FEATURING 15 IN-DEPTH ARTICLES ON 40 SHOREBIRD SPECIES

From the Publisher of &

Complete Your
Collection!
Hone your birding identification skills
with the Birdwatch and BirdGuides
ID Photo Guide series.

Written by expert birders, these

comprehensive guides are illustrated
with high-quality images to
demonstrate the variation in plumages
shown in birds at all ages and at all
seasons, as well as helping you to
separate similar species that can be
tricky to tell apart while out birding.

From common and familiar birds to

rarities and even the most extreme
of vagrants, this series of seasonal
compilations will help you get the best
from your birding throughout the year.

Browse the collection here

 In association with

EDITORIAL OFFICE
Warners Group Publications
The Maltings
West Street
Bourne
Lincolnshire
PE10 9PH
Tel: 01778 391000
www.warnersgroup.co.uk

www.birdguides.com/birdwatch
editorial@birdwatch.co.uk

Editor: Josh Jones

Deputy Editor: Ed Stubbs
Design: Charlotte Bamford

Contributors: Andy Stoddart, Dominic

Mitchell, Don Taylor, Josh Jones, Julian

STEFAN PFÜTZKE (WWW.GREEN-LENS.DE)

Hough, Keith Vinicombe, Tony Prater

Publisher: Rob McDonnell

Keep up to date on Facebook

www.facebook.com/birdwatchmagazine
and www.facebook.com/BirdGuides
47
@BirdwatchExtra | @BirdGuides

@birdwatch_extra | @_birdguides

© Warners Group Publications 2023.

No part of this magazine may be

reproduced, copied or stored in a
retrieval system without the prior
permission in writing of the publisher.
COVER IMAGE: KIT DAY

AURÉLIEN AUDEVARD

The views expressed are not necessarily

those of Warners Group Publications
or its staff. No liability can be accepted
for any loss or damage to material
submitted, however caused. 19
 Contents
COURSERS, PRATINCOLES
Collared, Black-winged and Oriental Pratincoles .......................................................................................6

PLOVERS
Greater and Lesser Sand Plovers.........................................................................................................................12
European, American and Pacific Golden Plovers ..................................................................................... 19

SANDPIPERS, SNIPES
Wood, Green and Solitary Sandpipers ........................................................................................................... 26
Ruff, Pectoral and Sharp-tailed Sandpipers ............................................................................................... 34
Ruff, Buff-breasted and Upland Sandpipers ............................................................................................... 41
Dunlin, Curlew Sandpiper and White-rumped Sandpiper ................................................................ 47
Dunlin, White-rumped Sandpiper and Baird’s Sandpiper ................................................................. 56
Common, Spotted and Terek Sandpipers .................................................................................................... 64
Black-tailed, Bar-tailed and Hudsonian Godwits..................................................................................... 70
Red-necked, Grey and Wilson’s Phalaropes ............................................................................................... 77
Wood Sandpiper, Lesser and Greater Yellowlegs and Greenshank ..............................................84
Long-billed and Short-billed Dowitchers ..................................................................................................... 93
Common and Wilson’s Snipe ............................................................................................................................. 101
Common and Great Snipe and Eurasian Woodcock ........................................................................... 109
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

ZBIGNIEW KAJZER

101 12
5
 Collared, Black-winged
and Oriental Pratincoles
Words by Tony Prater
CARLOS BOCOS

ONE: Adult breeding Collared Pratincole (Toledo, Spain, 21 July 2014). The Collared Pratincole illustrated here shows the typical
appearance of all three species, with a short, stocky bill with decurved culmen, neat throat bib in summer plumage and elongated
appearance. The easiest diagnostic character of Collared is that the outer tail feathers extend beyond the primary tips – shown well
by this individual.

Three pratincole species, Collared, Black-winged

and Oriental, have been recorded in Britain, but
the last has not yet been seen in Ireland. They all
share a remarkable swallow-like appearance, with
forked tails, pointed wings and agile aerial foraging,
sometimes also recalling a distant small tern.
However, subtle differences between them can, with
perseverance, in most cases enable identification
to be made with some certainty. Tony Prater has all
the information you need to separate these similar
species in the field.
6
 Basic Principles
C
ollared Pratincole Birds gather after breeding and leave their
This is by far the most widespread of the three steppe nesting areas from late July. They tend
species, with isolated populations breeding to arrive in South Africa late in the autumn,
from Central Asia west to Iberia which are of the with most not occurring until November,
nominate and highly migratory form. Two further after moving through Central Africa.
subspecies occur in Africa: erlangeri, in Somalia and
Adults are noticeably darker than Collared, though
Kenya, and fuelleborni, in the rest of Africa south to
the difference can be subtle. The critical feature on
South Africa. The two African taxa are both nomadic,
the ground is the length of the outer tail feathers
but are not known in Europe. However, birds are
worth checking if they appear rather smaller, darker which nearly always fall well short of the primary
than expected and the underwing is less red. tips. Other more variable features include more
As this is the only western European breeding extensive black on the lores and the red base of
pratincole, it is not surprising that it is the most the lower mandible rarely reaching the nostril.
frequently seen here. It is still rare and only 76 In flight the black underwing coverts and axillaries
have been recorded in Britain up to 2017. Like stand out and are diagnostic. On the upperwing the
many other southern and eastern European secondary coverts, especially the outer ones, do not
birds it is typified by overshooting individuals in contrast strongly with the dark primaries and the
spring and is most frequently reported in May dark secondaries do not have white or even pale tips.
and June – so definitely one to look for now.
All features emphasise the darkness of the species.
While Collared Pratincole is essentially aerial, it
The legs are slightly longer than those of the
frequently lands on dry mud or very short saline
other two species and it often stands slightly
vegetation, the typical breeding habitat. When
feeding on the ground it can look remarkably higher. The chattering tern-like flight call is
like a horizontal Northern Wheatear in chasing subtly different from Collared, with Black-winged
invertebrates. More often it is mixed in with Pratincole having a short, penetrative trill.
hirundines, flying quite high with the chattering
tern-like calls indicating its presence. The call is Oriental Pratincole
slightly higher in pitch than Black-winged and a With a breeding range from Mongolia to
little longer, but it is not easy to tell on vocalisation. Pakistan and wintering from India to Australia, it
In adult plumage the combination of long tail is not surprising that this is the least frequently
streamers, a bright white outer primary feather encountered pratincole in Britain. It has yet
shaft, strong red underwing contrasting with darker
to be reported in Ireland. Just seven birds
secondaries and a white or pale trailing edge to
have been recorded since the first in 1981.
the secondaries are diagnostic, though the white
In many respects it resembles Black-winged
trailing edge can be abraded and is less obvious
Pratincole, having no pale trailing edge to the
by autumn or early winter, or against a bright sky.
Underwing colour can sometimes be deceptive as secondaries and darkish upperwing coverts
when in deep shadow, the red can look almost black. which often contrast only a little with the primary
coverts. Unlike both Black-winged and Collared the
Black-winged Pratincole shaft of the outer primary is dull brownish when
Breeding from the Ukraine to the steppes of Central viewed from above, though whiter underneath.
Asia in Kazakhstan, this is less frequently seen in Britain However, it shows a red underwing and the tail
and Ireland than Collared. Only 37 have been reported streamers are even shorter, with the tips only
in total, despite it being a highly migratory species. reaching halfway between the tertial and primary
Although few individuals occur, they can tour several tips, sometimes only as far as the tertial tips.
locations, with one notable bird in 2014 being seen at
In other pratincoles the upper breast tends to be a
eight different sites in eastern England from Sussex
rather dull greyish brown and lower breast whitish,
to Northumberland between 12 June and 9 August.
but in Oriental the lower breast is tinged with orange-
Unlike Collared, the bulk of the records are later in the
year, with most between July and the end of August. buff. The red on the base of the lower mandible
The majority of the population winters in southern maybe even less and sometimes it is possible to
Africa, often in huge flocks, when feeding conditions see that the nostril is more oval than slit-like as
are right; once some 800,000 birds were estimated in the other two species. The call tends to be
in a single flock. A few winter in mid-west Africa. a medium, relatively high-pitched trill.
7
TWO: Adult breeding Collared Pratincole
(Kalloni Salt Pans, Lesvos, 2 May 2007). This
individual shows how the tail streamers can fall
equal to the primary tips (while the
introductory photograph shows the maximum
length). They are longer than those of the other
two species. The fairly extensive red on both
mandibles can be seen to extend to at least
halfway along the slit-like nostril. Other
supportive features here are that the dark lores

OLIVER SMART (WWW.SMARTIMAGES.CO.UK)

do not extend above nor behind the eye and
the breast shows very little warm buff. Collared
tends to look a little slimmer and less bulky
than Black-winged.

THREE: Adult breeding Black-winged

Pratincole (Mayshukur, Kazakhstan, 8 May
2013). In this individual the tail-tip just extends
past p9 but is still well short of the tip of p10. As
the extremes just overlap, it is important to
look at all features. The extensive black lores
extend to just above the eye and a small area
of blackish can be seen just behind the eye.
Also, the red on the lower mandible does not
reach the nostril which, although relatively
large, is still not quite oval. The lack of warmth
on the breast and the rather bulky shape are
further useful features of Black-winged.

AREND WASSINK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

FOUR: Adult breeding Oriental Pratincole
(Petchaburi, Thailand, 24 April 2011). This
species has the shortest tail streamers of the
three; the outer tail feather can just be seen
falling between p7 and p8, but care needs to
be taken in assessing relative length as the
outermost (10th) primary is old and very worn
compared with the other primaries. Often they
lie closer to the tertial tips. The darkish
upperparts recall Black-winged and the dark
lores are also quite extensive though less than
in Black-winged. Many have limited red on the
HELGE SORENSEN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

base of the lower mandible, but this individual

has quite extensive coloration.

8
 FIVE: Adult non-breeding Collared Pratincole
(Salalah, Oman, 27 October 2007). In winter the
neat black line around the throat and the
creamy throat patch itself are absent, with the
former sometimes just visible as separated
brownish streaks. This is true for Black-winged
as well. The upperparts are a dull olive-brown,
but as in breeding plumage, it is slightly paler
than Black-winged. The red on the bill base
becomes duller, but usually the pattern
remains discernible. On this bird the nostril is
clearly elongated. The bird also is relatively slim
DANIELE OCCHIATO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

in appearance.

SIX: Adult non-breeding Black-winged

Pratincole (Salalah, Oman, 27 October 2007). In
this plumage Black-winged can often be very
difficult to tell from Collared, but the
photograph shows well the rather chunky
appearance of the former, and the red on the
bill base is even more dull and sometimes, as
here, the bill appears black. In all pratincoles
the tail streamer length tends to be slightly
shorter in non-breeding plumage, but the
intermediate length of Black-winged is usually
visible (though not here). The darkish brown
DANIELE OCCHIATO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

upperwing coverts maintain the overall darker

appearance.

SEVEN: Adult non-breeding Oriental Pratincole

(Perak, Malaysia, 27 November 2014). The
breeding plumage throat pattern of Oriental is
usually partly retained in non-breeding
plumage, and the overall colour of the head is
more washed brown than the other two
pratincoles. While the salmon colour on the
underparts is mostly lost, it is replaced by a
dull olive wash which is more extensive than in
the other two species. The red of the bill base is
also clearly duller, and in some birds, but not
this one, the nostril shape can be helpful.
AMAR SINGH

9
EIGHT: Juvenile Collared Pratincole (El Gouna,
Egypt 2 September 2009). This is pretty much
the standard juvenile plumage of all three
species, though there is often more dark
brown subterminal covert fringes than in this
individual. Given the similarities, one has to
concentrate on structural features. This
individual shows that the tail-tips are equal to
the primary tips, that there is quite an
extensive dull red on the bill base and a slit-like
nostril. In flight the red underwing may be
sullied with dark feathers, but the trailing edge
of the wing is whitish.

EDWIN WINKEL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

NINE: Juvenile/first-winter Black-winged
Pratincole (Rubirizi, Uganda, 4 October 2016).
The juvenile brown plumage is retained on the
head for the longest, giving quite a striking
head and throat pattern. The tail-tips fall short
of p9 tip so are shorter than in Collared.
Although a small area of red is shown at the bill
base it is limited. In flight the underwing
coverts are already black at this age, but there
maybe a very inconspicuous buffish trailing
edge to the wing.

TEN: Juvenile/first-winter Oriental Pratincole ALAN TATE

(Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, 6 September
2011). The brown subterminal fringes on the
lower scapulars and wing coverts are more
extensive here than in the other two species,
but its head pattern resembles Black-winged.
The red on the bill base is variable: this bird has
quite an extensive amount, but sometimes the
bill is all dark. The tail-tips can be seen to fall
just short of p7 so the short tail remains
distinctive. The underwing resembles Collared
in that it often has dark feathers.
ALEX VARGAS (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

10
 ELEVEN: Adult Collared Pratincole (Sohar,
Oman, 23 February 2013). Given a favourable
light on the underwing, the beautiful orange-
red underwing coverts and axillaries stand out.
Oriental has a similar coloration, but its greater
secondary underwing coverts are often paler.
The pale trailing edge to the secondaries
makes these appear fainter than in Oriental
and a distinctive light notch where the
primaries and secondaries meet is not shown
by the other species. This bird also shows the
long line extending from the gape; although
variable, this feature is not shown by the other
RENÉ POP/THE SOUND APPROACH

species.

TWELVE: Adult Black-winged Pratincole

(Atyrau, Kazakhstan, 5 June 2017). The smooth
jet black of the underwing coverts and
axillaries with not the slightest hint of a pale
trailing edge to the secondaries make this
unmistakable. The white shaft of the outer
primary shows clearly, but this is also present
in Collared. The darker upperwing is also
shown by this bird, as is the large area of black
on the lores which just creeps over the eye.
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

Note also that it lacks a thin gape line.

THIRTEEN: Adult Oriental Pratincole

(Petchaburi, Thailand, 12 February 2012). The
orange-red underwing coverts are similar to
those of Collared, but the secondaries form a
conspicuous dark trailing edge to the wing,
which lacks both the white trailing edge and
outer secondary pale notch typical of Collared.
Although the outer primary is whitish at its
base from below, above it is dull with a
brownish wash. The very short tail streamers
make this a more dumpy bird in flight than the
other two species.
BOB STEELE/BIA

11
 Greater and Lesser
Sand Plovers Words by Josh Jones
MARKKU RANTALA (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

ONE: Greater and Lesser Sand Plovers (Oman, 10 December 2016). This excellent comparison shows a single Greater Sand Plover
(front centre) with four Lesser Sand Plovers. The structural differences are well illustrated here: note Greater’s longer and heavier bill,
squarer head shape with flat crown, slightly larger size and, overall, a more robust, ‘stronger’ feel (although take in to account that it is
standing in the foreground!). While the legs of this Greater appear paler than the surrounding Lessers, this feature is variable in both
species and cannot be reliably used to tell them apart.

Rare anywhere in Europe, as well as being strikingly

beautiful in their summer dress, finding a vagrant
of one of these attractive waders in Britain or
Ireland would be a dream come true for any birder.
But away from their usual breeding or wintering
ranges, it is challenging to identify a lone individual,
especially when the various subspecies are added
into the mix. Josh Jones has all the information you
need should you locate a likely candidate in the
field.
12
 Basic Principles
T
wo species of striking Charadrius plovers – comparatively robust yet rangy structure often makes
Greater and Lesser Sand Plovers – are among the it ‘feel’ like a larger plover.
most desirable of all vagrants to reach Britain and That said, western columbinus generally exhibits a
Ireland. shorter and more slender-looking bill and is overall
Both species are rare in Europe: in Britain, 23 Greater smaller, sometimes overlapping in size with the largest
and six Lesser have been seen; Ireland is limited to a Lesser in some measurements.
single record of each. Coming across one would make All Greater Sand Plover show pale sandy-buff
any European birder’s year. upperparts and white underparts. Breeding males
However, they are very similar in appearance, are the most straightforward to identify, showing
especially in non-breeding plumage, with some an orange-rufous breast band, neck sides, nape and
overlap in biometrics and plumage features. Things are (less so) forehead. The striking white throat is further
further complicated by there being three subspecies contrasted by a black ‘bandit mask’ across the eyes
of Greater and five of Lesser – the latter of which are and lores. This extends across the forehead, framing
bracketed into two ‘groups’ on the basis of appearance a variable white ‘window’ just above the bill, which is
and phenology. sometimes split in two by a thin black line of feathering
Great care should be taken with diagnosing any up the centre of the forehead from the base of the
potential vagrant sand plover, which will invariably upper side of the bill.
involve a lone bird where others (of either species) Breeding females are sometimes very similar to
aren’t available for direct comparison. Indeed, winter-plumage birds, although the breast band
separating sand plovers can be challenging enough becomes complete – and most show a variable buff or
when seen side by side on their wintering grounds or rufous wash to this, sometimes quite rich in colour and
migration routes – in winter both are true shorebirds, approaching some duller males. However, at most they
frequenting most Indian Ocean and Australasian show only a ghosting of the male’s black mask. Non-
coastlines from East Africa and the Red Sea east to breeding adults lose all black and rufous colour from
Australia and New Zealand. the head and neck, while the breast band becomes
Having an awareness of the key features will help to broken and restricted to the neck sides.
assess a vagrant alongside the next best thing: a more As in many Charadrius plovers, juveniles are
familiar wader species – usually another Charadrius, distinguishable by the clear pale fringing to the
particularly Ringed Plover, with which many western upperpart feathers. Although these scapulars are
European sand plovers have been found. quickly moulted out, first-winters retain the pale-
Summer offers the best time to find a vagrant here. fringed juvenile flight feathers.
Britain has produced six July records of Greater, with
a further five in June. Two in April hint at some spring Lesser Sand Plover
potential, with the rest occurring between August and The rarer sand plover in Britain (and indeed Europe),
December. This bias is also evident for Lesser: three this species has a disjointed breeding range from
have occurred in July, with two in August and just one Central Asia north-east throughout eastern Siberia
in May. Both of Ireland’s sand plovers appeared in July. to Chukotka. It has bred on occasion in Alaska. In
comparison to Greater, this species favours more
Greater Sand Plover mountainous areas and has been recorded breeding
The ‘commoner’ of the sand plovers to occur in as high as 5,500 m in Ladakh, India.
Europe, this species has a large but intermittent Five subspecies are recognised: pamirensis, atrifrons
breeding range across the lowland steppe and semi- and schaeferi – collectively known as the ‘atrifrons
desert of Central Asia, from Turkey (where it is rare) to group’, or Lesser Sand Plover – breed in the high
Mongolia and westernmost China. mountains of Central Asia from Kyrgyzstan and the
Three subspecies are recognised: columbinus Himalayas through western China to southernmost
(breeding from Turkey east to Azerbaijan) is the most Mongolia and number around 200,000 individuals as a
westerly; central scythicus (Turkmenistan to southern collective. The ‘mongolus group’, or Mongolian Plover
Kazakhstan); and eastern leschenaulti (Mongolia to – comprising mongolus and stegmanni – breeds in
China). The world population is estimated at around eastern Siberia and totals around 100,000 birds. Based
200,000 individuals. on habitat preference, appearance and phenology, the
It is fairly large in size, being more akin to an two groups are widely suspected to represent separate
American or Pacific Golden Plover in stature, rather species, although this is not yet formally adopted by
than the smaller Charadrius species. It is proportionally the International Ornithological Congress.
longer legged and shorter winged than Lesser Sand In some plumages, the two are extremely difficult – if
Plover. Leg colour is quite variable, from greenish-buff not impossible – to separate. However, breeding birds
to dark grey. are readily identifiable.
The black bill generally appears long and strong, Males of the atrifrons group show a variable
with a noticeably swollen tip. This, combined with a peach or orange colour to the breast band and
13
neck sides. A solid black ‘bandit mask’ extends across and white throat. These basal colour differences are
the forehead, at most showing two minimal white reflected in breeding females, in which there are also
‘windows’ on the forehead. slight differences in facial pattern.
Males of the mongolus group show a darker, Non-breeding birds are very similar to non-breeding
chestnut-rufous colour on the breast and neck sides, Greater, and are best told apart by size and structure.
while the black face mask is broken up by much The bill is typically shorter and more lightweight, with a
larger white ‘windows’ on the forehead above the bill. less bulbous tip, and the smaller size (closer to Ringed
Furthermore, many show a thin black line on the upper Plover) is generally apparent. Leg colour also varies in
breast, creating a neat border between the breast band this species, but averages darker than in Greater.

TWO: Breeding male Greater Sand Plover

(Paem Bak Lia, Thailand, 21 April 2011). Sand
plovers are at their most striking in summer
plumage, with males especially distinctive. In
this bird, note the neatly demarcated rufous-
orange breast band extending onto the neck
sides framing a white throat, the black ‘bandit
mask’ and neat white ‘windows’ nestled within
this on the forehead, just above the bill. The
particularly heavy and long bill of this bird
renders it one of the more structurally
distinctive eastern birds (western columbinus
may be more Lesser-like in gait). The legs are a
greyish-green, which is more typical in
breeding-plumage Greater.

