Shadow30's picture

Ui bird Lesvos 3

Observed: 20th April 2000 By: Shadow30Shadow30’s reputation in BirdsShadow30’s reputation in BirdsShadow30’s reputation in BirdsShadow30’s reputation in Birds
Ui bird Lesvos SIS 3.JPG
Description:
Identifications
Species interactions

No interactions present.

Comments

ophrys's picture

Bird...what bird?

Is there a bird?! Really?! ;)

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

Ray Turner's picture

Oh there it is

Smidgen right of dead centre ---- but it took me ages to find it!!

Ray

ophrys's picture

'avin' a larf

No...still no joy!

Returning to opticians for a refund...clearly the glasses are faulty!

Thanks anyway, Ray.

Ian
_________________

My Flickr photos...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52163027@N02/

RoyW's picture

Snipe?

There is a bird there, and it might possibly be a Snipe (though I'm not even sure that it's a wader!).

Shadow30's picture

Is there a bird?

Stint sp. Little or Temminck's?

John

Syrphus's picture

Sorry, John, but it is

Sorry, John, but it is completely unreasonable of you to expect anyone to identify this (even as a bird - if you had not said there was a bird there, no-one would have guessed).

If you want IDs, your pictures will need to be a lot more informative. They do not have to be publication quality, but they must show the necessary detail, which this certainly does not. If you browse the site you will see what is needed for birds, fungi, insects, etc., as the details are different for each group.

M.

TRY

recording wildlife with The Recorder's Year on www.hbrg.org.uk/TRY.html.

Shadow30's picture

OK. You will all be pleased

OK. You will all be pleased to learn that I have almost finished uploading scanned images from old prints. Hopefully, digital submissions will be, at least marginally, better!

John

RoyW's picture

I agree.

In some cases it may be possible to supplement a poor photo with a written description to allow observers to come up with an identification using a combination of both the features that can be seen and those which are described. In this case though I don't think that the photograph shows anything at all that can be used to arrive at an identification - and if a written description had been posted, any identification would likely be based entirely on the details that contained.

If photos are poor, try and supplement them with any aditional details that you can remember.

Shadow30's picture

I agree

Having consulted with my then companion, we have decided that this was an attempt to photograph a Temminck's Stint.
Your points are all noted and apreciated.

John