SANParks.org Forums

When driving in any of our beautiful national parks and you see a bird which is difficult to ID (especially perched raptors) do you tend to take photos first and then examine them for an ID later or do you try and ID them on the spot?
I find that taking pictures have a huge advantage as you can cross reference your ID with different bird books and also show the pictures to other birders for their opinions. Rather than sitting for hours at a sighting, bending your mind trying to ID that difficult raptor it is easier to take decent photos and sit at a camp fire at night with all your bird books and make an ID at leisure. Obviously if taking decent photos are not possible, a field ID should suffice.
Maybe being a novice birder that is how I operate and as my skill and knowledge increase I will be able to do field ID's easier but for now this is the method that works best for me.

You have the best modus operandi going there, Canis Lupus. You can augment that strategy with a notebook in which you jot down things like habits of the bird that catch your eye, the general habitat and some reference to the size of the bird (which is often very difficult to judge from a photograph).

Amazingly, listening to the song of birds most often gives away an otherwise very difficult ID (especially true for LBJs), so that is another skill you should start developing ASAP. Your best reference on this subject is Roberts VII sound bytes for most of the SA bird species that you get when purchasing their latest birding software.

If you remain birding for an extended period of time, your skill levels will also be sharpened up quicker your (smart) way than any other.

BTW, use this forum extensively for those birds that you need confirmation on!

Thanks Johan, those are great tips - I will definately incorporate them into my twitching.

The heading is good policy, whether birding, anti poaching etc.

Often One gets away a shot or 2 and then the bird flies off. Sometimes it flies off before the shot, and a brief look is all you get, but for subtlties one can linger over a photo which is more reliable than memory.

Next time i am in Kruger, I will take pics of all coucals, in Addo, all thrushes, and oters where the possibility of a 'rarer' one occurs.

I hope to get some practise on larks in KTP next week.

I definitely practice shoot first, ask later -- birds so often will fly off before you've had a good look, so I find it better (and easier) to try for a photo or two first, so that I don't have to rely only on (vague) memory.

I agree with you Canis Lupus! We also first make sure that we get a picture for later reference and identification!

imo most quickly shot pictures are poor in colour, backlight etc.
very difficult to see the destincitive marking on a poor image
So i first use the binoculairs with a ID book on my lap

But as Johan said, being able to identify sounds helps a lot

Of course you are right Bert, but only if they stay long enough, which seldom happens! We first take pictures, and if they didn't fly away after that, we do use binoculars with a bird guide as well.

And then you get those soaring raptors while you are driving along. There is (sometimes) JUST enough time to bring the car to a safe stop plus one quick shot before the bird disappears behind a tree... Without the camera that would just have been another BBB fly-by!

Two recent expamples while atlassing around my home patch:



(Initially thought it was a harrier of sorts... turns out to be an osprey, another homepatch first!)



(Even though that would have been special as well, my first impression was snake-eagle. I was shaking so much from the excitement that getting a clear shot bordered on a miracle! Martial eagle? I would have believed Martian UFO to be more likely!)

I bird alone quite often, so I don't have a soundboard to bounce first impressions for a reaction or confirmation. First thing that happens is that you don't believe what your eyes are telling you, because these birds are not seen on the Mpumalanga highveld! Thank goodness for the technology that can provide proof (often to oneself!) of these special sightings!

Really cool topic, and not something we have discussed before (unless I missed it)

I always bird with my camera as it has become as much a tool for birding as my binoculars. It all depends on the situation for me for example if a bird is perched and looks relaxed, I will first check it out through the binoculars and if it is something I recognize and I don't really need a better photo of that particular bird I will just enjoy the sighting and move off.

Over time, a birder recognizes a bird's "giss" which allows you to either slam on your brakes point and fire away, or calmly observe and carry on.

Prime example of shoot first ask questions later, happened to us when we were birding in Hans Merensky NR in January. A bird came flying over and nobody could immediately ID the bird as it had a raptor/cuckoo look to it. When your brain doesn't instantly recognize something, immediately your addrenaline kicks in and you have this feeling in your gut that this is something special. This time the gut feel paid off and we all got a great sighting of a Thick Billed Cuckoo that flew over. I would have kicked myself if I had only seen it through the binoculars for those 5 seconds and not viewed it through the camera and at least got a few shots off so that I can view it again later, as previously mentioned, around the camp fire later that night.




I also maintain that there are no rules when it comes to how each individual wants to bird. Whether you want to merely observe or whether you would like to get the photos and ID them at your home, it doesnt matter, as long as you enjoy doing it. Birding is a great hobby, how you enjoy it is entirely up to you

A few other examples of shoot first and check later :

This raptor, like most brown raptors in summer, needed some closer investigation and when it came flying over the car, I got a few shots off and later made the ID as a Lesser Spotted Eagle. There is no way you can remember all the details of a bird if you view it for a few seconds. YOu have an idea, but you might forget small features like underwing pattern, wing shape, stove pipe leggings or baggy leggings, eye colour, streaking on the chest, leg colour, bill extension under the eye or behind the eye (for Steppe Eagle purposes) etc etc. All things that are needed to make a clear ID on brown raptors



There is no way you can easily make a correct ID on this Raptor by just seeing it fly over for 5 seconds.

I don't think one can go without the shoot first ask questions later method.

Here is another classic example. I heard this noise behind me in a bush, turned around and saw some movement. I instinctively fired off a squadron of shots before the bird ducked.

I had a little clue as to what it was that I had shot, but would not be able to confirm it without photos.

From the photos I found the two following ones which clinched the id.





It is absolutely crucial, especially if you keep a photo list to have your camera ready for any action. With some of these birds, you simple do not get a second chance. Chances of seeing the bird again, never mind getting the chance to photograph it can be astronomically slim.

Here are a couple of examples of birds I will have to stop short of going to hell and back in hoping to see in my lifetime again.

May I throw the dabate spanner?

I agree with all the above and sometimes you are just to slow, stupid, dumbfounded, that you dont lift the camera, thats why DD has a TB cuckoo and not I.

But the next is something that I personally battle with, If you just had those 2 seconds to fire off, but you never really saw the bird, except afterwards on the photo, is it a lifer?

The same counts if you take a shot of lets say a number of waders, and back home you notice one is strange and turns out a lifer, but you never actually saw the bird? Is it a lifer.

So when I see 727 photographed, does that mean 178 seen!

Each person decides for themselves as to lifers.

My eyesight is not great so I do not have strict rules, especially on endemics that I will never visit again.

But often I have had second or more 'confirmer' sightings as I call them.

Don't let strict rules get in the way of enjoying it.

But you still see the bird through the viewfinder