HELGE SORENSEN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

THREE: Breeding male Lesser Sand Plover
(Kyrgyzstan, 11 June 2015). With its pale peach-
orange breast band fading diffusely towards
the flanks and belly, plus its solid black ‘bandit
mask’ punctuated only by a small paler patch
in front of the eye, this male is easily identified
as a member of the ‘atrifrons group’. This
individual, on Kyrgyzstani breeding grounds, is
of the subspecies pamirensis. Other atrifrons-
group Lessers may be a richer orange than this
bird and possess a more clear-cut breast band,
approaching Mongolian in colour and pattern.
But the forehead pattern is an important
pointer. Note also the dark (almost blackish)
leg colour.
RALPH MARTIN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

14
 FOUR: Breeding male Mongolian Plover
(Heuksan Do, South Korea, 6 May 2009). The
breast band is more of a rich rufous-orange in
mongolus and stegmanni, as illustrated by this
bird. This is blotchy at its lower extents, with
variable orange speckling extending down the
flanks and towards the belly. A thin black line
separates the white throat from the breast
band, in this individual widening into a small
‘bib’ in the centre (this isn’t the case with most).
Furthermore, note the extensive white window
above the bill, significantly disrupting the black
AURELIÉN AUDEVARD (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

mask. The legs are paler greenish-grey in this

bird, illustrating why this feature isn’t useful for
separation from Greater.

FIVE: Breeding female Greater Sand Plover

(Texel, The Netherlands, 18 July 2013). Caught
mid-step, this bird’s squat pose makes it
appear smaller than it really is. However, it still
looks well built, particularly the head and bill.
The former is square-shaped, with a flat crown;
the latter is clearly long, deep-based and
shows an extensive bulge towards the distal
half of the upper mandible, as well as a
tapering tip, making this a Greater Sand Plover.
In addition, the legs are greenish in colour,
while the bird can be sexed as a female by the
almost complete lack of orange in the breast
band (although note that some females can be
much more colourful than this, and approach
duller males in appearance).
JOS VAN DEN BERG

SIX: Breeding female Lesser Sand Plover

(Kyrgyzstan, 11 June 2015) The combination of a
short and slender bill, and rounded head
shape, gives this bird much more of a cute,
‘small plover’ feel compared to the almost Grey
Plover-like Greater depicted above. It is a
female atrifrons-group Lesser Sand Plover,
with the diffuse peachy-orange breast band
and otherwise clean underparts good pointers
of this. Note that the legs are blackish.
RALPH MARTIN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

15
SEVEN: Breeding female Mongolian Plover
(Heuksan Do, South Korea, 27 April 2008). In
many respects, this female shows a ghosting
of the head, neck and breast markings shown
by the male in the background (and that in
image four). Compared to the female Lesser in
image six, it shows a blotchier breast band,
flecking extending down the flanks and an
extensive white forehead patch. Mongolian
Plovers also show a stubbier and thicker bill
than Lesser, with a more developed gonys and

AURELIÉN AUDEVARD (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

nail at the tip – as illustrated here – which
recalls Greater somewhat. Note the extensive
greenish-grey wash to the legs.

EIGHT: Juvenile Greater Sand Plover (Hurghada,

Egypt, 5 July 2013). Identification of juvenile
sand plovers can be very difficult, not least
because the bill may not be fully developed.
Smaller-billed columbinus Greater can really
invite confusion with Lesser. While this
youngster doesn’t possess the obviously
bulbous nail on the tip of the upper mandible
shown by many adult Greaters, the long bill
length and tapered tip, as well as the large-
looking eye, large-looking head with flat crown,
long, pale legs and attenuated appearance all
suggest a bigger bird and point to Greater as
the correct identification.

NINE: Juvenile Lesser Sand Plover (Karnataka, ZBIGNIEW KAJZER

India, 13 September 2014). Although possessing
a very similar plumage to the Greater above,
the impression here is of a smaller, more
lightweight bird with a less attenuated and
more front-heavy appearance, overall more
akin to a Kentish Plover than a larger species.
The bill is short and fine, while the head shape
is more rounded. The upperparts show broad,
and often diffuse-looking buff fringing, ageing
it as a youngster. This feature contrasts
somewhat in Mongolian (see image 10). The
legs are dark.
PRASHANTHA KRISHNA M C

16
 TEN: Juvenile Mongolian Plover (Hokkaido,
Japan, 13 September 2015). The short and
stubby bill, with relatively blunt tip, and
rounded head shape recall a Ringed Plover.
Juveniles of this taxon are identifiable by their
crisp white or off-white fringing to the
upperpart feathers (rather than the buff of
atrifrons-group Lesser and Greater), which in
turn gives the impression of a colder-toned
bird (although there is variation). Furthermore,
the breast band tends to be noticeably more
defined than in Lesser, while around half of
juvenile Mongolian also show variable dark
markings on the flanks. Again, the legs are
dark greyish-black.
STUART PRICE

ELEVEN: Winter Greater Sand Plover (Oman, 29

October 2017). When seen as well as this,
recognising a winter Greater Sand Plover is
relatively straightforward. The impressive bill
exhibits a clear and extensive bulge towards
the tip of the upper mandible, and tapers at
the tip. The head is large and square shaped,
with a relatively flat-looking crown. It also
appears long legged and attenuated, yet well
built at the same time. This overall impression
recalls a larger plover species, such as a Grey
Plover, rather than a smaller Charadrius. Note
also the pale leg colour.
SAVERIO GATTO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

TWELVE: Winter Lesser Sand Plover (Oman, 31

March 2013). Although this individual shows
quite a robust bill with a well-defined, bulging
nail towards the tip of the upper mandible, it is
nonetheless stubbier in its appearance, while
the head looks smaller and more rounded. The
bird appears a little more front heavy and less
attenuated, with shorter-looking legs, which
are all notable structural pointers towards a
Lesser. The legs are dark in this bird, but can be
paler greenish-grey.
RALPH MARTIN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

17
 RALPH MARTIN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)
THIRTEEN: Greater Sand Plover (Oman, 28 January 2013). The upperwing pattern is a useful way to separate Greater from Lesser –
although, realistically, high-quality photographs are essential to assess this. The white wingbar, narrow across the secondaries, rapidly
bulges across the inner primaries, creating a concave impression. The tail pattern is also contrasted, with a dark subterminal band
contrasting with the paler rump. This is matched by some Mongolian Plovers, but not Lesser. Note also the large eye, hefty bill and
overall bulk.

MARKKU RANTALA (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

FOURTEEN: Lesser Sand Plover (Goa, India, 10 December 2016). This Lesser exhibits a more evenly shaped wingbar that gradually
broadens across the secondaries and onto the primaries. The more uniform uppertail is also a pro-Lesser feature, although
Mongolian can show a more contrasted tail, as in Greater. A further clue that this is Lesser is the small and rounded head, as well
as the relatively short and dainty-looking bill. The feet projecting beyond the tail is often cited as a pro-Greater feature, but
that is clearly not the case here!
18
 European, American and
Pacific Golden Plovers
Words by Andy Stoddart
WIL LEURS (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

ONE: European Golden Plovers (Texel, The Netherlands, 19 September 2008). A large flock of European Golden Plovers is always a
wonderful sight. The black-bellied summer-plumaged birds here catch the eye, but the repeated pattern of gold-spangled
upperparts is always a delight as well. The tight flocking and constant alertness are typical of the species.

In bird identification, perhaps the most tricky assess-

ments come when a British or European species has
a counterpart elsewhere in the world, separated long
enough by evolution to be distinct but not for suf-
ficient time for any radical plumage differences to
have developed. Such a group is the golden plovers,
which has European, American and east Asian rep-
resentatives that all occur in Britain. Andy Stoddart
is here to help differentiate between all three – and
perhaps to help you find your own individual of the
rarer two species.
19
 Basic Principles
T
here can be few more attractive sights than recently both were treated together as ‘Lesser Golden
the ‘golden plovers’ in summer plumage. With Plover’. Today, however, their distinctive structural,
their black faces and bellies and gold-spangled vocal and plumage features are better understood.
upperparts, they are an arresting sight. However, as American Golden Plover is, compared to European, a
well as being objects of beauty, they also present smaller, more slender-bodied species, with longer legs,
some identification problems, and further difficulties neck and wings and a proportionally slightly longer
arise with the more plainly marked juveniles. This and stouter bill. The structural differences can be hard
article discusses the identification of all three species: to evaluate on a ‘fluffed up’ bird, but when alert this is a
European Golden, American Golden and Pacific strikingly slim, elegant species which should stand out
Golden Plovers. among European Golden Plovers on this feature alone.
These structural features are, however, shared with
European Golden Plover Pacific Golden Plover so, to eliminate that species, it is
This species breeds from Iceland in the west to Siberia necessary to focus on the rear of the bird. In American
in the east. It winters in western and southern Europe Golden, the tertials are quite short, falling short of the
and North Africa. A scarce upland breeder in Britain, it tail-tip, while the primary projection beyond both is
is much more familiar as a winter visitor to fields and quite long, with at least four primary tips visible.
wetlands, typically in large flocks which can number up Adult male American Golden Plovers in summer
to several thousand individuals. In the air, these flocks plumage are even more dramatically marked than
often adopt a distinctive laterally elongated or ‘rugby European birds. The upperparts are spangled with
ball-shaped’ appearance. a very bright gold. The face and the whole of the
Structure is an important identification feature of this underparts (including the flanks and undertail coverts)
trio of plovers, with European being the most distinctive are solidly black and the white lateral line is broad,
of the three. This species is typically very fat and dumpy, bulging at the breast-sides and almost meeting across
a little short at the rear-end, a somewhat short legged, the centre. Note, however, that females, first-summer
rather short necked and quite short billed. In flight, birds and those in body moult will all show a paler and
although a powerful flyer on long, pointed wings, the more disrupted pattern.
body still appears quite chunky. Juveniles are a characteristic grey colour; indeed
In summer plumage this is a striking species: the they are as likely to be mistaken for a Grey Plover as
upperparts are spangled with pale gold, separated a European Golden. The mantle is a little darker and
by a white line from the black face and foreneck. The there are some subtle gold hues in the wing coverts.
flanks and undertail coverts are also white. In southern The face pattern is well-marked with a prominent
breeders, the black areas are paler and duller and there supercilium, dark crown and ear covert and loral
is also sexual variation, the males being more black patches, the effect almost resembling a phalarope.
below than the females. Juveniles and winter adults At all ages, the underwing coverts and axillaries of
are very similar. Both lack the black underparts and are American Golden Plover are a uniform mid-grey. The
spangled with a light gold colour all over, appearing call is very different from European Golden, too, a
relatively uniform at range. This rather featureless disyllabic chew-ee, generally with the stress on the first
impression is reinforced by a plain face with an isolated syllable.
dark eye.
At all ages, the underwing coverts and axillaries are Pacific Golden Plover
bright white, easily seen in flight and often displayed This species breeds across northern Siberia to western
prominently on landing. Alaska. It is also a spectacular migrant, wintering in
The call is the characteristic mournful, piping south and south-east Asia, Australasia and the Pacific
piooooo. islands. It is a regular rarity in Britain, though rarer than
its American cousin. Records typically involve summer-
American Golden Plover plumaged adults in July and August, with juveniles
With a breeding range extending across Alaska surprisingly rare here.
and northernmost Canada and winter quarters in Structurally, this species closely resembles American
Argentina and Uruguay, this is one of the world’s great Golden Plover and is best distinguished by looking at
wader migrants. Its long autumn passage takes it out the rear-end. The tertials in Pacific Golden Plover are
over the western Atlantic, so it is, unsurprisingly, a long, the same length as the tail-tip. As a result, the
regular rarity in Britain. The majority of records involve primary projection beyond both is quite short, with
juveniles in September and October, but most years only two or three primary tips visible.
also see a few summer-plumaged adults, typically in Summer Pacific Golden Plovers closely resemble
July and August. Americans, but the breast-side patches are a little less
American Golden Plover forms a species pair with broad and they typically show a white flank line (with
Pacific Golden Plover, resembling the latter much a little black barring) separating the black underparts
more than its European relative. Indeed until and gold upperparts. The undertail coverts often show
20
 some white. Note, however, that the flank line can be Golden Plover. They are best distinguished from this
hidden under the closed wing (and beware moulting species by size and structure, but the face pattern is
Americans which can occasionally appear to show also a little stronger.
such a line). At all ages the underwing coverts and axillaries
Juveniles are quite different from Americans, lacking of Pacific Golden Plover are the same mid-grey
the latter’s distinctive grey hues. Instead they are as American, while the call is a disyllabic chew-it,
bright golden and therefore closely resemble European resembling that of Spotted Redshank.

TWO: Adult European Golden Plover

(Ouessant, France, 16 May 2004). This classic
portrait of a summer European Golden Plover
shows off perfectly its rather compact, portly
structure, with a relatively short, fine bill and
short neck, rear-end and legs, particularly the
exposed tibia. Such extensively black
underparts are typical of more northern
breeders.
AURÉLIEN AUDEVARD

THREE: Adult American Golden Plover (De

Putten, The Netherlands, 5 June 2013). This bird
shows a rather slender body and rear-end and,
although it is wading in water, its exposed tibia
are quite long. It is therefore either a Pacific
Golden or an American Golden Plover; its
identity as the latter can be confirmed by its
broad white neck-side patches and solidly
black flanks. The short tertials can be seen
clearly, as can the relatively long projection of
the primaries beyond the tip of the tail.
CHRIS GALVIN (WWW.CHRISGALVINPHOTO.COM)

21
FOUR: Adult Pacific Golden Plover (Hyères,
France, 22 July 2016). This golden plover has a
rather prominent bill. Its body also looks
slender, with a long rear-end and the legs –
again especially the exposed tibia – are long,
too. These are all classic features of the two
smaller species. This bird can be identified as a
Pacific Golden Plover by its relatively narrow
white breast-side patches and the presence of
a white flank line barred with black. The
primary/tertials/tail-tip ratios are, however,
difficult to interpret in this photograph

AURÉLIEN AUDEVARD
FIVE: Adult European Golden Plover (Eccles-on-
Sea, Norfolk, 27 December 2010). In terms of
plumage (brightly spangled with gold), this
non-breeding bird must be either a European
Golden or a Pacific Golden Plover; non-
breeding American Golden Plovers are much
greyer. Structure is the most important feature
and this bird’s portly, neckless shape with
short, fine bill and short legs (with almost no
exposed tibia) indicate that it is a European
Golden Plover.

SIX: Adult or first-summer American Golden NEIL BOWMAN

Plover (Texas, USA, 15 April 2008). This non-
breeding bird has lanky proportions with a
prominent bill, long rear-end and long legs. It is
therefore one of the two rarer golden plover
species. Its overall grey appearance is
immediately suggestive of American Golden
Plover, a diagnosis confirmed by the relatively
short tertials and long primary projection. The
pale supercilium stands out very well on this
individual.
DAVID KJAER (WWW.DAVIDKJAER.COM)

22
 SEVEN: Adult Pacific Golden Plover (Kauai,
Hawaii, 29 August 2016). This bird’s lanky
proportions, prominent bill and long legs
indicate one of the two ‘lesser’ golden plovers.
Its identity as a Pacific can be confirmed by the
golden hues in its upperparts and by the
JONATHAN LETHBRIDGE (WWW.JUSTBIRDPHOTOS.COM)

crucial structural relationships at the rear-end.

Note the relatively long tertials, almost
reaching the tail-tip, and the relatively short
primary projection beyond.

EIGHT: Juvenile European Golden Plover (St

Mary’s, Scilly, 5 October 2005). This bird looks
superficially rather slender with a long neck.
Could it be one of the two smaller golden
plovers? However, it is stretching up,
exaggerating its neck length, the exposed tibia
are noticeably short and the bill is quite short
and fine, too. It is in fact a juvenile European
Golden Plover.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

NINE: Juvenile American Golden Plover (St

Mary’s, Scilly, 8 October 2010). The long rear-
end and legs and prominent bill of this bird are
all indicative of American Golden or Pacific
Golden Plover, but what really catches the eye
here are the overall grey hues. On a juvenile
bird, these colours are characteristic of
American Golden. Our identification can be
confirmed by reference to the short tertials
and the long primary projection. Note also the
prominent supercilium.
RICHARD STONIER

23
TEN: Juvenile Pacific Golden Plover (Al Batinah,
Oman, 14 November 2008). This juvenile Pacific
Golden Plover resembles a European Golden
Plover in plumage – both are brightly spangled
gold. Structural features offer the best clues
and this bird’s prominent bill and long legs
with exposed tibia are key indicators of Pacific
Golden. Note also the long tertials almost
reaching the tail-tip and the relatively short
primary projection.

DANIELE OCCHIATO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

ELEVEN: European Golden Plover (Terschelling,
The Netherlands 2 October 2007). The dumpy,
neckless shape and short, fine bill are enough
to identify this bird as a European Golden
Plover. However, the key feature is the
underwing: white axillaries and underwing
coverts in European Golden, dusky in Pacific
and American. These feather tracts on this bird
are unequivocally white, confirming its identity
as a European Golden.

TWELVE: American Golden Plover (St Mary’s, ARIE OUWERKERK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

Scilly, 8 October 2010). This bird is slim and
delicate with a prominent bill and is therefore a
Pacific Golden or American Golden Plover.
Unfortunately the underwings are in shadow,
therefore masking the dusky axillaries and
underwing coverts. As for its specific identity,
the striking grey hues are sufficient to identify
this individual as an American Golden.
RICHARD STONIER

24
 THIRTEEN: Pacific Golden Plovers (Kaziranga
National Park, India, 20 February 2009).
Although the underwings of the right-hand
bird are in shadow, its companion clearly
shows a dusky wash across the axillaries and
underwing coverts. These birds are therefore
either Pacific Golden or American Golden
Plovers, a diagnosis supported by their slim,
compact structure. They can be identified as
Pacific Goldens by the prominent gold
spangling around the head and upper breast.
MARC GUYT (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

FOURTEEN: Grey Plover (Titchwell RSPB,

Norfolk, 27 September 2013). This bird is
strikingly grey, so it must be an American
Golden Plover mustn’t it? Although grey hues
are an important feature of American Golden, it
is important to confirm that your target bird is a
small golden plover. Grey Plover is the classic
trap here and this bird, although superficially
resembling American Golden in plumage, is
typically large, bulky and stocky, with none of
the finesse of the small golden plovers.
TONY CLARKE (WWW.TONYCLARKE.CO.UK)

FIFTEEN: Grey Plover (Viareggio, Italy, 15

October 2013). This flying Grey Plover reveals
its key features – solid black axillaries and a
white rump – firmly eliminating any thoughts
of American Golden. Note also the stocky
structure, much plainer face and heavy,
deep-based bill.
DANIELE OCCHIATO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

25
 Wood, Green and
Solitary Sandpipers Words by Don Taylor
CHRISTINE JUNG (WWW.BIRDIMAGENCY.COM)

ONE: Wood Sandpiper (Lesvos, Greece, 4 May 2008). Close views like this certainly aid identification, but invariably key features may
need other views, such as in flight, to separate this Wood Sandpiper from Green and Solitary with confidence. The birds are of similar
size, with similar bills, but key identification features include calls, overall structure and subtle variations in underwing and tail
patterns.

