Hi Pete and Lindsay
I still think this is a female Common Redstart. Common Nightingale have PALE LEGS, are much more richly brown (to reddy brown) toned above (not the washed out brown of this bird - even taking into account the bright light), have greyer colouration around the brown ear coverts, and would have an evenly coloured reddish-brown tail (NOT the dark central tail feathers). I don't think you will ever see such a strong contrast between the upper tail colour and mantle colour of a Common Nightingale. In my opinion the tail is square enough ended for Common Redstart and the wing structure and covert edges are ok for this species too. And I think the pale lores are also fine for a female Common Redstart (in fact maybe better for this species than Common Nightingale).
Plus, you would be very lucky to see a Common Nightingale showing this well in the open. They are skulkers most of the time.
More discussion or feedback would be great.
Cheers Dan
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:02:14 +1100
From:
To: ;
Subject: [canberrabirds] Bird ID: Common Nightingale
Its a very long time since I have seen one but I think that this may be a first winter Common Nightingale. Points in favour versus female Common Redstart:
Rounded not square ended tail.
Large separation between tips of visible primaries.
Heavy bill (pale gape reveals age).
Dark wing coverts with broad pale fringes creating an especially obvious line of dark spots through the lesser wing coverts.
Pale lores.
It is not a Sprosser (Thrush Nightingale) because inter alia there are four primary tips visible and the tip of the alula is just visible below the greater primary coverts.
Milburn
Get the next generation of Free Windows Live Services Click here!
|
|
