevant to a spring bird either.

The song of the Pennington bird is very striking and does immediately grab you as a Tree Pipit, though of course, as it's original observers pointed out it doesn't finish the song. This morning I heard this from a small tree on the slope above the lagoon. The bird didn't fly during the song. I then saw it for about 10 seconds in the tree, before it dropped in to the grass. It didn't reappear and I unfortunately didn't have time to stay. I noticed what appeared to be a long hind-claw and with hindsight this should have been enough to i.d. it as Meadow. At the time I thought the median covert wing bar looked striking enough for Tree Pipit, but this was probably the lack of recent experience coming through. The flanks are definitely heavily streaked and this should have rang the alarm bells. The consistent warm buff underparts are another feature which I now also realise I was totally forgetting should have shouted out Meadow Pipit.

In conclusion this bird is one with a striking opening to the song, enough to completely throw the unfamiliar or unwitting observer (e.g. me!!!). Any further info on variation in Mipit song or abberant singing (as in mixed singing Willow Warblers/Chiffchaffs) would be interesting.

-- Edited by dave broome on Tuesday 14th of April 2009 09:09:59 PM

-- Edited by dave broome on Tuesday 14th of April 2009 09:14:26 PM

come on give us some input,enough of you saw it,and claimed it,have you changed your mind

int birdin beltin?maybe we are not all looking at the same bird?there are several meadow pipits in that area,and caused me confusion on sunday,as twice i photographed a bird on the ground ,i thought was a second tree pipit,and when on the computer screen looks very much like a meadow,but the singing bird i followed for 300 yards,was singing just like a tree pipit,in song and song flight,i can't remember ever seeing a meadow sing like that(it was like a bloomin canary)also the one i photographed most seems to have a thicker longer bill than meadow,has all the features of tree pipit,but still has a massive hind claw,maybe its just a tree with strange claws.
It won't be the first or last time a strange bird,makes normal sane birders see something that they are sure of,then change their mind(the manchester warbler comes to mind)but i have quite a lot of experience of tree pipit,but that was over 25 years ago on the mosses with paul brown,so its not like riding a bike ,that was a long time ago,thats is why i sent paul the pictures as no-one i know can tell a tree pipit like paul,and if he thinks its a meadow,although he didn't actually say that,he just said its hindclaw was large,i bow to his better judgement,as paul and ian for that matter are better birders than i could ever hope to be.
But that song!no meadow pipit sounded like the bird i was following,so i expect everyone to come on now and say i thought it was a meadow pipit all along,but i thought and still think the bird i was watching,was no normal meadow pipit,i see them daily when i get to the flash,and have for 30+ years and have never seen or heard one sing like that.
If it turns out to be a meadow i still have some crackin shots of it


-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Tuesday 14th of April 2009 06:31:51 PM

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Tuesday 14th of April 2009 07:06:38 PM

Just returned from seeing the pipit.

Seen several times perched in small trees and on fences.

Bird didn't seem right for Tree Pipit.

When perched on fence the streaking on the flanks appeared strong and there was no change in colour from breast to belly. The bird then flew to a small tree and the flank streaks seemed to disappear. This was probably due to it's wings being slightly drooped.

very interesting, i did have my concerns on sunday and monday whilst watching this bird over the hind claw and the amount of streaking on the flanks which didnt come across as quite right for tree pipit but concluded that some tree pipits most be close to meadow pipit in appearance. not very familiar with tree pipit song but this bird just didnt sound like a meadow pipit. two out of county birders on monday who have tree pipits on there local patches said this bird was a tree pipit when listening to it and watching it display. so we either have a meadow pipit which displays and sounds like a tree pipit or a tree pipit that looks like a meadow pipit!

sounds like article due I made sure browney got the pics,knew he'd have an opinion,and agree about the hindclawis there such a thing as a meadow/tree pipit as it was singin like a tree pipit sunday it had the jizz of a tree pipit,but that hindclaw?the second bird i got pictures of that was following it looks nearer to meadow(sorry paul )so discount that but the singin bird,looked and sounded like a tree pipit sunday,but that hindclaw as paul said is massive,which is wrong for tree,so i was expecting this ,and was waiting for pauls view,as you say he thinks its a strange meadow,

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Tuesday 14th of April 2009 04:42:16 PM
int birdin fun

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Tuesday 14th of April 2009 04:49:49 PM

Okay boys and girls, hold onto your hats because here it comes! I think the reported Tree Pipit currently at Pennington Flash isn't one. I think it's a Meadow Pipit. I was alarmed initially by comments at the time of the birds finding, that it sounded like one although only in partial song (partial song?). Nobody seemed to mention anything about it looking like one. Yesterday I received several photos of the bird and to my eye it clearly didn't look right which included one huge flaw. Obviously photos can give the wrong impression (unfortunately not over it's one huge flaw, more of that later) and I'm rightly cautious of giving an opinion based off just photos so I got down there today and saw it for myself. Firstly, it does appear to sound like a singing Tree Pipit, the rather Chaffinch like quality of the usual opening notes of a Tree Pipit anyway but I never heard it utter the usual flurrish or tremble of Tree and I was never sure any of it's notes were quite there for a Tree Pipit. Clearly they weren't right for a normal Meadow Pipit either, so it was all rather confusing but it was rather elusive whilst I was there and didn't sing all that often so hopefully I'll get more on that. It did however fly very close past me on a couple of occasions (and yes it was the right bird!) and uttered flight calls that were more Meadow Pipit and certainly not Tree Pipit. Habits- I think sometimes too much is being placed on it singing form a Tree or flying up and then back down to a tre again, Meadow Pipits do similar. When this bird did sing in flight it seemed to sing as soon as it took off and up to it's peak of flight whereas a Tree Pipit would be expected to only start singing when it has reached the peak of it's flight and continue as it flies back down again. As it flew back down it never showed the drooping legs and feet I often associate with singing Tree Pipits. Whilst in song from it's perch it's wings were drooped below it's tail which is unlike Tree Pipit and at no time did it pump it's tail or walk about the branches like Tree Pipit often does. Plumage- not what I was expecting to see! I expected a bird which would have a rather bright buffish wash across the breast (and perhaps flanks) contrasting against a white belly but instead saw a bird with rather uniformly washed pale buff underparts (photos received though seem to show diferent characteristics in each one though, so this is based off my own views). I expected the usual Tree Pipit bolder streaking on the breast and beautifully fine 'pencil' streaks along the flanks but instead was met by streaks of equal strength across the breast and flanks. Streaks that were far too bold on the flanks for any Tree Pipit. The facial features, often very difficult to judge between the two anyway, just weren't quite right for Tree Pipit for me. It's eyering was complete and not broken at the front like Tree Pipit and the bill was for me too slender for Tree Pipit (but was right for Meadow) which has a noticeably heavier bill. And finally, the nail, that huge flaw... First noticed in the images provided to me and what initially got me going, the bird in question has a rather huge and obvious hind claw. Tree Pipit has a short and very curved hindclaw and this bird was a long way from that. It's hindclaw was clearly very long, just longer than it's hind toe, shallow with little curve and was all dark. So there you go, just my opinion although I have just received an email from Paul Brown on North Ronaldsay expressing his concern over the length of it's hindclaw from images independantly sent to him by one of the photographers. I think it's a Meadow Pipit, one singing unlike a 'normal' Meadow perhaps but a Meadow nevertheless. Unfortunately I am still having problems accessing the website to update (not my fault, their's) so cannot upload any photos but better than that, if you're that interested get down and have a look for yourself. All comments and personal views appreciated, preferably from those who have seen and heard the bird in the field (otherwise how can you have an opinion on it )