Shorebirds are on the move again, the first returning

adults being followed by a strengthening wave of
young birds on southbound migration. Among the
species that need sorting out are the widespread
Green Sandpiper and the less widely observed
Wood Sandpiper, both of which have the potential to
cause confusion. And though a real wildcard option,
Solitary Sandpiper, an American vagrant, also has to
be taken into consideration. Wader field guide
author Don Taylor looks closely at this trio of
Tringas.
26
 Basic Principles
T
hese three waders are closely related and share from the dark breast.
interesting behavioural characteristics, including On the wing, Green Sandpiper can look almost
the distinctive actions of bobbing the head and black and white as it flies rapidly away, having been
pumping the tail-end up and down, albeit not as much disturbed; it can be difficult to approach. The white
as Common Sandpiper does. More particularly, they rump and uppertail coverts contrast with the dark
present identification challenges, especially in the case wings and back and dark barred tail; the underwing is
of Wood and Green Sandpipers for less experienced also dark.
birders, and Green and Solitary for those who like a Flight is rapid with deep wing-beats, and when
challenge. escaping a predator it will zig-zag snipe-like, sometimes
soaring before plummeting down. Green Sandpiper has
Wood Sandpiper
shorter legs than the other two species and in flight the
With a population of no more than 27 pairs, Wood
toes barely protrude beyond the tail-tip.
Sandpiper is a very rare breeding bird confined to
Particularly noisy when flushed, it utters a loud weet-
northern Scotland. It is best known as a passage
tweet-wit-wit call, the rhythm of which I often liken
migrant, when it can appear on freshwater marshes
to that of Swallow. Aside from the outside chance of
across Britain and Ireland. As with most waders, it is
encountering the next species, the almost black-and-
more widespread in the extended autumn passage
white appearance is virtually diagnostic, meaning there
period from July to as late as October, though still local
and never numerous. should be no confusion with any other wader.
Wood Sandpiper has an elegance which on its own is
almost sufficient to clinch the identification. At rest it is Solitary Sandpiper
a slim Tringa, having longer and more yellowish-toned This ‘wildcard’ wader is the Nearctic counterpart
legs than Green Sandpiper. The long white supercilium of Green Sandpiper. A rare vagrant to the Western
is also distinctive, typically giving the bird a subtly Palearctic, where all records have come from the
capped appearance. Adults have upperparts coarsely western seaboard of the region, it has reached Britain
and unevenly notched with white and buff, becoming on 37 occasions and appeared in Ireland five times. It
somewhat plainer and greyer once they moult into is most likely to be found in mid-late autumn and, like
winter plumage, whereas juveniles are densely marked Green Sandpiper, could turn up almost anywhere on
with buffish-white spots above and streaked on the small (and often well-vegetated) ponds, settling beds
breast. and other marshy areas.
In flight, Wood Sandpiper has brown upperparts with At rest, Solitary Sandpiper closely recalls Green
variable white speckles on the mantle and innerwing Sandpiper. In breeding plumage the white spotting on
coverts. The rump and uppertail coverts are white the upperparts is slightly bolder and the head, neck
above a finely barred tail and the underwing is whitish, and breast streaking coarser.
in contrast to the dark of Green Sandpiper. The flight Most birds reaching Britain and Ireland are likely to
action is fluttery with a fast wing-beat, and when flushed be juveniles, which are subtly paler above compared to
Wood Sandpiper typically ‘towers’ high, with remarkable Green Sandpiper. In all plumages the eyering is often
acceleration. Often uttered on take-off or on the wing, more conspicuous, while structurally the bill and legs
the call is a quite distinct, shrill, whistled chiff-if-iff.
are slightly longer, the bill is subtly decurved and the
rear end is more attenuated.
Green Sandpiper
In flight, Solitary again resembles Green Sandpiper,
This species is best known in Britain and Ireland as a
with uniformly dark brown upperwings, balanced by
common migrant in autumn, less so in spring, and
dark underwings and contrasting white underparts.
a localised winter visitor. Passage periods almost
The obvious difference is its distinctive dark rump
overlap in June, with the last northbound birds nearly
and centre of the otherwise barred tail. The long legs
coinciding with the first returning migrants, so it can
be present in every month of the year. Just three pairs project slightly beyond the tail-tip. The flight action
bred in northern Scotland in 2009-2010. has similarities to the other two species, though
In breeding plumage the dark upperparts show Solitary often flutters up in a series of short ascents
profuse but fine white spots, there is a narrow white before dropping down again. It may ‘tower’ and, when
eyering (often broken at the rear) and, unlike Wood threatened by a predator, use a snipe-like zigzag action
Sandpiper, the distinct white supercilium is confined to to escape.
in front of the eye. Winter adults look more uniformly The call is similar to that of Green Sandpiper, though
dark, while juveniles are neatly spotted above with fine quieter and less frequent – typically a single pit,
buff-white markings, recalling Wood Sandpiper. In all sometimes a disyllabic twit-wit or, more usually,
plumages the white underparts are sharply demarcated a high pleet-weet-weet flight call.
27
TWO: Adult Wood Sandpiper (Elmley NNR,
Kent, 5 June 2011). This photo catches the slim
elegance and long-legged appearance
characteristic of Wood Sandpiper. The dark line
from bill to eye is obvious, but the eye-stripe is
more diffused across the ear coverts. The dark
brown upperparts are profusely speckled
white. The breast is heavily streaked and the
strongly barred flanks, clearly shown here,
would normally be almost completely
obscured by the folded wing. The base of the
medium-length straight bill is greenish, with a
darker distal half, similar to the other two
species.

DAVID CAMPBELL
THREE: Adult Green Sandpiper (Andalucia,
Spain, 25 March 2014). This photo and that of
the adult Solitary below illustrate an important
aspect of identification: the apparent effect of
the light, which must always be borne in mind.
Here, the Solitary appears to have darker
upperparts, which is a reversal of the actual
plumages in neutral light. The darker
upperparts of this sun-lit Green display
numerous fine white speckles and, like Solitary,
the pale supercilium is confined to the front of
the eye, merging with the white eyering. The
legs are usually greenish, similar to Solitary, but
the colour does vary.

FOUR: Adult Solitary Sandpiper (Foula, PETER DEDICOAT

Shetland, 6 May 2009). The projection of the
primaries beyond the tertials and the tail-tip
gives the rear end of this species a more
attenuated appearance, and the long legs are
also shown clearly in this photo. However,
another aspect of identification observers
need to be aware of is the apparent effect of
behaviour; in this case the erect posture,
compared with the crouched attitude of the
Green above, makes it difficult to assess
comparative lengths. The leg colour is usually
greenish, though can appear yellowish in
juveniles.
RUSSELL WYNN

28
 FIVE: Juvenile Wood Sandpiper (Utö, Finland, 4
August 2009). Although this individual is
looking apprehensive and hunched, the photo
shows some of the key identification features
well. The long pale supercilium clearly extends
from the bill base to well behind the eye,
contrasting sufficiently with the speckly brown
crown to give it a capped appearance. The
warm buff of the upperparts and the profusion
of buff-white spots and notches are typical of
juvenile plumage. The tertial and primary tips
MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.BIRDPHOTO.FI)

can be seen to be closely in line with the tail-

tip.

SIX: Juvenile Green Sandpiper (Rainham

Marshes, Greater London, 28 August 2009). The
upperparts are a grey-brown, with conspicuous
fine white speckles and notches. The white
underparts contrast with the sharply
demarcated, evenly washed brown breast. The
short supercilium, confined to the front of the
eye, flows into the distinctive white eyering.
The tertials and primary tips project just a very
short distance beyond the tail-tip. Leg colour is
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

not a distinguishing feature for these three

species, as they vary. Green usually has darker
legs than Solitary, both usually shades of green.

SEVEN: Juvenile Solitary Sandpiper (Seaton,

Devon, 12 October 2010). The pale brown
upperparts, with conspicuous pale buff spots
and notches, are illustrated clearly in this
photo, which also shows the brown wash to
the breast, with a suggestion of streaking. The
distinct short supercilium and white eyering
are also shown well. The attenuated rear end
illustrates the distinct long primaries, although
they hide the tail-tip. Like Wood, the legs can
sometimes be more yellowish, particularly in
this plumage, as illustrated.
JACK LEVENE

29
EIGHT: Adult Wood Sandpiper (Tsavo West NP,
Kenya, 25 November 2009). The elegance of
this species is clearly reflected in this photo,
and the long white supercilium is also distinct,
giving a capped appearance. Like light and
behaviour, photography can also create false
impressions: maybe it is the angle in this case,
but the primary tips appear to extend beyond
the tail-tip, when they actually should fall more
or less in line.

NEIL BOWMAN
NINE: Green Sandpiper (Terschelling, The
Netherlands, 20 December 2007). The
plumage is similar to that of breeding birds,
though the olive-brown upperparts are paler,
and the crown almost uniform, lacking the
streaking of breeding individuals. The buffy
spots on the tertials, scapulars and coverts are
smaller. The breast is a more uniform greyish
brown, with slightly darker streaks, and is
sharply demarcated from the white
underparts, as in other plumages.

TEN: Solitary Sandpiper (Llanos, Venezuela, ARIE OUWERKERK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

February 2007). As with the other two species,
the plumage is similar to that of breeding
birds, though generally paler, with smaller and
fewer dots and notches on the upperparts. The
crown is more uniformly coloured, with less
obvious streaking, and the barring on the
flanks is just visible. This photo clearly shows
the extension of the primaries beyond the tail-
tip.
ALAN TATE

30
 ELEVEN: Wood Sandpiper (Lesvos, Greece, 19
April 2006). One diagnostic feature, the pale
underwing, is shown well in this photograph,
which also shows a hint of barring on the flanks
and the lack of almost black-and-white
contrast shown by the other two species. The
white uppertail coverts and barred tail are also
visible.
RICHARD BROOKS (WWW.RICHARD-BROOKS.CO.UK)

TWELVE: Green Sandpiper (Cley Marshes,

Norfolk, 1 September 2009). The dark
underwing, with extensive, even barring on the
underwing coverts and axillaries, is clearly
shown in this photo and is similar to that of
Solitary Sandpiper, though the white bars are
slightly narrower. The contrast of the white
underparts is also shown well.
KEVIN DU ROSE

THIRTEEN: Solitary Sandpiper (Indiana, USA, 17

August 2007). The dark underwing, with
extensive, even barring on the underwing
coverts and axillaries, is clearly shown in this
photo and is similar to that of the Green
Sandpiper, though the white bars are slightly
broader. Both are in marked contrast to the
pale underwing of Wood. The broadly barred
outer tail feathers are also distinct.
JOHN CASSADY

31
 DOUGLAS MCFARLANE
FOURTEEN: Wood Sandpiper (Summer Leys, Northamptonshire, 30 April 2011). Upperpart views in flight are another useful aid to
separation. This photo clearly shows the obvious white rump and uppertail coverts, as well as the narrowly barred tail. Another key
feature in flight is judging the toe length overlapping the tail, which is not easy when the legs hang down. However, here the legs
look long and the toes should project well beyond the tail-tip.

CHRIS UPSON

FIFTEEN: Green Sandpiper (Cley Marshes, Norfolk, 31 August 2009). The whiteness of the rump and uppertail coverts contrast well
with the dark, olive-green upperparts. Note that in Green Sandpiper, the broad barring on the tail often fades to white at the
edges; the tail on Solitary Sandpiper, in contrast, is generally visibly more heavily barred across the width and length of the
tail. The legs look shortish and the toes should more or less align with the tail-tip.
32
JEFF LEWIS (WWW.FLICKR.COM)

SIXTEEN: Solitary Sandpiper (North Carolina, USA, 8 May 2010). The heavily barred tail is obviously illustrated in this photo, and the
diagnostic dark centre to the tail, as well as the dark rump, can also be seen; at this angle a Green Sandpiper would be showing much
more white.
MARTIN GOODEY

SEVENTEEN: Solitary Sandpiper (St Mary’s, Scilly, 14 September 2011). Occasionally, key flight features can be observed on the
ground, when birds are stretching their wings. The diagnostic rump and tail pattern is clearly visible here, with a dark tail centre
and barred outer tail feathers.

33
 Ruff, Pectoral and
Sharp-tailed Sandpipers
Words by Andy Stoddart
MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.BIRDPHOTO.FI)

ONE: Female Ruff (Loviisa, Finland, 13 May 2009). This spring female Ruff shows the typical combination of short, slightly decurved
black bill, small head, long neck and rather large-looking body. Typically, it also looks quite plain with no defined face pattern and no
strong contrasts in the upperparts. Instead the scapulars, wing coverts and tertials are boldly ‘tiger striped’ with black and cinnamon.
The underparts grade smoothly from buff to white and the legs are yellowish.

With waders back on the move after breeding,

potential is rife for confusion among the passage
birds appearing on coastal wetlands and inland
marshes. In its many and varied guises, Ruff is a
frequent cause of puzzlement, either on its own or
sometimes with the much rarer Pectoral and Sharp-
tailed Sandpipers. Andy Stoddart looks at the issues
involved in separating these three species and
presents the answers.
34
 Basic Principles
T
he genus Calidris has seen something of a eliminate Ruff. Fortunately this is often straightforward.
taxonomic rearrangement in recent years. Always Summer-plumaged adult males will have black, white
a large genus, it has now become even bigger with or orange ruffs and orange legs, while winter adults will
the recent inclusion of Broad-billed and Buff-breasted look very pale and ‘pasty’, also with dull orange legs.
Sandpipers and Ruff. Autumn juveniles look very different and are most
Within this large genus, however, certain groupings similar to Buff-breasted Sandpiper (see Birdwatch 183:
are apparent, notably the stints and the slightly larger 28-30). Females can appear surprisingly small. Juveniles
‘Dunlin group’. Next up is an intriguing medium-sized of both sexes are always strongly washed with bright
trio: the commonly seen Ruff, the scarce Pectoral plain buff on the face and underparts, have a striking
Sandpiper, and its decidedly rare sister species Sharp- plain face and ‘staring’ eye and also show a very neat
tailed Sandpiper. upperparts pattern of solid blackish feathers with crisp
buff fringes. The legs are dark at this age.
Ruff Ruffs look very long winged in flight, with a distinctly
This wader is very common and familiar in Britain.
fluid wing action and strongly projecting feet. They are
Breeding right across northern Europe and northern
invariably silent.
Russia, it winters mainly in west Africa and is a
If your medium-sized Calidris won’t fit readily into
common sight on passage through western Europe.
any of these ‘boxes’ then it is perhaps time to consider
It is, however, notoriously variable, showing massive
differences between the sexes in size and plumage, a rarer alternative. Pectoral Sandpiper is an elegant
and also large differences between adults and bird, with a small, round head and long neck when
juveniles. standing alert. It is solid bodied, sometimes looking
The gaudily plumed adult males are unmistakable. ‘full chested’, and with an elegant attenuated rear
Potentially more problematic, however, are autumn end and longish legs. Although in reality only a little
juveniles, females of which may appear surprisingly larger than Dunlin, it gives the impression of being a
small and look much more ‘conventional’. The significantly larger bird.
identification difficulties should not be overstated, In terms of plumage it is a bird of bright tones and
however. Although it is rare to find two Ruffs which pleasing contrasts. Spring and autumn adults show a
look the same, this is in reality a highly distinctive moderately strong supercilium, some rufous hues in the
species. crown and upperparts, subtle white ‘V’s on the mantle
and scapulars and, of course, a sharply demarcated line
Pectoral Sandpiper of streaking across the breast which comes to a point at
This species has an extensive Arctic breeding the breast centre.
distribution. Though traditionally thought of as a North Autumn juveniles are even more crisply patterned,
American wader, its range extends across north-east with strikingly vivid orange fringes in the upperparts
Siberia too, as far west as the Yamal peninsula. Almost and very prominent white mantle and scapular ‘V’s. At
all birds winter in South America, however. all ages, the legs are greeny-yellow.
It occurs in Britain mainly as a scarce autumn In flight Pectoral Sandpiper looks long winged and
migrant, initially as adults in the east, but from mid- rather Ruff-like, though it lacks the strongly projecting
autumn onwards occurrences of juveniles in the west feet. Its call is a dry krrrt.
become the norm. This interesting occurrence pattern If your bird doesn’t quite fit this mould then it is
is a strong hint that we are seeing both Siberian birds time to consider the rarest option of all. Sharp-tailed
(those early in the season) and North American birds Sandpiper closely resembles Pectoral Sandpiper in size
(those later in the autumn). and is structurally only slightly distinct, so identification
Pectoral Sandpipers are also regularly found in should rest on a thorough analysis of the plumage.
spring. These are presumably birds returning north Spring and autumn adults show an arresting
following their displacement to western Europe and
combination of a bright, well-defined rufous ‘cap’
Africa the previous autumn. Pectoral Sandpiper is a
(always the brightest part of the bird), a striking whitish
realistic self-found target in May and again from July to
supercilium and a broad white eyering. The breast lacks
October.
the neatly streaked band of Pectoral Sandpiper, being
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper rather messily marked, the flanks have heavy transverse
This species is exclusively east Siberian. It is a very long- bars and chevrons and the undertail coverts feature
distance migrant, wintering mainly in New Guinea and V-shaped markings.
Australasia. It is a very rare visitor to Britain and western Autumn juveniles are the least familiar plumage in a
Europe, with only 31 British records and another seven British context. The head pattern resembles that of the
in Ireland to the end of 2011. adult but the breast is strongly washed orangey-buff and
Most British Sharp-tailed Sandpipers are autumn only very lightly streaked, while the flanks are plain white.
adults, a typical pattern for rare Siberian waders, with The upperparts have orange feather fringes, but these
only half a dozen juveniles recorded. Finding a Sharp- are never as bright as the crown, and narrow mantle and
tailed Sandpiper in Britain is an exceptional event, and scapular ‘V’s are also present. The legs are generally a
one which most of us will never experience. grey-green colour.
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper has a long-winged Ruff-
Identification like flight profile. Its call is a distinctive mellow
With any medium-sized Calidris the first step is to pleep.
35
TWO: Female Ruff (Lesvos, Greece, 14 April
2007). This spring female Ruff shares many of
the features of the bird on page 34. It appears
rather uniform overall, with a black beady eye
and little in the way of a face pattern. Its bill is
short and subtly decurved, and its legs, though
in shade, appear to be a dull yellow. The breast
is washed a uniform grey-buff which merges
gradually with the white belly, while the
upperparts show dark feather centres and
subtle brighter ‘tiger stripes’.

MARTIN SMART
THREE: Adult Pectoral Sandpiper (Alaska,
United States, 27 June 2011). This displaying
bird is showing off its key feature to maximum
effect here. The breast is finely marked with
dark and meets the white of the underparts in
a clean, sharply defined line. Unlike in Ruff, the
face pattern has contrast and is more
‘conventional’ – the cap is washed rufous, as
are the ear coverts, and the supercilium,
although streaked, remains prominent. The
upperparts and wing feathers are solidly black,
with rufous and white fringes merging to form
subtle mantle and scapular ‘V’s.

FOUR: Adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Heuksan RAY TIPPER

Do, South Korea, 27 April 2008). This spring bird
is structurally similar to Pectoral Sandpiper,
though it appears perhaps a little flatter
crowned. It is to the plumage that we must
turn to identify it. On this bird the strikingly
rufous cap is the brightest part of the plumage,
while the face pattern is dominated by a bold
white ‘spectacle’ eyering. This combination of
features should ring serious alarm bells!
Confirmation that this is a Sharp-tailed
Sandpiper comes from the bold arrowhead
markings which extend from the breast sides
all the way down the flanks.
AURELIEN AUDEVARD

36
 FIVE: Juvenile Ruff (Seaforth, Lancashire, 19
August 2003). This juvenile Ruff is in pristine
plumage. Note, however, its slightly ‘gawky’
structure compared with Pectoral and Sharp-
tailed Sandpipers. Ruffs always look as though
the head is too small for the body. See also the
typically ‘smooth’, featureless face pattern and
the uniform breast and underparts. Although
the upperparts and upperwing feathers show
blackish centres and brighter whitish and
rufous fringes, there are no prominent ‘V’s
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

along the sides of the mantle or the scapulars.

SIX: Juvenile Pectoral Sandpiper (Beddington,

London, 16 September 2010). This smart juvenile
Pectoral Sandpiper shows the typical bright
plumage contrasts of any juvenile calidrid. It is
washed rufous on both the crown and the
upperparts, and there are prominent white ‘V’s
on the mantle and scapulars. The bird also
looks more ‘conventional’ in structure, much
better proportioned than a young Ruff.
Crucially, the breast markings are shown to
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

good effect here. The breast is marked with

short dark vertical streaks and is sharply
separated from the clean white underparts.

SEVEN: Juvenile Sharp-tailed Sandpiper

(British Columbia, Canada, 16 September 2007).
This juvenile Sharp-tailed Sandpiper appears
even brighter than the equivalent plumage of
Pectoral. Typically, the eye is drawn to the
crown – easily the brightest part of the bird –
and also to the boldly spectacled appearance.
Additional confirmation of its identity comes
from the strongly orange-washed breast which
has no dark vertical marks in the centre and so
lacks the clean separation from the underparts
shown by its Nearctic cousin.
PAUL KUSMIN

37
EIGHT: Female Ruff (Martin Mere, Lancashire, 13
November 2003). This winter-plumaged Ruff
shows the typical ungainly structure and
‘undersized’ head, while the bright orange legs
shown by birds at this time of year readily
preclude the possibility of other calidrids and
invite comparison with Redshank instead.
Typically, the whole plumage appears rather
uniform, with a bland face pattern, rather ‘cold’
and ‘frosty’ upperparts and softly washed
underparts.

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

NINE: Adult Pectoral Sandpiper (Connecticut,
United States, 28 March 2007). This rather
drab-looking individual has yet to attain the
expected strong contrasts in the upperparts of
a spring bird, but the other features of Pectoral
Sandpiper are all present. The bird shows a
strong face pattern comprising a rufous crown,
warm-coloured ear coverts and a strong
supercilium, but the eyering is barely visible.
Key to the identification is the breast. Here we
see the characteristic pattern of dark vertical
marks and a clean divide from pure white
underparts.

TEN: Adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Osaka, JULIAN HOUGH

Japan, 30 September 2005). This autumn adult
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper is rapidly acquiring its
drabber winter plumage but the key clues are
still here. The crown is strikingly bright and, as
always, the face pattern is dominated by a bold
white eyering. Also unlike Pectoral Sandpiper,
the breast is softly washed orangey-buff and
instead of dark vertical marks we see bold rear-
pointing arrowheads which continue all the
way down the flanks as far as the undertail
coverts.
NOBUHIRO HASHIMOTO

38
MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.BIRDPHOTO.FI)

ELEVEN: Female Ruff (Utsjoki, Finland, 1 July 2011). This flying Ruff shows a typically uniform appearance relieved only by a neat, crisp
and narrow white wing-bar. The wings of Ruff look very long in flight though foreshortening in this image prevents a true
appreciation on this bird. It also shows the characteristic small, plain-looking head but, most importantly, the feet project strongly
beyond the tail-tip – a feature never shown by Pectoral or Sharp-tailed Sandpipers
MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.BIRDPHOTO.FI)

TWELVE: Adult Pectoral Sandpiper (Utö, Finland, 16 June 2011). This flying spring adult Pectoral Sandpiper shows a typical calidrid
head and body, a nicely contrasting face pattern, feet which do not stick out behind the tail-tip and – easy to see even in flight –
the characteristic contrast between a dark breast and clean bright white underparts. The upperwing pattern is, however, not
dissimilar to that of Ruff, while all three species can look long winged in flight.
39
MICHELLE AND PETER WONG

PAUL KUSMIN
THIRTEEN: Adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Po Toi Island, Hong FOURTEEN: Juvenile Pectoral and Sharp-tailed Sandpipers (British
Kong, 24 April 2005). This spring adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper is Columbia, Canada, 16 September 2007). This image of juveniles is
about to take off but can still be identified. As in all three species, even more instructive! Note the bright orange cap and big white
the wings look long and there is a weak white wing-bar. eyering of the Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (front bird), and also its
However, we can still see the very bright rufous cap and the bold strongly washed orangey breast with dark marks restricted to the
white ‘spectacles’, as well as a coarsely marked breast pattern. breast sides, leaving the breast-centre clear. The duller (though still
Shown to excellent effect here are the flanks and their long line bright) crown, minimal eyering and sharply contrasting breast of the
of bold, dark arrowhead markings. Pectoral Sandpiper are equally obvious.

MARTIN CAKE

FIFTEEN: Adult Pectoral and Sharp-tailed Sandpipers (Kogolup Lake, Western Australia, 13 January 2011). This portrait is highly instructive.
The Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (right) shows a more pot-bellied and flat-crowned appearance, but it is feather detail which will provide the
ultimate confirmation of its identity. Though in winter plumage, the Sharp-tailed shows a more strongly capped appearance and a
bolder white eyering, while its breast is much less distinctly marked.
40
 Ruff, Buff-breasted
Sandpiper and
Upland Sandpiper
Words by Dominic Mitchell
MENNO VAN DUIJN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

ONE: Ruff (Katwijk, The Netherlands, 11 September 2015). Juvenile Ruffs can be quite variable in plumage, as these two individuals
suggest, with some a richly saturated buff and others paler and/or greyer. In all plumages bare-part colour also varies, making this
species something of an identification pitfall for less experienced birders. However, with familiarity its jizz alone is distinctive enough
to eliminate other species: the head and bill profile on a long-legged and big body, with long tertials and little or no primary
projection, give it a unique character.

The wind has picked up, waders are on the move

and your rarity radar is working overtime. After
a run of westerlies, you glimpse something
interesting on the fields at your local patch – was it
a Ruff, or something much rarer? At times like this
it pays to know the key features to home in on, so
Dominic Mitchell takes a closer look at the more
familiar candidate and the other two contenders
which, with a great deal of good fortune, could
also be in the frame at this time of year.
41
 Basic Principles
W
hen it comes to finding your own rarities, than a rarity in Britain, it is a mainly autumn visitor
October is the best month to be out in the in small numbers, principally to the South-West,
field. Migration is in full swing and, unlike having first been recorded in England in 1826 and
spring, unusual species can appear from all points of Scotland as recently as 1957 – though atypically both
the compass. Shorebirds offer significant potential for
of these records were inland, in Cambridgeshire and
the sharp eyed, and among the massed ranks of adults
Lanarkshire respectively.
and juveniles of the expected species there is always a
chance of finding something scarcer, if not downright There was a recent surge in numbers in Britain from
rare. 2005 to 2012, when average annual totals reached 56,
The three species under the spotlight this month but occurrences have since fallen by more than half
are not your typical waders. In terms of habitat they to a current average of 24 per year (White and Kehoe
have, to a greater or lesser extent, strong associations 2019). In Ireland, the species is similarly considered a
with grassland, the rarer two especially favouring scarce passage migrant to south and west coasts from
this habitat when they reach Britain and Ireland. In July to October.
appearance all three are distinct to the well-trained During their 30,000-km round trip between High
eye, but there is still potential for confusion.
Arctic breeding grounds and southern South American
winter quarters, migrating Buff-breasts mostly use
Ruff
With its spectacular lekking behaviour and male a ‘corridor’ across the eastern Great Plains of North
breeding plumage, Ruff is both unique and America. In autumn, however, small numbers –
charismatic. Although half of the world population principally juveniles – also travel down the Pacific coast
breeds in Europe – some 265,000-1,650,000 calling or as well as to New England, from where some take
lekking males – it is a rare breeder in Britain, with just a direct oceanic route to north-east South America,
four confirmed records in the 10 years to 2015 (Holling sometimes encountering Atlantic depressions en
et al 2017). route.
Ruff is better known as a migrant. The first ‘autumn’
In Europe Buff-breasts often appear in grassy
adults – mainly males, which are not involved in
habitats, evoking their North American prairie stopover
parenting – appear in July, followed by juveniles
in August. One estimate put the peak number of sites. Airfields, pasture and even golf courses can
migrants at about 1,300 in September (Pollitt et al 2000 produce birds, but there are also records from coastal
in Wernham et al 2002), though this will vary from marshes. Most occur between late August and mid-
year to year. Ruff is a rather local winterer, a habit first October, with September the key month.
noted as recently as 1934, and about 800 are thought
to be present between November and January, mainly Upland Sandpiper
in England. Ruffs breed on lowland marshes and wet Another North American grassland specialist, Upland
grassland, but also occur in other wetland habitats on Sandpiper is by far the rarest of this trio. It has a more
migration.
southerly summer distribution than Buff-breasted,
Adult males in spring and early summer are
the bulk of its breeding range lying in south-central
adorned with the lavish and variably coloured neck
feathering from which the species gets its English Canada and the Great Plains of interior United
name. So distinctive and unmistakable are they that States, and eastwards to New England. It also breeds
no discussion is needed on this plumage – our focus is disjunctly west of the Rockies, and in north-west
on the duller non-breeding males and, particularly, the Canada and Alaska.
smaller females. It winters in the grasslands of southern South America,
often completing this significant journey within a week,
Buff-breasted Sandpiper but compared to Buff-breasted Sandpiper the species
Breeding in Arctic Canada and northern Alaska, with
is far less prone to Atlantic vagrancy – there are just
an outlying population on Wrangel Island, north-
47 records from Britain and 12 from Ireland, the great
east Russia, Buff-breasted Sandpiper has a world
population estimated at just 15,300-56,000 individuals majority of them in September and October. About 40
(BirdLife International 299). This underlines the steep per cent of British records since 1950 are from Scilly,
decline that followed years of large-scale overhunting, where it is an October speciality (Hudson et al 2012).
the species formerly numbering in the hundreds of Considered sister to the curlews and underlining its
thousands to millions. Sadly, the population continues uniqueness, Upland Sandpiper is placed in its own
to decline, and it is now classified as Near Threatened. monotypic genus. Similarly, Ruff and Buff-breasted
All the more remarkable, then, that Buff-breasted Sandpiper were until recently also the sole members
Sandpiper occurs in these islands as frequently as respectively of Philomachus and Tryngites, but are now
it does. Classified as a scarce migrant rather
both considered to be Calidris sandpipers.
42
 REFERENCES
• Balmer, D, Gillings, S, Caffrey, B, Swann, B, Downie, I, and Fuller, R. 2013. Bird Atlas 2007-2011: the Breeding and Wintering Birds of Britain and Ireland. BTO
Books, Thetford.
• BirdLife International. 2019. IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from www.birdlife.org on 19/08/2019.
• Brown, A, and Grice, P. 2005. Birds in England. T & A D Poyser, London.
• Forrester, R, and Andrews, I (eds). 2007. The Birds of Scotland. Volume 1. Scottish Ornithologists’ Club, Aberlady.
• Holling, M, and the Rare Breeding Birds Panel. 2017. Rare breeding birds in the UK in 2015. British Birds 110: 706-754.
• Holt, C, and the Rarities Committee. 2018. Report on rare birds in Great Britain in 2017. British Birds 111: 557-627.
• Houston, C S, Jackson, C, and Bowen Jr, D E. 2011. Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), version 2.0. In The Birds of North America (A F Poole, Editor).
Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca. https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.580.
• Hudson, N, and the Rarities Committee. 2012. Report on rare birds in Great Britain in 2011. British Birds 105: 556-627.
• McCarty, J P, Wolfenbarger, L L, Laredo, C D, Pyle, P, and Lanctot, R B. 2017. Buff-breasted Sandpiper (Calidris subruficollis), version 2.0. In The Birds of North
America (A F Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca. https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.bubsan.02.
• Mitchell, D. 2017. Birds of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East: an Annotated Checklist. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
• Wernham, C, Toms, M, Marchant, J, Clark, J, Siriwardena, G, and Baillie, S. 2002. The Migration Atlas: Movements of the Birds of Britain and Ireland. T & A D
Poyser, London.
• White, S, and Kehoe, C. 2019. Report on scarce migrant birds in Britain in 2017. Part 1: non-passerines. British Birds 112: 444-468.

TWO: Ruff (Titchwell RSPB, Norfolk, 24

September 2018). In flight, Ruff is immediately
separable from Buff-breasted and Upland
Sandpipers by the broad white sides to the
uppertail coverts. Note also the narrow white
wing-bar on the inner wing. A further
distinction, especially useful when flying birds
are seen only from below, is that the toes
project significantly beyond the tail tip. This
rather short-billed and compact individual is a
juvenile female.
JAMES LOWEN (WWW.JAMESLOWEN.COM)

THREE: Buff-breasted Sandpiper (St Mary’s,

Scilly, 2 October 2016). Buff-breasted Sandpiper
looks somewhat uniform on the wing, with the
unmarked rump and uppertail coverts the
same colour as the mantle, scapular and wing
coverts. The buff colour on the head extends
down the breast to the lower underparts and,
though not visible here, contrasts strongly
from below with the white underwings, which
have dark crescents on the primary coverts.
JIM ALMOND (WWW.SHROPSHIREBIRDER.CO.UK)

43
 VINCENT LEGRAND
FOUR: Upland Sandpiper (Corvo, Azores, 11 October 2016). This quirky flight shot looks almost as if it was taken on the breeding
grounds, but in fact this Upland Sandpiper is a young bird on its first migration and way off course in the Atlantic. The rump and
uppertail coverts are barely visible in this side view but, like Buff-breasted Sandpiper, they lack white and are concolorous with the
rest of the upperparts – a feature shared with other Nearctic shorebirds such as Hudsonian Whimbrel and Long-billed Curlew, but
contrasting with their Old World counterparts.

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

FIVE: Ruff (Seaforth, Lancashire, 19 August 2003). This juvenile Ruff shows the species’ distinctive jizz well: relatively big bodied and
small headed, with a medium-short bill which droops slightly towards the tip, and a ‘lanky’ gait. The beautiful dark-centred feathers
on the upperparts are fringed chestnut-buff or whitish, the head often appears slightly capped, and the variable buff tones on
the ‘face’, neck and breast can appear washed out, as here, or more strongly saturated (compare this bird with those in
photo one).
44
 SIX: Buff-breasted Sandpiper (Davidstow
Airfield, Cornwall, 5 October 2017). In juvenile
plumage, Buff-breasted Sandpiper is
beautifully scalloped above and subtly shaded
with buff below, this colour becoming stronger
on the neck and ‘face’. The upperpart feathers
have dark centres or shafts and subterminal
bars and, unlike Ruff, are all fringed white. Note
the short black bill, prominent dark eye, yellow
legs and dark spotting on the breast sides, a
feature shown by this species in all plumages.
KIT DAY

SEVEN: Upland Sandpiper (Ouessant, France, 1

November 2005). With good views like this,
Upland Sandpiper is unlikely to be mistaken for
either Ruff or Buff-breasted Sandpiper. Its
genetic affinity with the curlews is hinted at in
both its plumage, with neck and breast
streaking and flank chevrons, and its structure,
but the straight bill, beady eye, plain face and
disproportionately long tail give it a truly
unique jizz. The short, straight bill is extensively
yellow or yellow-orange on the upper
mandible, creating a distinct two-tone
impression, unlike juvenile Ruff or Buff-
breasted Sandpiper.
AURELIEN AUDEVARD

EIGHT: Ruff (Martin Mere WWT, Lancashire, 16

November 2003). In winter, male Ruffs are a far
cry from their lavishly plumed, colourful former
selves. Some are rather plain but others, like
this bird, show more extensive white
feathering on the head, neck and underparts,
this variation presumably being linked to
particular breeding plumages. The upperpart
feathers are grey with dark shaft streaks,
variably darker feather centres and whitish or
buff fringes. At any time of year, male Ruff is
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

unlikely to be mistaken for either Buff-

breasted or Upland Sandpipers.

45
NINE: Ruff (Martin Mere WWT, Lancashire, 13
November 2003). Male and female Ruffs (or
Reeves, as they are sometimes termed) differ
significantly in size, the former sometimes
matching Upland Sandpiper in length and the
smallest examples of the latter approaching
Buff-breasted Sandpiper. Despite an average
size difference between the sexes of about 20
per cent, small males and large females can
also appear similar in bulk, though may not
often be seen together on migration and in

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

wintering areas, as non-breeding Ruffs are
often segregated by sex.

TEN: Buff-breasted Sandpiper (Alaska, USA, 18

June 2018). Adult Buff-breasts are seen much
less frequently than juveniles in western Europe,
but birds in this plumage do occur. In fact all
plumages are similar, but breeding adults have
longer scapulars and the upperpart feathers
have broader buff, not white, fringes. The jizz of
this species is characteristic, being more evenly
proportioned than Ruff, with shorter legs, a
short, straight bill and a rather square head.

GLENN BARTLEY/BIA
ELEVEN: Upland Sandpiper (Texas, USA, 16
April 2007). Records of Upland Sandpiper in
Europe at any time of year outside autumn are
truly exceptional, but spring birds are a sight to
behold: a cryptic cream-and-brown blend of
streaks, chevrons, anchor markings and
transverse barring, with a hint of warm buff to
add a dash of colour. The structure and gait of
this grassland specialist is unique among
waders, and the species is a worthy find
anywhere outside its expected range.
BRIAN E SMALL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

46
 Dunlin, Curlew Sandpiper
and White-rumped
Sandpiper
Words by Andy Stoddart
HOWARD BOTTRELL (WWW.ECOVISUALS.COM)

ONE: Dunlin, left, and Curlew Sandpiper (Upper Tamar Lake, Cornwall, 14 September 2006). These two species are roughly similar in
size and can often be seen together, though the former averages slightly smaller. This portrait enables the structural features of each
to be compared. Although this particular Dunlin is a long-billed individual, its bill is still a fraction heavier at the tip and the base than
that of the accompanying Curlew Sandpiper. Note also the latter’s rather attenuated rear end and slightly longer exposed tibia.

August is the month when waders begin returning

in earnest, with early post-breeding adults and
failed breeders followed by juveniles. Among the
myriad identification difficulties presented will be
those of the smaller calidrids, and here we examine
three species with plenty of potential for confusion:
Dunlin, Curlew Sandpiper and White-rumped
Sandpiper. Andy Stoddart guides you through the
pitfalls and diagnostic features of non-breeding
plumages, so that you can pick out each with
confidence at your favourite shorebird hot-spot.
47
 Basic Principles
T
his article focuses on three small shorebirds: autumn birds may have come on an eastern route.
Dunlin, Curlew Sandpiper and White-rumped By contrast, the arrival pattern of late autumn birds
Sandpiper. The first is very common, the second is far more suggestive of a direct transatlantic passage.
scarce and the third rare though annual in small Despite these occurrence patterns, however, this is
numbers. There is plenty of scope for confusion among a species which has the potential to occur anywhere
them, particularly in non-breeding plumages. in Britain (even inland) between July and November.
Spring records are very few.
Dunlin
Dunlin is the commonest of all our small waders, and a Identification
regular passage migrant and winter visitor around our Dunlin is the key species, and an understanding of
coasts, as well as a breeder in some of our upland areas. its distinctive ‘jizz’ and plumages is vital if we are to
This is the default small wader in Britain, but its near progress to finding its scarcer and rarer cousins. At all
year-round presence masks a somewhat complex seasons, Dunlin presents a highly distinctive profile:
status. Three forms occur regularly. The subspecies pot bellied, round backed, hunched, neckless, rather
schinzii breeds in Britain and Ireland in small numbers droopy billed and a little truncated at the rear end.
and also in south-east Greenland, Iceland and around Even at range, this characteristic shape is striking once
the Baltic. It winters in West Africa. It is these birds that learned.
comprise many of our migrant Dunlin in spring and In spring, summer and early autumn, but depending
again in late summer and early autumn. Performing on the form, a variable black belly is evident, as are
a similar migration is the north-east Greenland form ochre or more orange feather fringes in the mantle
arctica. In winter, however, our migrant Dunlin are and scapulars. The form schinzii is dull with a small
replaced by larger numbers of wintering alpina from belly patch, moderate breast streaking and dull
Scandinavia and north-west Russia. upperparts fringes, while the rarer arctica is small with
pale and narrow upperparts fringes, reduced breast
Curlew Sandpiper streaking and an even smaller belly patch. Both can
This species is exclusively a High Arctic Siberian look very different from the typically brighter alpina.
breeder, with a range extending from the Yamal This form shows a large and solid black belly patch,
Peninsula in the west to Chukotka in the east. It has heavy breast streaking and bright orange upperparts
an extensive winter range which stretches from West fringes.
Africa to Australia. In the eastern part of its winter All forms wear rapidly, however, and the adults can
range it can be one of the commonest small waders, just look dark by mid-summer. In winter adults and
but in Britain and western Europe it is a relatively first-winter birds, the typical drab ‘mud-brown and
scarce passage migrant, especially so in spring. For white’ appearance is the norm. Juveniles are crisply
most of us this is a bird of autumn, occurring typically marked above, with clear pale feather fringes and,
between July and October, with peak numbers in unusually in small waders, distinctive smudgy black
September. blobs along the upper flanks, though these disappear
Adults come first, mainly in August, while juveniles during the autumn as the birds moult into their first-
arrive in September. In most years numbers are winter plumage. The call is easily learnt – a rather
modest, and mainly confined to eastern coasts, but drawn-out descending treeep.
some years – presumably of high breeding success – Curlew Sandpiper is best picked out on size and jizz.
see much more significant influxes of juveniles. The Compared with Dunlin, it is larger and characteristically
species is exceptional in winter. longer and slimmer billed, longer legged and
slimmer bodied – altogether a much more elegant
White-rumped Sandpiper bird. Summer adults are stunning, with fiery orange
This species breeds from northern Alaska east through heads and underparts recalling that other High Arctic
northern Canada as far as Southampton Island. It Siberian wader, Bar-tailed Godwit.
is a very long-distance migrant, wintering in the Winter adults and first-winters are plain grey-brown
south-east of South America, including the Falklands. above and white below, much more like a Dunlin, and
Unsurprisingly, therefore, although still rare, it is are best identified by structural characters. Juveniles
among the commonest of the North American waders are very different, however: bright white below, peachy
to reach Britain. There is also a small Siberian breeding breasted and marked above with beautiful crisp,
population believed to be the source of many of our ‘frosty’ white feather fringes. Although rarely necessary
east coast records. to secure an identification, a flight view will show a
Two types of arrival can be discerned: an early prominent square white rump patch. The call is a
autumn peak of adults, largely focused on North Sea distinctive rich chreet.
coasts, and a late autumn peak of juveniles/first- White-rumped Sandpiper is a little smaller than
winters with a more westerly distribution. This
Dunlin, but still significantly larger than the otherwise
pattern suggests that at least some of our early
similar stints. Its bill is short and its legs generally
48
 appear short to medium length (though this is partly Winter adults and first-winters are, like all of our trio,
an effect of their stance, for they can sometimes look a somewhat anonymous greyish colour, but juveniles
surprisingly long in the leg). are beautifully marked with white and rufous fringes in
Most striking is the shape of the back end: long and the upperparts and a narrow, stint-like ‘V’ at the mantle
slim with a good projection of primaries beyond both sides. Limited streaking in the flanks is present in all
the tips of the tertials and the tail-tip. Summer adults plumages. The clinching feature is the narrow band of
have pale rufous feather fringes in the crown and white across the uppertail coverts. Despite its name,
upperparts and streaks and arrowhead markings in the this species is not white rumped! The call is a thin,
flanks leading back from a streaky breast-band. high-pitched jeeet.

TWO: Juvenile Dunlin (Salthouse, Norfolk, 12

September 2005). This young Dunlin shows the
typical rather hunched, almost neckless
posture, thick-looking bill and short rear end.
Its wing feathers are fully juvenile with neat
pale fringes forming a scaly pattern, but new
grey adult-type feathers are already present in
the scapulars and the mantle. This appearance
is typical of birds in the transitional stage from
juvenile to first-winter plumage. Note also the
prominent blurry dark spotting in the
underparts, a characteristic feature of juvenile
Dunlin.
ROBIN CHITTENDEN (WWW.ROBINCHITTENDEN.CO.UK)

THREE: Juvenile Curlew Sandpiper

(Terschelling, The Netherlands, 1 September
2008). In this beautiful portrait, note the
elegant proportions created by the long, slim,
fine-tipped bill and the slight primary
projection beyond the tail-tip creating a
somewhat attenuated rear end. Equally
striking is the crisp, frosty appearance to the
whole of the upperparts, each feather having a
neat whitish fringe. With no grey adult-type
feathers yet appearing above, this bird is in full
juvenile plumage. Note also that, in contrast
with juvenile Dunlin, the underparts are a pure,
clean white with just a peachy flush to the
breast.
ARIE OUWERKERK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

49
FOUR: Juvenile White-rumped Sandpiper (São
Miguel, Azores, 10 October 2012). The relatively
stumpy bill, shortish legs and very long rear
end with the primary tips extending well
beyond both the tail-tip and the tertials
identify this as a White-rumped Sandpiper. The
crisply patterned wing feathers age it as a
juvenile but, as with the Dunlin in image two,
the moult to first-winter plumage is well under
way, with most of the rusty-fringed mantle and

DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

scapular feathers already replaced with dull
grey adult-type feathers. Also visible here is
fine streaking in the upper flanks – a typical
character of White-rumped Sandpiper at all
ages.

FIVE: Dunlin (Salthouse, Norfolk, 11 September

2005). This bird shows the species’ typical
dumpy, rotund and neckless outline. It is an
advanced juvenile bird nearing the end of the
moult to its characteristically rather plain
greyish winter plumage, although some traces
of its juvenile finery can still be seen in the
rusty hues in the crown sides and ear coverts,
and also in the orange tips to the few
remaining scapulars, as well as all the wing
coverts.

SIX: Curlew Sandpiper (Doha, Qatar, 29 ALAN TATE

December 2014). This individual is in full winter
plumage. Although looking essentially plain
grey and somewhat featureless, it is still
separable from Dunlin even without a flight
view. Very obvious here are its slim, fine-tipped
bill, slightly attenuated rear end and long legs
with plenty of exposed tibia. Most Curlew
Sandpipers seen in Britain are summer
plumage adults in early autumn and juveniles
in mid-autumn, so birds like this are most likely
to be encountered on a winter foreign holiday.
CARLOS BOCOS

50
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

SEVEN: Adult White-rumped Sandpiper (Flores, Azores, 14 October 2013). The really long primary projection is the most immediately
striking feature of this bird, extending noticeably beyond the tail-tip and especially so beyond the tip of the longest tertial. The
shortish legs and short bill add further confirmation that this is a White-rumped Sandpiper. Once moulted into winter plumage,
autumn adults are typically, as here, a rather dull and uniform grey, but note the presence of fine streaking in the upper flanks
leading back from the breast streaking – a pattern never shown by either Dunlin or Curlew Sandpiper.
JULIAN HOUGH

EIGHT: Adult White-rumped Sandpiper (Connecticut, USA, 4 July 2011). Even in breeding plumage this species is a relatively subdued
creature, but there are subtle rusty hues here in the crown and ear coverts and also in the fringes to the mantle and scapular
feathers. Perhaps most obvious yet again is the fine streaking in the flanks on this individual, extending to the rear flanks as well.
Confirmation of this bird’s identity is provided by the shortish bill and, most importantly, by the long primary projection
giving the typically strongly attenuated rear end.
51
NINE: Juvenile Dunlin (Seaforth, Lancashire, 28
August 2010). The warm buff plumage hues,
crisp fringes to the wing coverts and
prominent blurry blackish spotting in the
underparts are sufficient to identify this bird as
a young Dunlin. Its dumpy, unremarkable
proportions are also evident here. It would,
however, need to turn around a little to reveal
the prominent dark centre to its rump and
uppertail coverts – a feature common to most
small calidrids, but not to either of the two

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

confusion species discussed here.

TEN: Juvenile Curlew Sandpiper (Cuckmere,

East Sussex, 10 September 2012). This ‘wings
up’ Curlew Sandpiper is showing off its
characteristic white rump. Typically, this patch
is quite extensive, covering both the lower
rump and the uppertail coverts, and it appears
in flight as a large square patch. The longish,
fine-tipped bill adds further confirmation of its
identity, while the peachy flush to the breast
and the just-visible scaly-looking upper mantle
identify it as a fresh autumn juvenile.

ELEVEN: White-rumped Sandpiper (right) and PETER WILSON

Dunlin (Lodmoor, Dorset, 17 July 2013). These
two species can look remarkably similar, but
note the former’s rather short-looking bill,
slightly weak-looking wing-bar and, most
obviously, a narrow white ‘rump’ – actually
restricted to a white ’horseshoe’ across the
uppertail coverts, which contrasts sharply with
a rather ‘stuck-on’-looking dark tail.
BRETT SPENCER

52
 TWELVE: Juvenile White-rumped Sandpiper (Terceira, Azores, 21
October 2012). This individual is showing off its rear to better
effect. Note that the rump itself is actually dark and that it is only
the uppertail coverts which are white. The resultant white ‘band’
therefore sits across the base of the tail and contrasts very
sharply with the blackish tail-feathers. A short-looking bill and
rather weak upperwing bar are also visible here.
STEFAN PFÜTZKE (WWW.GREEN-LENS.DE)

Find your own sandpipers

Dunlin is one of our most numerous waders, and can be found in huge flocks in winter at
many coastal mudflats on any river estuary. When the tide is in, birds can form
substantial roosts, and can also be seen in smaller groups flying along the shoreline
between sites. The locations of roosts are sometimes traditional, but can also change
depending on conditions. On migration it is plentiful, and can also turn up inland, even
on small reservoirs and gravel pits from time to time. Often as not in these kinds of
locations, familiarity with its call will alert you to a bird’s presence, as the species is easily
flushed. As Dunlin is the default small calidrid, virtually any wetland reserve close to the
coast with some exposed mud should produce birds in autumn.
It is during migration that Dunlin flocks are also likely to pull in the odd Curlew
Sandpiper and even White-rumped Sandpiper on occasion. Curlew Sandpiper is less
likely inland due to both scarcity and habits, but good sites for the species in late
summer and autumn include Pennington Marshes, Hants (SZ 3292), Rye Harbour NR,
East Sussex (TQ 9318), Oare Marshes KWT (TR 0064) and Cliffe Pools RSPB (TQ 7176),
Kent, Minsmere RSPB, Suffolk (TM 4766), Titchwell RSPB (TF 7544) and Snettisham RSPB
(TF 6432), Norfolk, Frodsham Marsh, Cheshire (SJ 5078), Leighton Moss RSPB, Lancashire
(SD 4775), Musselburgh Lagoons, Lothian (NT 3573) and Belfast Lough RSPB, Co Antrim (J
3675); many other sites can also produce the species in small numbers.
White-rumped Sandpiper, though very scarce, is expected in small numbers each
autumn, so it is good to always have the species on your radar if visiting a coastal wader
hot-spot, particulary if water levels are low and there has been some national shorebird
movement. There are no really regular sites for the species, but recent records have been
from sites as widespread as Tresco, Scilly (SV 8914), Beacon Ponds, East Yorkshire (TA
4117), Frampton Marsh RSPB, Lincolnshire (TF 3538), Cley Marshes NWT, Norfolk (TG 0544)
and Papa Westray, Orkney (HY 4952). Owing to the species having a small breeding
population in eastern Siberia as well as North America, individuals are almost as likely
to turn up on either coast, despite its reputation as a ‘Yank’.
53
FREE 30-DAY TRIAL TO THE UK'S

For just one price, you

will have access to:
 The very latest breaking news and
sightings (our service is updated for
16 hours a day during the summer
and 15 hours during the winter
months – more than any other
provider);
 View sighting information on your
phone, tablet or web browser making
the service accessible wherever you
may be;
Receive text alerts*;
 Search the British and Irish Records
Archive;
 Continue receiving Birdwatch
magazine to keep abreast of all the
latest news and expert reviews**

Small print: *Bird News Ultimate

memberships include 100 free
text alerts free of charge. For Bird
News Pro, this can be added at
£10 per 100 texts. **Birdwatch is
included with Bird News Ultimate
memberships only.
NO.1. BIRD SIGHTING SERVICE
Join thousands across Britain and Ireland who trust BirdGuides
as their chosen service, delivering efficient and reliable bird
sighting news 7 days a week. Never miss a mega again!

Start your 30-day free trial today

Go to
www.bit.ly/birdguides30
We are so confident with the quality of our service that we offer a 30-day free
trial to all new members. There’s no catch and no payment details required.
 Dunlin, White-rumped
and Baird’s Sandpipers
Words by Andy Stoddart
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

ONE: Juvenile Dunlin (Crosby, Lancashire, 3 August 2008). This fabulous portrait shows the features of a juvenile Dunlin to perfection.
It is characteristically hunched, neckless and dumpy, with a rather droopy-looking bill. The upperparts feathers are all very fresh with
neat pale fringes and the underparts are marked with heavy dark breast streaking and an area of black blotching on the upper
breast-sides which mimics the black patch of summer plumage. Typically, the face is weakly marked and rather bland.

Small sandpipers of the genus Calidris are a perennial

birding headache – they seem to possess an endless
pool of age-related and seasonal plumages. This is
particularly true of three frustratingly similar
members of the genus seen in Britain, one common
and two annual but rather rare. However, do not fear,
says Andy Stoddart – careful observation of their
structure, jizz and certain key tracts of feathers
should enable you to call them with confidence, and
even find your own of the rarer two.
56
 Basic Principles
D
unlin is the most regular of our small waders, September), but spring records are not unprecedented.
a common migrant and winter visitor around
our coasts. However, among the flocks of this Identification
familiar bird may be found, very occasionally, much Dunlin is the key species. This is the dominant small
rarer calidrids. Of these, the most Dunlin-like are two
calidrid and an understanding of its distinctive jizz and
predominantly Nearctic visitors: White-rumped and
Baird’s Sandpipers. But, having searched for these plumages is vital if we are to progress to finding its
two rarities, our task is still not complete: the Dunlin rarer cousins.
themselves also warrant study. Dunlin presents a distinctive profile – round backed,
hunched, rather droopy billed and a little truncated
Dunlin at the rear end. In winter, even at range, this striking
This is the default small wader in Britain. Although the shape, combined with an unremarkable mud-brown
species may be encountered almost all year round, its and white plumage, is a characteristic sight along our
seemingly constant presence masks a much greater
shorelines.
complexity.
Three subspecies occur in Britain. The form which In spring, summer and early autumn the jizz remains
breeds here, albeit in small numbers, is schinzii. This the same but, depending on the taxon, a variable
subspecies also breeds in south-east Greenland, Iceland black belly is evident, as are ochre or more orange
and around the Baltic, and winters in West Africa. It feather fringes in the mantle and scapulars. Dullest
is these birds which comprise many of our migrant is schinzii, with a small belly patch, moderate breast
Dunlin in spring and again in late summer and early streaking and dull upperparts fringes. The rarer arctica
autumn. Performing a similar migration is the north-east is small with pale and narrow upperparts fringes,
Greenland form arctica. In winter, however, our migrant
reduced breast streaking and an even smaller belly
Dunlin are replaced by hordes of wintering alpina from
Scandinavia and northern Russia. patch. Both can look very different from the typically
Further afield, other Dunlin forms can be found, brighter alpina. This form shows a large and solid black
some of which have the potential to reach Britain. Of belly patch, heavy breast streaking and bright orange
particular relevance are Nearctic hudsonia and north- upperparts fringes. All forms wear rapidly, however,
east Asian sakhalina. Though neither form is on the and can look dark by mid-summer.
British list, birds showing at least some characters of All Dunlin forms have a similar juvenile plumage,
either subspecies have already reached us. sharing – unusually for a calidrid – rather distinctive
smudgy black blobs along the upper flanks. These
White-rumped Sandpiper
This species breeds from northern Alaska east through disappear during the autumn as the birds moult into a
northern Canada as far as Southampton Island. It is a more adult-like first-winter plumage. In this plumage
very long-distance migrant, wintering in south-eastern hudsonia may show neat rows of dots along the flanks.
South America, including the Falklands. Unsurprisingly, Once familiar with Dunlin, we can move on to hunt
this is among the commonest of the North American for the Nearctic rarities. Both White-rumped and
waders to reach Britain. Baird’s Sandpipers are likely to attract attention by their
Two types of arrival can be discerned: an early structure. In comparison with Dunlin they are slim, long
autumn peak of adults, largely focused on North
bodied and strikingly long winged, with a significant
Sea coasts, and a late autumn peak of juveniles/first-
winters with a more westerly distribution. This pattern extension of primaries beyond the tertials and the tail tip.
suggests that at least some of our early autumn birds They also share a slightly short-legged appearance.
may have come via an eastern route. By contrast, Closer examination will reveal plumage differences
the arrival locations of late autumn birds is far more too. In summer plumage, White-rumped Sandpiper
suggestive of a direct transatlantic path. is pale and frosty with rufous hues in the ear coverts
Despite these occurrence patterns, however, this is and upperparts, and lines of streaks along the flanks.
a species which has the potential to occur anywhere Juveniles are also bright with a frosty appearance
in Britain (even inland) between July and November.
and bright chestnut and white feather fringes in the
Spring records are, however, very few.
upperparts.
Baird’s Sandpiper Winter adults and first-winters are less distinctive
Baird’s has a larger breeding range than White- and appear greyer and somewhat featureless, but
rumped, extending from north-west Greenland to have a strong face pattern, some residual streaking
north-east Siberia. It too is a great migrant, wintering in in the upper flanks and, as in every plumage, a neat
central and southern South America. Both on passage ‘horsehoe’ of white across the uppertail coverts (but
and in winter it often frequents dry, inland habitats not the actual rump).
and is less restricted to the coast than most calidrids.
Baird’s Sandpipers are typically less contrasting: a
Though rarer in Britain than White-rumped
Sandpiper, a few reach us each year. Arrivals are bright buff colour above and white, with unmarked
typically in the west, but this is also a species which flanks, below. In juvenile plumage, the feather fringes
could occur anywhere, including inland. As with White- in the mantle, scapulars and wing coverts are crisp
rumped Sandpiper, most will be in autumn (typically and even, giving a typically ‘scaled’ appearance.
57
TWO: Adult Dunlin (Terschelling, The
Netherlands, 5 July 2004). Dunlin are
transformed in spring from grey anonymity
into gorgeous colourful birds. Though the
precise appearance varies according to form,
all show an arresting combination of black
belly, breast streaking and dark upperpart
feathers fringed with bright chestnut,
especially in the crown and scapulars. The bird
pictured here is not as bright as some, but it is
highly attractive nonetheless.

ARIE OUWERKERK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

THREE: Adult White-rumped Sandpiper
(Connecticut, USA, 26 May 2011). With its rather
short bill and legs and long rear end, this bird is
clearly no Dunlin. These are the typical
structural characters of White-rumped
Sandpiper. Like summer-plumaged Dunlin,
there are bright chestnut fringes in the crown
and upperparts, but there is no sign of a black
belly patch and, characteristically, the breast
streaking continues in a broad band along the
flanks, even reaching the sides of the undertail
coverts. Towards the rear the streaking takes
the form of chevrons or arrowheads. There is
also a subtle ‘V’ at the mantle sides. Birds with
this appearance can also be encountered in
early autumn.

JULIAN HOUGH
FOUR: Adult Baird’s Sandpiper (New Mexico,
USA, 16 May 2007). This spring-plumaged
Baird’s Sandpiper resembles a White-rumped
Sandpiper in structure. It is small headed, short
billed and short legged, and very long winged.
However, the bill is a little straighter and not
quite so deep at the base. The plumage is not
as bright as White-rumped Sandpiper, looking
more uniformly patterned and lacking ‘V’s at
the mantle sides. Note also that the breast
streaking ends in a neat band and the flanks
are clean white, totally lacking the markings
shown by White-rumped Sandpiper.
GERRY OLDENETTEL

58
 FIVE: First-winter Dunlin (Crosby, Lancashire, 9
January 2009). The portly, hunched, short-
reared, droopy-billed and somewhat mouse-
like jizz of this bird should render it instantly
identifiable as a Dunlin, an identification
confirmed by the typical dull browny-grey and
white plumage and an overall rather
featureless appearance. There is considerable
variation in Dunlin bill length, linked both to
sex and geographical origin, and this bird is on
the long-billed side.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

SIX: Adult White-rumped Sandpiper (East

Falkland, Falkland Islands, 21 February 2010).
This winter-plumaged White-rumped
Sandpiper has exchanged its bright chestnut
summer feathers for a more drab and uniform
– and therefore much more Dunlin-like – winter
plumage. It is still readily identifiable, however,
by its short, slightly decurved and deep-based
bill, its long primary extension, the extension of
markings along the flanks and by a stronger
face pattern, an effect largely of its bolder
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

supercilium. In flight it would, of course, reveal

a neat horseshoe of white across the uppertail
coverts.

SEVEN: Adult Baird’s Sandpiper (Florida, USA,

28 April 1998). Although photographed in
spring, this bird still shows non-breeding or
winter-type plumage. The upperparts are a
fairly uniform bright buff with only thin dark
feather centres in the mantle and scapulars
and thin dark shaft streaks in the wing coverts.
The buffy breast-band remains typically well
defined, cleanly separated from the bright
white underparts, and there are no markings in
the flanks. Also obvious in this image are the
typical long-bodied appearance, very long
primary projection, shortish legs and straight,
rather fine bill.
JULIAN HOUGH

59
EIGHT: Juvenile Dunlin (Salthouse, Norfolk, 28
September 2006). Dunlin has quite a striking
juvenile plumage. The upperpart feathers are
dark with crisp, neat white and buff fringes,
while the underparts are heavily blotched grey
in a pattern suggestive of summer birds,
though this individual is at the more heavily

ROBIN CHITTENDEN (WWW.ROBINCHITTENDEN.CO.UK)

marked end of the spectrum. Note the
rounded grey feathers appearing among the
upper scapulars – a sign of the onset of the
moult into a drab, grey first-winter plumage,
almost indistinguishable from that of an adult
winter bird. This bird also shows well the typical
hunched Dunlin shape.

NINE: Juvenile White-rumped Sandpiper

(Terceira, Azores, 21 October 2012). This young
White-rumped Sandpiper is typically short
billed and elongated, while some fine streaking
is visible in the flanks. There are still some
ginger fringes in the upper scapulars and a
subtle ‘V’ at the mantle sides, but otherwise
this bird is well advanced in its moult to first-
winter plumage, grey winter feathers already
replacing the bright hues of its juvenile
plumage. Such birds are typically encountered

STEFAN PFÜTZKE (WWW.GREEN-LENS.DE)

in Britain in late autumn.

TEN: Juvenile Baird’s Sandpiper (Marazion,

Cornwall, 21 September 2009). This juvenile
Baird’s Sandpiper exhibits the usual fresh, neat
scaly appearance of the species in this
plumage. The feather fringes are a uniform
pale buff, lacking the bright ginger hues
present in White-rumped Sandpiper, and there
is no sign of a ‘V’ at the mantle sides. Other
features visible here include a typically short,
fine and narrow-based bill and a very long
extension of primaries beyond the longest
tertial. Note also the neat buffy breast band
and the clean white flanks.
DAVID CHAPMAN

60
TONY MILLS (WWW.NOTJUSTBIRDS.COM)

ELEVEN: Adult Dunlin of the subspecies schinzii (Chanonry Point, Highland, 24 May 2006). Dunlin are only assignable to form in
summer plumage, and even then it is not always possible. There is significant individual variation and the average diferences
between the forms are obscured by moult and wear. However, the dull ochre fringes to the upperparts of this bird strongly suggest
that it is of the form schinzii.
JAN WEGENER (WWW.BIRDIMAGENCY.COM)

TWELVE: Dunlin of the subspecies alpina (Varanger Peninsula, Norway, 29 June 2007) This bird is on breeding territory in
northernmost Norway and can therefore be confidently assigned to alpina. However, it is already quite dark and worn and the
prominence of the orange fringes to the scapulars is much reduced. The belly patch is large and the breast streaking dark
and heavy – both features typical of this form.
61
 BRETT SPENCER
THIRTEEN: White-rumped Sandpiper (right) and Dunlin (left)) (Lodmoor, Dorset, 17 July 2013). In this excellent comparative image (with
Dunlin) the broad horseshoe-shaped white band across the uppertail coverts (not the rump) is clearly visible. Otherwise there are few clues
though White-rumped Sandpiper may appear a little smaller and shorter billed. The call might be a giveaway though – a high-pitched
tzeeet.

KEITH CARLSON

FOURTEEN: Baird’s Sandpiper (Idaho, USA, 10 August 2011). In flight this species looks small and almost stint-like, but with very long
wings, often appearing quite ‘swept back’. As well as the overall buff-and-white appearance, the most striking in-flight feature is
the wing-bar which is typically very narrow and rather short. Otherwise, this bird looks like many other calidrids, but its call – a
low treep – should attract attention.
62
ALAN TATE

FIFTEEN: Dunlin (right) with White-rumped Sandpiper (left) (Grafham Water, Cambridgeshire, 16 October 2005). This handy side-by-
side comparison shot clearly shows the elongated, low-slung appearance of White-rumped Sandpiper and also its typically much
shorter bill (though many Dunlin are shorter billed than this individual). Both birds are moulting from juvenile to first-winter plumage
and show a typical combination of neatly fringed juvenile wing coverts contrasting with rapidly advancing grey feathers in the
mantle and scapulars. Note also the stronger supercilium of the White-rumped Sandpiper, giving it a ‘sharper’ face pattern.

Find your own sandpipers

Dunlin is fairly ubiquitous on our muddier coasts and estuaries in winter and spring,
forming impressive flocks that appear to manoeuvre with a single mind, somewhat
like Red Knot. They will also motor through saltmarsh and clumps of seaweed in small
groups, and the mudflats themselves will teem with them. Check any major estuary in
the British Isles for this species, always keeping an eye out for ‘different’-looking birds
– almost any Calidris species can be found among them, including the two American
species considered here. Single birds or small parties can also turn up inland at marshes,
lakesides and reservoirs, even in fair weather, and fly-overs and fly-throughs are also
possible, even along river valleys.
White-rumped Sandpiper is the species more likely to be found buried deep within a
coastal Dunlin flock, but rarely can also turn up inland. Look out for its horseshoe-shaped
white uppertail coverts, but get a good look to make sure that you haven’t seen the scarce
but much more common Curlew Sandpiper, which has a bigger, more prominent white
rump, is larger and has a longer bill and legs.
Baird’s Sandpiper is often found on its own in Britain and Ireland, favouring dry or grassy
waterside habitats, as well as beaches. In the latter habitat it can associate with Sanderling,
a species which in breeding plumage is a potential pitfall but separable by upperpart
pattern, lack of primary projection and different feeding behaviour.
63
 Common, Spotted
and Terek Sandpipers
Words by Andy Stoddart
OLIVER SMART (WWW.SMARTIMAGES.CO.UK)

ONE: Adult summer Common Sandpiper (Skye, Highland, 10 May 2008). This is a classic portrait of a Common Sandpiper. Just like
Common Snipe and Common Redshank, this species will readily perch on posts on breeding grounds.

These three closely related shorebirds are very

similar in size, structure and plumage. Common
Sandpiper is the most familiar in Britain and
Ireland, but the North American Spotted Sandpiper
and Asia’s Terek Sandpiper, though rare do both
occur, especially during migration periods. Their
close resemblance combined with the unfamiliarity
of the second two can cause identification
conundrums. Andy Stoddart has all the information
you need to recognise all three species in all
plumages.
64
 Basic Principles
T
his trio of ‘bobbing’ sandpipers forms a distinctive in total and around half a dozen occurring each year.
group within the wader family. Common Records peak in spring and autumn, but there are a
Sandpiper is a familiar bird in Britain, but an good number of summer records too and it is also
encounter with either Spotted or Terek Sandpiper here not infrequent in winter. Any wintering ‘Common
would make for a memorable day. Sandpiper’ should be carefully checked for this species.
Unlike many Nearctic waders, there is a long history
Common Sandpiper of inland occurrences, and this is a species which could
This species has a large breeding range, extending be encountered almost anywhere. Spotted Sandpiper
from Ireland in the west to Kamchatka in the east. It is also has the distinction of being the only American
a long-distance migrant, wintering throughout central
wader to have nested in Britain. Remarkably, a pair
and southern Africa, the Middle East, South and South-
laid four eggs on Skye, Highland, in 1975, but sadly, the
East Asia, Indonesia and Australasia.
attempt was unsuccessful.
Despite its name, however, this is a relatively scarce
breeding species in Britain, confined to upland In size, structure and habits this is a near-exact
areas in the north and west. It breeds largely inland replica of Common Sandpiper, although its tail is
along gravel-shored rivers and lakes, sharing these distinctly shorter, projecting only slightly beyond the
freshwater habitats with such species as Dipper and wing-tips.
Grey Wagtail. It is a relatively early migrant, arriving The basic plumage tones are the same as well,
mainly in April and departing in early autumn, although summer adults acquire the highly distinctive
although a very few remain here in winter. thrush-like scatter of dark spots across the underparts
It is most familiar in Britain as a passage species from which the species gets its name.
and at such times can be encountered commonly in Juveniles and winter adults closely resemble Common
coastal regions, its numbers augmented by migrants Sandpiper. However, juveniles have stronger barring
from the Continent. It is a conspicuous species, across the wing coverts and the fringes to the tertials
typically seen feeding along the muddy fringes of are plainer, with just a dark subterminal mark and a pale
creeks and pools and performing its characteristic tip. Sometimes, the face pattern can be a little stronger
nervous ‘bobbing’ action. than Common Sandpiper.
This is a small wader, only fractionally longer than In flight, it appears very like Common Sandpiper
Dunlin. It has a highly distinctive structure, though, but the wing-bar is shorter and narrower across the
comprising a small head on a large, oval body, a short secondaries and does not reach the body.
neck, medium-length bill, long tail projecting well
The bill is often prominently pale at the base. The legs
beyond the wing-tips and relatively short legs. The
are typically yellowish, hence brighter than those of
stance is invariably horizontal and rather ‘crouched’.
Common Sandpiper.
The bill is dark with a pale base and the legs are
typically greyish-green. The call is a disyllabic peet-weet, less shrill than that
Its plumage is relatively dull – pale mud-brown above of Common Sandpiper.
and white below, with obvious brown breast-side
patches and a rather plain-looking face. As such it most Terek Sandpiper
closely resembles an over-sized Temminck’s Stint. This species breeds across northern Asia, from
The sexes are indistinguishable and there is relatively European Russia in the west to the Russian Far East. It
little age or seasonal variation. However, summer is also a migrant, wintering widely in southern Africa
adults develop a complex pattern of dark internal and Asia. It is a very rare bird in Britain, with only 85
markings in the upperparts feathers. Juveniles and records in total. Most occur in spring, but it can arrive in
winter adults are plainer above, the former having a summer and autumn too, and has also wintered.
characteristic ‘dogtooth’ pattern along the outer webs The basic size, structure and habits resemble Common
of the tertials. Sandpiper, but it has a rather steep forehead and – its
The flight action is very distinctive: a ‘flicking’ action most distinctive feature – a clearly upturned bill. Its
on bowed wings low over the water. In flight, the feeding action is quite striking too, with frequent short
white wing-bar extends across the full width of the runs and much sweeping of the bill through the water
secondaries, reaching the body. There is also a white in the manner of an Avocet. The bill is dark with a pale
trailing edge to the secondaries and prominent white area at the base and the legs a rather striking yellow.
sides to the tail.
The overall plumage is plain grey above and white
The species normally draws attention to itself by its
below, with a well-marked supercilium and grey
call – a loud, high-pitched ringing swee wee wee.
breast-side patches. The sexes are indistinguishable,
Spotted Sandpiper but summer-plumaged adults develop distinctive dark
This is the Nearctic counterpart of Common ‘braces’ formed by blackish centres to the scapulars.
Sandpiper. It breeds throughout North America These are not so well marked on juveniles or winter
from Alaska to Newfoundland and winters in the adults.
southernmost United States and Central and South In flight there is a broad whitish trailing edge to
America. Like its Palearctic cousin, it breeds along the wing (similar to but more diffuse than that on a
rivers and lakes and frequents more coastal habitat on Common Redshank) combined with a grey rump
passage and in winter. and tail.
It is a rare bird in Britain, with just over 200 records The call is a rapid fluty wit wit wit wit.
65
TWO: Adult summer Common Sandpiper
(Austria, 30 May 2012). The distinctive structure
of Common Sandpiper is shown well here.
Note the long, oval body, small head, short legs
and, perhaps most striking of all, the long tail
which projects well beyond the tips of the
primaries. The overall impression at range is of
a brown-and-white bird with prominent
breast-side patches and a white ‘V’ between
these and the ‘shoulder’, but a close view like
this reveals a surprisingly intricate and
attractive pattern of dark marks in the
upperparts feathers.

RALPH MARTIN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

THREE: Adult summer Spotted Sandpiper
(Michigan, United States, 18 May 2015). The
structure of this bird closely resembles that of
Common Sandpiper, but note the much
shorter projection of the tail beyond the wing-
tips. The upperparts resemble those of
Common Sandpiper, but the underparts are
eye catching indeed: covered in blackish
thrush-like spots. Birds like this are pretty
unmistakable! However, note also the slightly
stronger face pattern and more prominent
pale in the bill base.

RAY TIPPER
FOUR: Adult summer Terek Sandpiper
(Beidaihe, China, 6 May 2016). At first glance
this Terek Sandpiper resembles a Common
Sandpiper, but the pale grey upperparts, bright
yellow legs and, most obviously, the long and
upturned, two-toned bill should all catch the
eye, as should the rather abrupt forehead
profile and high, rounded crown. Further
features include the lack of a projecting tail
and, just visible here, some dark markings in
the scapulars hinting at the dark scapular
‘braces’ which are more apparent in some
individuals.
NEIL BOWMAN

66
 FIVE: Adult winter Common Sandpiper (Kenya,
1 January 2006). The distinctive structure – note
the long tail – and typical low, crouching
posture readily identify this bird as a Common
Sandpiper. Its appearance in winter is very
similar to that in summer, although the dark
markings in the upperparts are perhaps a little
more subdued. Note also the rather dull-
looking legs, almost wholly dark bill and bland,
diffuse face pattern.
HARVEY VAN DIEK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

SIX: Adult winter Spotted Sandpiper (California,

United States, 26 February 2015). This winter-
plumaged Spotted Sandpiper looks similar to
the Common Sandpiper in the previous image,
but the shorter tail is particularly apparent
here. Other useful features include the rather
bright yellow legs and a slightly stronger face
pattern with a well-marked whitish
supercilium.
BRIAN E SMALL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

SEVEN: Adult winter Terek Sandpiper (Oman,

14 November 2014). Winter-plumaged Terek
Sandpipers closely resemble those in summer
– note the grey-and-white appearance, bright
yellow legs, steep forehead, high, rounded
crown and striking long, upturned, two-toned
bill. The dark ‘shoulder’ is also well shown here.
RALPH MARTIN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

67
EIGHT: Adult Common Sandpiper (Sohar,
Sultanate of Oman, March 2006). This flying
Common Sandpiper shows the typical long-
tailed and bowed-winged appearance,
although the characteristic ‘flicking’ flight
cannot be captured in a single image. The
rump and tail are concolorous with the
upperparts, with just some brown and white
barring visible in the tail sides, but the most
obvious feature is the prominent narrow white
wing-bar which reaches the body. Also visible

MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.BIRDPHOTO.FI)

are the typically rather dark bill and legs.

NINE: Adult Spotted Sandpiper

(Newfoundland, Canada, 17 May 2010). This
Spotted Sandpiper shows the same flight
profile as its Palearctic cousin, albeit with a
shorter tail. The prominent underparts spots
readily identify this bird, but note also that the
white wing-bar does not reach the body. The
bill and legs are typically bright.

LISA DE LEON
TEN: Adult Terek Sandpiper (Oulu, Finland, 14
June 2018). Flying Terek Sandpipers have a
rather unusual uniform and grey appearance.
The rump and tail are the same pale grey as
the rest of the upperparts and the upperwing
is relatively plain too. There is no wing-bar, but
there is instead a prominent triangular greyish-
white trailing edge, resembling that of a
Common Redshank, although much more
diffuse and less contrasting.
MARKKU RANTALA (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

68
 ELEVEN: Juvenile Common Sandpiper
(Seaforth, Lancashire, 8 August 2006). This
image shows the typical Common Sandpiper
structure well. Its basically brown-and-white
plumage closely resembles that of summer-
and winter-plumaged adults. However, closer
examination reveals a neat and regular pattern
of dark brown and pale cream subterminal
barring with a characteristic ‘dogtooth’ pattern
along the outer edges of the tertials. This
patterning identifies the bird as a fresh
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

juvenile.

TWELVE: Juvenile Spotted Sandpiper (North

America, 20 November 2008). This bird
resembles a Common Sandpiper, but the
pattern of subterminal barring in the
upperparts is most striking on the wing
coverts which form a noticeably more barred
patch. Note also that the outer edges of the
tertials are unmarked, lacking the ‘dogtooth’
patterning of Common Sandpiper. Further
features include brighter yellow legs and a
stronger face pattern.
MIKE DANZENBAKER (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

THIRTEEN: Juvenile Terek Sandpiper (Kyushu,

Japan, 23 September 2011). With its grey-and-
white plumage, steep forehead, high, rounded
crown, bright yellow legs, long, upturned, two-
toned bill and dark ‘shoulder’, this young Terek
Sandpiper looks effectively the same as
summer- and winter-plumaged adults. Note,
however, a slight difference in the shape of the
dark shaft streaks in the grey upperparts
feathers, here with a subtle spade-shaped
subterminal mark.
AYUWAT JEARWATTANAKANOK

69
 Black-tailed, Bar-tailed
and Hudsonian Godwits
Words by Josh Jones
PETER MOORE

ONE: Hudsonian (second from top left) and Black-tailed Godwits (Meare Heath, Somerset, 25 April 2015). When seen from below, the
diagnostic jet-black underwing coverts of Hudsonian Godwit sharply contrast with the white of Black-tailed. Note also the greyish
head and reddish belly of this breeding-plumaged female; in Black-tailed, the reddish colour is restricted to the head and neck and
the belly is white.

The godwits are a group of four large, long-billed, long-

legged and strongly migratory waders. Three have
been recorded in Britain and Ireland, with Black-tailed
and Bar-tailed Godwits present year-round. Hudsonian
Godwit is a New World species, breeding in Canada and
Alaska and wintering in South America. It is a rare
vagrant to these shores and finding one would be a
dream come true for many birders. All three species
share similarities which can make recognising them
tricky. Josh Jones has all the information you need to
separate them.
70
 Basic Principles
G
odwits are a genus of four large and elegant breeding distribution; northbound migration can be
wader species found worldwide, three of which quite impressive in Britain in April and early May and it
have been recorded in Europe and are covered is at this time that land-locked birders have their best
here. Two of these, Black-tailed and Bar-tailed Godwits, chance of connecting.
are familiar and can be seen throughout the year. The Although about equal in size to Black-tailed Godwit,
third, Hudsonian Godwit, is an extremely rare visitor it appears squatter, being shorter legged and heavier
from the New World, which has now been recorded bodied. It also shows a clearly upcurved bill; however, the
here on a handful of occasions. While each is generally longer-billed and larger females may appear straighter
quite distinctive when seen well, all three share certain billed, thus resembling Black-tailed.
plumage or structural similarities which can make In winter birds are grey above and white below. The
identifying them less than straightforward, especially if upperpart feathers have dark centres, giving a streaked
field views are wanting. effect that contrasts with the plainer-looking Black-
tailed. The supercilium is also longer, extending further
Black-tailed Godwit behind the eye.
This is the default godwit found across Britain or Ireland, The species shows significant differences in flight.
being just at home on freshwater wetlands inland as The uppertail shows intricate barring, while the white
it is in coastal habitats. It is present year round. Two rump extends as a triangular wedge up the back, similar
subspecies occur: islandica, which breeds in Iceland, to the pattern seen in Whimbrel. The upperwing is
is a fairly common passage migrant and winter visitor, plain, lacking the broad white wing-bar seen in Black-
forming flocks thousands-strong in some areas outside tailed. The underwing is white, but shows variable dark
the breeding season; and nominate limosa (often flecking.
referred to as ‘Continental Black-tailed Godwit’), which Plumage is sexually dimorphic in the breeding
is much scarcer overall but breeds in small numbers on season, with the smaller males attaining deep rusty-red
the washlands of The Fens and can be found in ones underparts, this rich colour extending from the face right
and twos elsewhere – normally in summer and early down to the vent and without the barring of Black-tailed.
autumn, when it is more readily distinguishable. The upperparts are black with gold spangling and the
Like many waders, this species is plain grey above in bill becomes all dark. Females retain a more winter-like
winter and white below. A bold supercilium contrasts
plumage, lacking the rich red of the male, although the
with darker lores; the bill is very long and very slightly
underparts do become washed with a pale buffy-peach
upturned (although essentially looks straight at a
colour.
distance), with a pale pinkish basal two-thirds and
Juveniles have a streaked appearance to the
darker tip. The legs are long and black.
upperparts, the feathers fringed with silver. It is usually
In breeding plumage, the head, neck and upper
more monochrome than similar-aged Black-tailed
breast and flanks become a rich orangey-red, with the
Godwit, but brighter birds do show a suffusion of apricot
hue and extent of this most intense in Icelandic birds –
to the underparts, which tends to be most noticeable
Continental breeders average a paler orange and lack
colour on the flanks. The flanks and lower breast are around the neck and upper breast.
barred black, while the upperparts become a varying Migrating birds are often silent, but birds will utter a
extent of spangled orange and black. The bill base sharp ku-ku or ku; the alarm call is more of a kuwee-
becomes orangey. kuwee-kuwee.
Juveniles show a neat, but washed-out version of
this plumage, although they lack the barring on the Hudsonian Godwit
underparts and show a soft suffusion of peachy-orange A New World species, Hudsonian Godwit breeds in
to the head, neck and upper breast rather than solid Arctic Canada and migrates south to winter in southern
colour. South America. It is an extremely rare vagrant in Europe
In flight, Black-tailed Godwit is very striking: the rump with fewer than 10 records, four of which have come
is white, contrasting with a solid black tail-tip. The from Britain.
upperwing pattern is similarly contrasting, with a broad In many respects this species looks like a cross
white wing-bar on black flight feathers. The underwing between Black-tailed and Bar-tailed Godwits, being
is crisp white. very similar to Black-tailed in non-breeding plumage
The call is a rapid, nasal vi-vi-vi, while displaying birds or when seen in flight, while more akin to Bar-tailed in
utter a noisy and repetitive kew-wit kew-wit kew-wit. terms of body shape and upturned bill.
Non-breeding birds have uniformly grey upperparts
Bar-tailed Godwit and show a similar upperwing and tail pattern to
This is a relatively numerous passage migrant and Black-tailed Godwit, although the white wing-bar is
winter visitor across Britain and Ireland, although a very less extensive. Most striking, however, are the jet-black
small number of non-breeding birds may be found underwing coverts, which are diagnostic.
throughout the summer. Unlike the previous species, it In breeding plumage, males look rather like breeding
shows a strong preference for coastal habitats, being a male Bar-tailed Godwits with a contrasting greyish
routine bird of beaches, estuaries and rocky shores, and head. The base of the bill becomes orange rather
is very scarce inland. than the pink of winter. The larger females show a
It is one of the world’s great flyers – a tagged bird similar pattern, although are generally duller with the
was logged as travelling 12,000 km non-stop over rufous underpart markings patchier and wavier in
the Pacific Ocean between Alaska and New Zealand appearance. The call is a simple, high-pitched wit
in just 11 days in autumn 2020. It has a circumpolar or to-wit.
71
 DANNY GREEN (WWW.DANNYGREENPHOTOGRAPHY.COM)
ROBIN CHITTENDEN (WWW.ROBINCHITTENDEN.CO.UK)

TWO AND THREE: Black-tailed Godwits (left Hvolsvöllur, Iceland, 9 June 2016; right Arkenheemse Polder, The Netherlands, 16 April
2009). These breeding-plumaged birds illustrate the variation between the islandica (left) and limosa forms. The former averages a
deeper, richer red on the head and neck, with this colour extending onto the flanks. The latter averages a paler orange colour, with
this restricted to the head and neck (the basal colour of the flanks is white). The upperparts also tend to be more uniform greyish in
the latter with less spangling, although moulting islandica may also simulate this appearance.
BRIAN E SMALL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

BRIAN E SMALL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

THREE: Hudsonian Godwits (Manitoba, Canada, 12 June 2017). This comparison shows breeding male (left) and female Hudsonian
Godwits. Note the male’s unbroken brick-red colouration below, with more extensively black upperparts. In contrast, the female’s
belly appears more diffuse, being made up of loose barring rather than solid colour. Also noticeable in this image is the larger
size and rangier structure of the female, with its longer bill. The head and neck is greyish and streaked, with a prominent pale
supercilium.
72
MENNO VAN DUIJN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

FOUR: Bar-tailed Godwits (Katwijk, The Netherlands, 23 April 2020). This wonderful image shows the variation in spring Bar-tailed
Godwit. The male (left) is a gorgeous brick red below, with black upperpart feathers fringed with orange (these wearing by late
summer to give a more uniformly dark impression). The pale base to the bill also reduces, looking uniformly dark in some birds (as
here). In contrast, breeding females loosely resemble winter plumage, although usually show a few hints of colour in the flanks, belly
and upperparts. Note the shorter-legged, squatter structure when compared to the Black-tailed Godwits in images two and three.
KIT DAY

FIVE: Black-tailed Godwit (Brancaster Staithe, Norfolk, 4 December 2016). This non-breeding Black-tailed Godwit shows the uniform
grey upperparts, diffuse greyish neck sides and clean white underparts that typify the ‘featureless’ plumage shown at this
season. Although hunched up, the bird’s elegance is still apparent: note the long legs and long, straight-looking bill, while the
neck also looks long. A pale fore-supercilium tapers out behind the eye and contrasts with the slightly darker lores.
73
 SIX: Bar-tailed Godwit (Titchwell RSPB, Norfolk,
4 December 2016). This image aptly
demonstrates the more intricate plumage of
non-breeding Bar-tailed Godwit. The
upperpart feathering is grey, but shows
conspicuous black centres, creating a streaked
impression. Streaking on the crown gives a
capped impression, while the face and neck
are also faintly streaked. Faint patterning is also
apparent on the flanks and the undertail
shows dark barring, this wrapping round onto
the upperside to give the species its name.
Note also the distinctly upturned bill and
shorter legs when compared with the above
Black-tailed.

KIT DAY
SEVEN: Hudsonian Godwit (Punta Rasa, San
Clemente del Tuyu, Argentina, 6 March 2005).
This image shows how Hudsonian can appear
something of a cross between Black-tailed and
Bar-tailed Godwits. It shows a very similar
uniform-grey non-breeding plumage to Black-
tailed, although the bill is clearly more
upturned and seems similar to Bar-tailed in
that respect. A bird like this may be easily lost
in a flock of non-breeding Black-tailed, though,
and seeing it in flight would be the only easy
way to nail the identification. A few hints of
breeding plumage, namely the dark barring on
the belly and undertail coverts, are subtle clues
as to its identification.

EIGHT: Black-tailed Godwit (Wallasey, Cheshire, ALAN TATE

17 September 2011). This bird’s plumage is
pristine, ageing it as a juvenile. The upperparts
display dark feathering with golden fringing,
while the underparts are suffused with a
peachy-orange colour that is at its brightest on
the neck (there is no barring, as in adults). The
cap is finely mottled dark, while the pale
supercilium does not extend beyond the eye.
Structurally, the legs are long and the bill is
fairly straight, being only slightly upcurved
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

towards the tip. Note that some juveniles won’t

have a fully grown bill by this stage, and may
appear peculiarly short billed.

74
KIT DAY

NINE: Bar-tailed Godwit (St Mary’s, Scilly, 9 October 2018. This juvenile Bar-tailed Godwit is superficially similar to the Black-tailed
above, but it is evidently shorter legged and the bill is more obviously upcurved. Furthermore, the supercilium extends well behind
the eye and the wing coverts show a different pattern, being pale with a dark streak running along the feather shaft. Two diagnostic
features are also detectable in this image: the barring (not solid black) on the uppertail and the white wedge extending up the back.
JULIAN HOUGH

TEN: Hudsonian Godwit (Connecticut, USA, 17 October 2009). Juvenile Hudsonian Godwit is quite a uniform-looking bird, and could
even be overlooked as an adult Black-tailed on poor views (assuming the underwing hadn’t been seen). The upperparts are
extensively plain grey, although some feathers show blackish streaks or anchor markings with pale fringing. Structurally, note
the upcurved bill.
75
ELEVEN: Black-tailed Godwit (Iceland, 17 June
2006). A flight view like this of a Black-tailed
Godwit should provide no identification
conundrums. The black-and-white wing
pattern, with broad white wing-bar, plus black
tail contrasting with square white rump,
coupled with the Persil-white underwing are
enough to identify the bird to species level. The
intense orange-red of the head, neck and
flanks – plus the date and location! – mean it is
quickly discernible as a breeding-plumaged
bird of the islandica subspecies.

MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

TWELVE: Bar-tailed Godwit (Hanko, Finland, 13
September 2006). Three diagnostic features of
Bar-tailed Godwit are shown nicely here,
namely the barred tail and the white rump
extending as a triangular wedge up onto the
bird’s back – a pattern shown by neither Black-
tailed nor Hudsonian Godwits – plus the lack of
a discernible wing-bar across the upperwing,
creating a plain impression in flight. The
underwing is largely white with some dark
flecking; the extent of this varies between
individuals. The warm tones to the plumage,

MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

plus its overall pristine condition, age this bird
as a juvenile.

THIRTEEN: Hudsonian Godwit (Inishmore, Co

Galway, 17 September 2015). The first feature
that leaps out about this bird is the black
underwing coverts, which is diagnostic of
Hudsonian. The upperwing pattern is similar to
Black-tailed, but note how the white wing-bar
is significantly narrower than in that species.
The bill is noticeably upcurved, recalling Bar-
tailed, and is relatively short. This, coupled with
the solid orange markings to the belly (albeit
now in moult), identify this as an adult male
Hudsonian Godwit transitioning from breeding
DAVID MONTICELLI (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

to winter plumage.

76
 Red-necked, Grey and
Wilson’s Phalaropes
Words by Andy Stoddart
JULIAN BHALERAO

ONE: Grey (left) and Red-necked (right) Phalaropes (Kelling, Norfolk, 26 September 2010). Although something of a record shot, this
rare side-by-side image of Grey and Red-necked Phalaropes highlights the differences very well. Note the larger size, more thickset
structure and stronger bill of the Grey Phalarope, as well as its plainer, paler upperparts overall.

Three of the most anticipated and distinctive wader

species seen in Britain are the phalaropes, with their
exquisite form and intriguing gender role reversal in
both their plumage and breeding biology.
None are common, but all are annual and an active
birder might have the opportunity to see all three
in one autumn, with a little luck. However, they are
not easy to tell apart in the immature and winter
plumages most often seen in this country. To help
you be sure which one you’re seeing, and perhaps
even find and identify your own, Andy Stoddart
guides you through the subtleties of phalarope
appearance.
77
 Basic Principles
P
halaropes are curious and distinctive members in breeding plumage.
of the wader tribe. They are almost always seen This is a slightly larger and stockier species than
on water and are noted for their lobed toes, Red-necked Phalarope, but it shares the latter’s small-
characteristic ‘spinning’ behaviour and ‘reversed’ headed appearance, short legs and medium-length
plumage and breeding biology: the dull-coloured bill. It appears less frail and delicate, however, and
males undertake most of the parental duties. differs most obviously in its stouter, more tubular bill,
These are charismatic birds, hyperactive and – which can show some yellow in the base.
especially the females – brightly plumaged. All three The breeding plumage of the female (from which
phalarope species occur in Britain, but none are the American name ‘Red Phalarope’ derives) is
common and an encounter with any of them is always spectacular: a deep reddish lower face and underparts,
a treat. dark upperparts with prominent straw feather fringes,
and a contrasting white patch around the eye and
Red-necked Phalarope across the ear coverts. In this plumage the bill is largely
This species has a circumpolar distribution. A long- rich yellow. As in Red-necked Phalarope, the male is
distance migrant, it breeds in Arctic bogs and winters similarly marked but much duller.
at sea in the tropics, often travelling overland. Red- Juveniles are strongly patterned above like Red-
necked and Grey Phalaropes are the only pelagic necked Phalaropes, but the moult to first-winter
waders. Russian breeders winter in the south-west plumage begins early and by the time they are seen
Pacific, North American birds off Peru, and European in Britain most have acquired pale grey mantles and
birds mainly in the Arabian Sea. scapulars and so more closely resemble the grey-and-
In Europe, most breed in Scandinavia and Iceland, white winter adults. With dark in the hindcrown and a
but a very few pairs can be found in Britain in the dark patch behind the eye, the face pattern recalls its
Northern Isles and Outer Hebrides. These were thought smaller sibling, while it can look like a small Little Gull
to winter off Arabia, but recent satellite-tagging studies when swimming.
have shown that at least some cross Central America In flight this species’ grey-and-white appearance and
to reach the Pacific. Away from northern Scotland, strong white wing-bar most recall Sanderling, but the
this species is encountered in Britain only as a scarce tubby-bodied, ‘head-up’ profile and slightly rocking
passage migrant at mainly coastal wetland sites in late flight action are rather different. A landing on water will
spring and early to mid-autumn. settle the identity of even the most distant bird.
This is the smallest and most delicate of the
phalaropes, with a small-headed appearance, short Wilson’s Phalarope
legs and a medium-length and noticeably fine, needle- This species is restricted to the Americas. Unlike its
like black bill. The female in breeding plumage is cousins it is not an Arctic breeder, nesting instead
stunning: ash-grey above with straw-coloured mantle inland in ‘prairie pothole’ country in south-west
and scapular ‘braces’, a white throat and white patch Canada and the north-western United States. Nor is
above the eye and, most eyecatchingly, a bright red it pelagic in winter, migrating overland to wetlands in
area on the neck-sides and upper throat. The male is southern South America. A long-distance migrant, it is
similarly patterned but the colours are much duller. prone to vagrancy and is a regular (though decreasing)
In first-winter and adult winter plumage (the latter rarity in Britain with almost 250 records, mostly in mid-
rarely seen in Britain) it is grey above and white below, autumn.
with a dark hindcrown and a dark patch leading This is a larger bird than the other two phalaropes,
back from the eye. The more frequently encountered with a long ‘boat-shaped’ body, small head, long neck,
juveniles are darker above, with buffy feather fringes medium-length legs and a long, needle-like bill, this
and sometimes a peachy wash on the foreneck. set of structural features inviting comparison with both
In flight, this species shows a strong white wing-bar, Lesser Yellowlegs and Marsh Sandpiper. It is also more
closely resembling a small calidrid sandpiper, and it likely to be seen wading than the other two phalarope
could easily be passed off as such on a brief view. Note, species.
however, the very fine bill, and the real giveaway, a The summer female has a pale grey crown and
landing on water. upperparts, a dark area leading back from the lores
through the eye, down the neck-sides and extending
Grey Phalarope into chestnut areas on the mantle sides and lower
This species has a near-circumpolar range, but is scapulars, and a peach-coloured foreneck. The male
absent as a breeding bird in Europe away from Iceland is correspondingly duller. In breeding plumage both
and Svalbard. It is more of a High Arctic species than sexes have black legs.
Red-necked Phalarope and, though the two can be Non-breeding birds have typical phalarope head
found together, it tends to breed in more northerly patterns, juveniles showing dark brown feather centres
regions. It is also a long-distance migrant, travelling with pale fringes above. These feathers are moulted
straight out to sea – not overland – to winter in the early, however, so that vagrants to Britain are typically
Pacific off Chile and in the Atlantic off western and in a more grey-and-white plumage, the only colour
southern Africa. provided by the bright yellow legs.
In Britain it is encountered almost exclusively as a In flight this species looks pale and slender, with no
mid- to late-autumn migrant, most often at sea in the upperwing bar, a square white rump patch with no
west, but it also occurs as a storm-blown visitor to extension of white up the back, and feet which project
coastal and even inland waters anywhere. As a beyond the tail tip. It is therefore superficially similar to
result, this species is incredibly rare in Britain Lesser Yellowlegs.
78
 TWO: Female Red-necked Phalarope (Hyères,
France, 29 April 2018). An adult female Red-
necked Phalarope in summer plumage is
beautiful and unmistakable; fortunately it is
possible to see the species in this plumage in
Britain. The red neck-sides and foreneck are
striking, but in dull light or at long range the
gleaming white throat can catch the eye just
as readily.
AURÉLIEN AUDEVARD

THREE: Female Grey Phalarope (Alaska, USA, 21

June 2015). Adult female Grey Phalarope in
summer plumage is perhaps the most
beautiful of all phalaropes, but is sadly near-
impossible to see without a trip to the High
Arctic. The red neck and underparts are most
striking, but the face pattern is eyecatching
too, while the upperparts are beautifully
marked with whitish feather fringes. Note that,
unlike the other two species, the bill is largely
yellow in this plumage.
CHRIS VAN RIJSWIJK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

FOUR: Female Wilson’s Phalarope (Alberta,

Canada, 23 May 2009). Adult female Wilson’s
Phalarope in summer plumage is also
gorgeous. It most resembles a large, long-
billed Red-necked, but the plumage detail
differs. Note the black through the eye and on
the hindneck, the maroon in the upperparts
and the peachy wash to the breast. Birds
looking like this occur occasionally in Britain,
but they are very much in the minority.
GLENN BARTLEY (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

79
FIVE: Winter Red-necked Phalarope (Hyères,
France, 30 March 2015). This winter-plumaged
bird (rarely seen in Britain) is essentially grey
above and white below, with a dark hindcrown
and a dark patch leading back from the eye. It
therefore very much resembles Grey Phalarope
and needs to be identified on structural
features. Note here the rather delicate
appearance and fine, almost needle-like bill.

AURÉLIEN AUDEVARD
SIX: Winter Grey Phalarope (Farmoor Reservoir,
Oxfordshire, 26 November 2015). This winter
adult Grey Phalarope is also basically grey and
white and closely resembles the Red-necked
Phalarope in the preceding image. Note,
however, the slightly larger, longer-looking
body and, most importantly, the slightly
thicker, more tubular bill, which has some
yellow hues just visible in the base.

ANDREW MOON
SEVEN: Winter Wilson’s Phalarope (California,
USA, 8 September 2011). Winter-plumaged
Wilson’s Phalarope is also grey and white but,
lacking the dark head markings, appears
plainer than the other two species. The
clincher, however, is structure. Note the larger
size – which should be readily apparent in the
field – longer neck and very long, fine, all-dark
bill.
BRIAN E SMALL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

80
ARIE OUWERKERK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

EIGHT: Juvenile Red-necked Phalarope (Terschelling, The Netherlands, 11 September 2008). With its dark brown upperparts and neat
buffy feather fringes, this phalarope is in full juvenile plumage. The small-looking slim body and the medium-length, very fine,
needle-like bill identify it as a juvenile Red-necked Phalarope. This is the typical plumage of early autumn birds in Britain.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

NINE: Juvenile Grey Phalarope (Newton, Lancashire, 27 August 2005). This young bird is still essentially dark above, with neat pale
fringes to blackish juvenile feathers. However, the presence of scattered pale grey feathers in the mantle and scapulars shows
that the moult to the grey-and-white first-winter plumage is already under way. Note also the relatively stout bill with yellow in
the base.
81
 BILL BASTON (WWW.BILLBASTON.COM)
TEN: Juvenile/first-winter Grey Phalarope (Bawdsey, Suffolk, 28 October 2003). This young Grey Phalarope resembles the previous bird
but the moult to first-winter plumage is more advanced, with most of the mantle and scapulars now pale grey. Note that, as in all
waders, the moult to first-winter does not include the wing coverts, which retain the typical juvenile patterning of dark feathers with
neat pale fringes.

DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

ELEVEN: First-winter Wilson’s Phalarope (Oare Marshes, Kent, 6 October 2017). This Wilson’s Phalarope has already moulted its
mantle and scapulars into the pale grey of first-winter plumage, but the wing coverts and tertials are still juvenile. The typical
slender proportions, long, fine bill and wading habit are all visible here, too.
82
MIKE DANZENBAKER (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

HUGH HARROP (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

TWELVE: Juvenile Red-necked Phalarope (California, USA, 6 THIRTEEN: First-winter Grey Phalarope (Shetland, 26 October
August 2006). Flying Red-necked and Grey Phalaropes both look 2008). The tubby body and small head are obvious here, too, but
tubby bodied and small headed, but Red-necks look particularly this bird can be identified as a Grey Phalarope by its rather more
small and might be taken for a small calidrid sandpiper. The ‘solid’ appearance and its superficial resemblance to a
overall very dark appearance means that the bird is in full Sanderling. The combination of grey mantle and scapulars with
juvenile plumage, while the broad white wing-bar is common to residual blacker feathering and dark, pale-fringed wing coverts
both species. The excellent view afforded in this image shows age this bird as a first-winter.
the rather delicate appearance and typical short, needle-like, all-
dark bill of a Red-necked Phalarope.
MIKE DANZENBAKER (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

DANIELE OCCHIATO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

FOURTEEN: Adult Wilson’s Phalarope (California, USA, August FIFTEEN: Adult Sanderling (Tuscany, Italy, 31 January 2010). With its
2006). Flying Wilson’s Phalaropes look very different from their pale grey upperparts and broad white wing-bar, this bird closely
smaller cousins. As well as being larger and longer with a long resembles a first-winter or adult Grey Phalarope. However, it is a
bill, the upperwing is plain, lacking any obvious wing-bar; the winter Sanderling – the classic Grey Phalarope ‘pitfall species’.
rump is whitish (and doesn’t extend up the back) and the legs Note the clean white head with no trace of the dark cap and ear
are long and yellow, here clearly projecting beyond the tail. In covert markings of the phalarope. At range, the two species can
life, a flying Wilson’s is more likely to be mistaken for a Tringa be hard to separate, but look for the tubby-bodied and small-
sandpiper than either of the smaller phalaropes. headed look of the phalarope, as well as its distinctive
‘rocking’ flight action and habit of landing on water.
83
 Wood Sandpiper, Lesser
and Greater Yellowlegs
and Greenshank Words by Dominic Mitchell
STAFFAN RODEBRAND

ONE: From left: first-winter Greater Yellowlegs, first-winter Lesser Yellowlegs and adult winter Greenshank (Terceira, Azores, 31 January
2011). A rare (possibly unique?) record shot showing the familiar Greenshank with its two New World congeners at that well-known mid-
Atlantic meeting point of Palearctic and Nearctic birds, the Azores. In an instant, two things are obvious: the bright mustard-yellow leg colour
of the two American species, and the size and structural similarities between Greater Yellowlegs and Greenshank compared to the much
smaller and slighter Lesser Yellowlegs.

At times, bird identification can be complicated by a

‘wildcard’ candidate – something odd or, if you’re
lucky, rare – among more familiar species. This
month’s line-up ably illustrates that problem in that
two of these four waders, Wood Sandpiper and
Greenshank, are unlikely ever to be mistaken for each
other, but they can be for Lesser and Greater
Yellowlegs respectively, while those two American
species are also confusable with each other. Dominic
Mitchell takes a look at these potentially tricky
Tringas.
84
 Basic Principles
W
ader migration moves up a gear in August. distinctly longer legged and longer necked, with wing-
The colourful but increasingly worn- tips which project beyond the end of the tail at rest.
looking adults which began appearing on The bill is distinctly longer than Wood Sandpiper’s and
passage last month are now being joined by the first rather fine. In shape, the species may recall the even
juveniles of the season at wetlands, coastal marshes rarer Marsh Sandpiper more than Wood Sandpiper.
and mudflats across the country. Many a productive Plumage-wise, the obvious distinction from the latter
hour can be spent sifting through such shorebird is the pale supercilium which is restricted to in front
gatherings, racking up a decent tally of species, of the eye, creating a plainer-headed appearance. The
distinguishing between different ages and, as birders practically all-dark bill (more obviously pale based in
so often hope, looking for something out of the Wood Sandpiper) and bright yellow legs are further
ordinary. The four suspects in our identification line-up distinctions from Wood Sandpiper, but it shares the
this month are two regular species, both much better latter with Greater Yellowlegs. The typical flight call is
known as migrants than breeders, and two ‘outside a clear, ringing tew-tew or tew, not unlike Common
chances’ from across the pond, one a rare but realistic Redshank in tone (note that juveniles of that species
target, the other a significant rarity of crowd-pleasing can also show orangey legs, a pitfall for the unwary).
proportions.
Greater Yellowlegs
Wood Sandpiper A genuinely rare vagrant, Greater Yellowlegs has
The great majority of Wood Sandpipers in Britain reached Britain just 31 times, and there are only 13 Irish
and Ireland at this time of year will be southbound records. Its rarity on this side of the Atlantic is related
migrants arriving from Fennoscandia, rather than to a tendency for actively moulting adults to have
individuals from the tiny Scottish breeding population. low fat deposits, meaning estimated flight ranges fall
As with other waders, the passage that began with considerably short of a long transatlantic crossing. As
adults in July sees juveniles arriving in increasing with other Nearctic vagrants, most appear in autumn,
numbers during August. Favouring freshwater but like its smaller congener this species has also
marshes, this species is never numerous – indeed often occurred in winter, and even spring and summer.
decidedly scarce – and always a good ‘patch bird’. As their names indicate, size and structure are key
The identification of this species was covered last to separating the two yellowlegs. Size may not be
month in the context of Green and Solitary Sandpipers. obvious on a lone bird, but structure should be if you
Here, particularly for less experienced observers, the are already familiar with the commoner species in
potential issue is with Lesser Yellowlegs. The problem this line-up. For Greater Yellowlegs, think Greenshank
should not be overstated, as not only are both species – this is a similarly large, well-built Tringa with a long,
distinctive when seen well, but Wood Sandpiper is stoutish and subtly upturned bill. Lesser is a visibly
much the more likely of the two to be encountered. more rakish, thin-billed and nimble affair, closer in size
Nonetheless, there is enough superficial similarity to Wood Sandpiper.
to warrant a confirmatory look when the American There isn’t a great deal to separate the two yellowlegs
species is suspected, if only to rule it out. species in plumage, at any age or time of year. Overall,
In the case of the slightly smaller Wood Sandpiper, Greater is often more strongly marked, especially in
the clinching field marks on an autumn individual of summer, when the breast may be heavily dark spotted
any age are the shorter bill, dark-capped appearance and the flanks obviously barred (few or no flank
created by a pale supercilium clearly extending behind markings in Lesser). Similarly, Greater’s secondaries
the eye, somewhat truncated look to the rear end and and inner primaries show fine pale spotting, whereas
dull greenish-yellow legs. Its whistled chiff-if-iff call, Lesser’s flight feathers are more evenly dark. They
typically given in flight, is distinctive once learned, and further differ in call, Greater sounding very like
quite different in tone and delivery from the tew-based Greenshank, typically giving a three-note tew-tew-tew
notes of the other three species. call, with the final note(s) often descending in pitch.

Lesser Yellowlegs Greenshank

A regular transatlantic vagrant, Lesser Yellowlegs The commonest of the four species by far, Greenshank
averaged some nine records annually in Britain and occurs widely on spring and autumn passage in
five or six per year in Ireland in the eight years to 2012. Britain and Ireland, as well as breeding in northern
Most occur between August and October and the Scotland and wintering in small numbers in the south.
species is more likely in the west, but the 324 British It should therefore be familiar in all plumages, in which
records fall in all months and are widely scattered. the rather pale-headed appearance, long, stoutish,
Unusually for a Nearctic shorebird, it occasionally upturned bill and greyish-green legs are constant
overwinters. features.
Structurally, Lesser Yellowlegs is a delicate, graceful The only confusion species here is likely to be
wader. Slightly larger than Wood Sandpiper, it looks Greater Yellowlegs. Aside from that species’
85
always brighter and yellower legs, a key plumage melancholy tew-tew-tew call tends to have notes of
difference in flight is the long white triangle extending
similar pitch, perhaps separable with practice from the
from the rump up the back of Greenshank – the only
species here to show this feature. Its ringing, slightly lower end note(s) of Greater Yellowlegs.

REFERENCES & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• Chandler, R. 2009. Shorebirds of the Northern Hemisphere. Christopher Helm, London.
• Cramp, S, and Simmons, K E L (eds). 1983. The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Volume III. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Hayman, P, Marchant, J, and Prater, T. 1986. Shorebirds: an Identification Guide to the Waders of the World. Croom Helm, London.
• Paulson, D. 2005. Shorebirds of North America. The Photographic Guide. Christopher Helm, London.
Many thanks to Killian Mullarney for reviewing and commenting on a draft of this article.

TWO: Adult summer Wood Sandpiper (Lesvos,

Greece, 7 April 2006). In comparison to the
other three species considered here, Wood
Sandpiper is a relatively compact wader. The
paler-based bill is not especially long and the
wing-tips do not project beyond the tail-tip,
features which help eliminate the possibility of
Lesser Yellowlegs – as indeed do the dull
greenish-yellow legs. Note the supercilium
extending behind the eye, accentuating this
species’ capped appearance.

OLIVER SMART (WWW.SMARTIMAGES.CO.UK)

THREE: Adult summer Lesser Yellowlegs
(Holbox, Mexico, 22 April 2008). Most Lesser
Yellowlegs reaching Europe are juveniles which
cross the Atlantic in autumn, and well-marked
spring birds like this individual are distinctly
rare in Britain and Ireland. Note the ‘random’
black feathering in the upperparts, creating an
overall impression rather different to typical
breeding-plumaged Wood Sandpiper. The
amount of black streaking on the neck and
breast is individually variable.
WIL LEURS (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

86
 FOUR: Adult summer Greenshank (Lesvos,
Greece, 2 April 2007). Greenshank is at its
darkest and most strongly marked in breeding
plumage, showing blackish-centred scapulars
contrasting with brownish-grey upperparts,
and variable black streaking on the neck,
breast and mantle. Distinctions from the
structurally similar Greater Yellowlegs in this
plumage include usually less heavily patterned
flanks and lower underparts, and of course the
OLIVER SMART (WWW.SMARTIMAGES.CO.UK)

duller greenish legs.

FIVE: Adult summer Greater Yellowlegs (Texas,

USA, 10 April 2008). Breeding-plumaged
Greater Yellowlegs is often more heavily
marked on the flanks than Lesser. Size may not
always be obvious, but bill length is a
consistent distinction between these species,
being notably longer than head length in
Greater, but barely longer than or equal to
STUART ELSOM LRPS (WWW.STUARTELSOM.CO.UK)

head length in Lesser. In bill length and in

general size and structure, Greater is much
closer to Greenshank than it is to Lesser
Yellowlegs.

SIX: Juvenile Wood Sandpiper (Seaforth NNR,

Lancashire, 22 August 2006). This pose
captures the jizz and structure of this species
very well – it’s an elegant but clearly rather
compact Tringa. In juveniles the upperparts are
heavily marked with distinct warm buff
notches and spots, the breast is buffish
(becoming whiter as autumn progresses) and
the whitish supercilium is prominent and long,
extending well behind the eye.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

87
 SEVEN: Juvenile Lesser Yellowlegs (Lower
Moors, Scilly, 8 October 2011). The upperparts of
juvenile ‘Lesser Legs’ are well marked with
white spots and notches, but through moult
will be noticeably greyer by the year end – this
individual has already moulted in a grey first-
winter upper scapular feather. Compared to
juvenile Wood Sandpiper (left), the head
pattern is much plainer, the bill longer and
darker, and legs yellower; note also the long
wings and more attenuated rear end.

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

EIGHT: Juvenile Greenshank (Dungeness RSPB,
Kent, 5 September 2008). In juvenile plumage,
Greenshank differs from the other three
species considered here by its darker and less
patterned upperparts, with pale but plainer
fringes to browner feathers creating a more
uniform appearance above. The darker-tipped
bill of this bird has a bluish tinge, while leg
colour can vary from grey-green to almost

JIM ALMOND (WWW.SHROPSHIREBIRDER.CO.UK)

yellowish, though never approaching the clear,
bright yellow of even the dullest yellowlegs.

NINE: First-winter Greater Yellowlegs (Hauxley,

Northumberland, 17 November 2011). This
young bird is already well advanced into its
first moult, having replaced first-generation
juvenile scapulars with the plainer, greyer
feathers of first-winter plumage – note the
contrast with the more boldly marked juvenile
wing coverts and tertials. The long, gently
upturned bill with an obviously paler base is a
sound distinction from Lesser Yellowlegs in the
same plumage.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

88
 TEN: Adult Wood Sandpiper (Ebro Delta, Spain,
31 August 2013). After the breeding season,
adult Wood Sandpipers look less striking, with
plainer brownish upperparts showing reduced
pale spotting and dark markings. The brown
cap, pale supercilium and dark stripe through
the eye are distinct, and the breast is washed
pale grey-brown. Note the greenish base to the
medium-length bill, and quite long olive-green
RAFAEL ARMADA (WWW.RAFAELARMADA.NET)

legs.

ELEVEN: Juvenile/first-winter Lesser Yellowlegs

(Dungarvan, Co Waterford, 22 November
2009). Virtually all Lesser Yellowlegs seen in
Britain and Ireland in late autumn and winter
are juvenile/first-winter birds, and adults seem
to be exceptional after September – perhaps
they simply keep on migrating. First-winters
are plainer and greyer above than juveniles and
resemble non-breeding adults, but on good
views are separable by their more heavily
spotted and worn retained juvenile wing
coverts.
RÓNÁN MCLAUGHLIN

TWELVE: Adult winter Greenshank (St Mary’s,

Scilly, 17 October 2007). Compare this bird to
the breeding adult in photo four, and the
differences are striking. Non-breeding adult
Greenshanks are a near-monochrome mixture
of white, pale grey and brownish-grey – visibly
paler than both yellowlegs species at the same
time of year – and they can look very ‘washed
out’ as winter progresses and plumage fades.
Compare the pattern of the upperparts
feathers to the juvenile in photo eight.
ASHLEY GROVE

89
THIRTEEN: Adult winter Greater Yellowlegs
(Vancouver, Canada, 10 October 2006). Non-
breeding adult Greaters are plainer and greyer
than juveniles, with feathers on the upperparts
showing smaller pale and dark marks along
the fringes. Leg colour is an obvious distinction
from Greenshank, but winter birds are also
more uniformly grey on the head and neck
than that species, lacking its paler and often
somewhat white-faced appearance.

MARTIN SMART
FOURTEEN: Juvenile Wood Sandpiper
(Sudbourne Marshes, Suffolk, 29 July 2013).
Individual variation sometimes produces birds
that are not entirely typical in their appearance,
and this should always be borne in mind.
Unlike most juvenile Wood Sandpipers, this
bird has a surprisingly Lesser Yellowlegs-like
head pattern with a less pronounced eyestripe
and ‘cap’. Note the light greenish legs, an
obvious distinction from that species (though
some are significantly more yellow than this).

FIFTEEN: First-winter Lesser Yellowlegs PAUL SAWER

(Thornham Quay, Norfolk, 4 February 2007).
Vagrants like this well-watched bird
occasionally appear in winter. In fact, this
individual followed another in the county that
spent seven months in residence at Stiffkey
Fen, providing ample opportunity to study the
progression from juvenile plumage through its
first winter to almost first-summer plumage
between mid-September 2004 and late April
OLIVER SMART (WWW.SMARTIMAGES.CO.UK)

2005.

90
MARKUS VARESVUO (WWW.BIRDPHOTO.FI)

SIXTEEN: Greenshank (Falsterbo, Sweden, 29 September 2005). Although there’s less to work with on an underside view, the long,
bicoloured and stout-based bill, heavy-looking body and yellowy-green legs all add up to Greenshank. Ageing this bird may be
inadvisable without a good look at the upperparts, but juvenile Greenshanks have slightly heavier streaking on the head and neck,
and are a little darker than non-breeding adults, which often look very pale grey in these areas.
JULIAN HOUGH

SEVENTEEN: First-winter Greater Yellowlegs (Connecticut, USA, 7 November 2004). Claiming a vagrant fly-over Greater Yellowlegs on a
view like this is far from ideal, and any such claim should be supported by photos. Visible clues include the structure, length and
colour of the bill (though the angle, and thus the length, is slightly deceptive), and the legs (yellow, but partly in shadow so
appearing dull here). Note that only the feet, and not the legs, project beyond the tail-tip.
91
DOUGLAS MCFARLANE

JULIAN HOUGH
EIGHTEEN: Wood Sandpiper (Summer Leys, Northamptonshire, NINETEEN: Juvenile Lesser Yellowlegs (New York, USA, 12 August
30 April 2011). Separating this species from Lesser Yellowlegs is 2006). The plain wings, white rump and long, bright yellow legs
straightforward if seen well on the ground, but what about in immediately shout ‘yellowlegs!’, but which one? Lesser and
flight? A bird on the wing is more challenging, with both species Greater look similar in flight, but Lesser’s toes project slightly
being plain winged and having square white rump patches, further beyond the tail-tip, resulting in a little tarsus also showing
diffusely barred tails and yellow legs. Structural differences are (even if this is difficult to register in the field); more usefully, total
not always easy to determine on flying birds, but note the shorter foot projection beyond the tail-tip is about the same as bill
bill and more obvious supercilium and ‘cap’ of this Wood length in Lesser, but distinctly less so in Greater.
Sandpiper.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

JULIAN HOUGH

TWENTY: Juvenile Greenshank (Falsterbo, Sweden, 5 September TWENTY-ONE: Adult Greater Yellowlegs (Connecticut, USA, 23
2010). Greenshank is very distinctive in flight, with a conspicuous August 2009). This bird is in heavy moult. The overall impression
white triangular ‘wedge’ extending up the back from the white in flight is like Lesser Yellowlegs, with a similar plumage pattern,
rump. Coupled with the pale-looking tail, here showing minimal and it may be difficult to appreciate size on a lone bird. However,
central barring, this species always looks more white in flight note the longer bill relative to toe projection beyond the tail-tip.
than the others featured here. The long bill and greenish Greater Yellowlegs also has more coarsely marked flight feathers,
feet projecting beyond the tail-tip create a similar but this may be of limited use unless the bird is giving good,
in-flight profile to Greater Yellowlegs (compare right). close views.
92
 Long-billed and Short-
billed Dowitchers
Words by Julian Hough
JULIAN HOUGH

ONE: Juvenile Short-billed Dowitcher (New York, USA, 12 August 2006). A sight like this in Britain would have every birder’s pulse
racing! A very bright individual, it shows the broad orange-buff fringes to the upperparts and the internal markings to the scapulars,
inner greater coverts, as well as the diagnostic ‘tiger-striped’ pattern to the tertials. The upper breast and flanks are a brighter
peachy-buff compared to the duller, more greyish overtones of Long-billed. Such bright birds like this may represent juveniles of the
interior hendersoni subspecies.

Similar in all plumages year round, Long-billed and

Short-billed Dowitchers pose a notoriously difficult
identification conundrum even for birders in their
native USA, while their rarity in Britain and Ireland
makes them especially tricky on this side of the
Atlantic. Julian Hough takes a look at this pair of
vagrant shorebirds and highlights the key
identification points for British and Irish birders that
can help separate them – should you be lucky
enough to discover one.
93
 Basic Principles
A
s far as vagrants go, American waders have Newlon 1983), but it is important to consider a suite of
always been firm favourites among rarity characters to cement any initial identification.
hunters in Britain. Of the larger species Call is the easiest means of differentiating the two
that occur here, both Long-billed and Short-billed species: a rapid, liquid tu-tu-tu in Short-billed and a
Dowitchers present identification stumbling blocks more clipped, higher-pitched keek in Long-billed.
for field birders. This fact is reinforced by some 80 In early autumn, juvenile Long-billed is duller grey on
individuals in the BBRC’s files that are only attributable the face and breast, shows solid dark scapulars fringed
to ‘dowitcher species’. with chestnut-buff, and has greyish, plain tertials.
Short-billed shows brighter, more prominent buff-
Long-billed Dowitcher orange fringes and internal marking to the scapulars
A monotypic species that nests in north and west and tertials and is relatively easy to identify. Once
Alaska, north-west Canada and north-east Siberia. Short-billed moults its juvenile upperpart feathers into
It migrates east to winter along the southern Atlantic an overall greyer first-winter plumage (Oct-Nov), a
coast from Florida south to Mexico and Guatemala. positive identification is still possible using the retained
Juveniles disperse in September and October, arriving juvenile tertials.
in the north-eastern US at a time when their long- Adults in winter plumage are the most difficult to
distance movements make them more prone to separate and rely on subtle differences in upperpart
displacement by low-pressure systems that track colours and patterning of the breast and flanks.
east across the Atlantic. This is the main reason why Tail barring on both species is variable and no longer
the less abundant Long-billed is the more expected considered diagnostic by US birders and should be
transatlantic vagrant, and the spike in records in the used in combination with other features. An individual
UK from late September-November supports this. with white bars that are obviously wider than the
The first for Britain concerned a juvenile male cited
black bars is likely to be a Short-billed (especially so in
as being “taken in Devonshire, probably in 1801”. Since
hendersoni), but a bird with barring of equal width or
then it has become an annual vagrant, with around
with wider dark bars could be either species.
450 British and Irish records to date, mainly involving
While there are no accepted records in Britain and
autumn juveniles, but with a peppering of records of
Europe of adult summer Short-billed Dowitcher, all
breeding-plumaged adults in spring and late summer.
three subspecies can be incredibly similar to Long-
billed and care must be exercised. A fresh dowitcher
Short-billed Dowitcher
in May that has chevron-shaped barring on the upper
With just five British and four Irish records to date,
flanks (with a white terminal fringe) and shows clear-
Short-billed Dowitcher is the much rarer congener in
cut, white oval tips to the rear scapulars and greater
Britain and Ireland.
coverts is a Long-billed. Short-billed generally shows
Three distinct subspecies are recognised: western
more extensive V-shaped fringes to the wing coverts
caurinus is restricted to the Pacific coast, breeding in
Alaska and wintering from California to Peru; central and more rounded markings that extend onto the
hendersoni breeds from Manitoba west to northern lower belly, importantly lacking the distinctive white
Alberta and winters in the Caribbean and in northern terminal fringe of Long-billed.
South America; and eastern griseus breeds in Quebec In August, worn Long-billed can look uniformly
and eastern Labrador, wintering in the eastern coloured below, with little obvious barring, and many
Caribbean, from Florida south to the coast of Brazil. have begun their head moult. Any dowitcher in August
Based on range, griseus is the most likely to occur in that has a combination of uniform, brick-red underparts
Europe. and a greyish face is likely a Long-billed. Comparatively,
Unlike Long-billed, adult Short-billeds begin their typical griseus is more a dowdy peachy-orange on
autumn migration as early as late July. Evidence the upper breast and shows messy flank barring. The
suggests that after staging along the mid-Atlantic underparts are noticeably white on the rear flanks and
states, they make a non-stop flight to the Caribbean vent and some may have white intruding into the lower
(McNeil and Burton 1977). This earlier north-south breast. If you are lucky enough to find a dowitcher, first
migration circumvents weather systems that would try to establish its age and then use a combination
increase their potential for transatlantic vagrancy. of the features described above to help you nail the
identification and avoid the dreaded ‘dowitcher sp’
Identification entry appearing in the annual rarity report. Good luck!
Like many waders, both size and bill length overlaps
between the sexes in both dowitchers, making Acknowledgements
identification of some individuals problematic. Long- Thanks to Michael O’Brien, Alvaro Jaramillo, Peter
billed averages larger, longer legged and shorter Pyle and Nick Bonomo for providing valuable
winged than Short-billed. A large, rotund bird, with comments. Tom Tams and Nick Bonomo also
a long bill roughly twice the length of the head provided photographic reference and Josh Jones
should prove to be Long-billed (Wilds and provided details on records.
94
 REFERENCES
• Chandler, R. J. 1998 Dowitcher identification and ageing: a photographic review. British Birds 91: 93-106.
• Hayman, P, Marchant, J, and Prater, T. 1986. Shorebirds: an identification guide to the waders of the world. Christopher Helm, London.
• Hough, J R. 1999. The Long and Short of It. Birdwatch 95: 28-31.
• Jaramillo, A, Pittaway, R, and Burke, P. 1991. The identification and migration of breeding-plumaged dowitchers in southern Ontario. Birders Journal. 1: 8-25.
• Jaramillo, A, and Henshaw, B. 1995. Identification of breeding-plumaged Long- and Short-billed Dowitchers. Birding World 8: 221-228.
• Jehl, J R Jr. 1963. An investigation of fall-migrating dowitchers in New Jersey. Wilson Bulletin 75: 250-261.
• Lee, C-T, and Birch, A. 2006. Advances in the field Identification of North American dowitchers. Birding 38: 34-43.
• McNeil, R, and Burton, J. 1977. Southbound migration of shorebirds from the Gulf of Lawrence. Wilson Bulletin 89:167-171.
• Nisbet, I C T. 1961. Dowitchers in Great Britain and Ireland. British Birds 54: 343-357. Reprinted in Sharrock, J T R, 1980, pp 16-31.
• Pitelka, F A. 1961 Long and Short-billed Dowitcher specimens in the British Museum. British Birds 54: 340-342.

TWO: Juvenile Short-billed Dowitcher

(Connecticut, USA, 19 August 2006). A typical
juvenile griseus, exhibiting the classic, ‘tiger-
striped’ tertials, lower scapulars and inner
greater coverts that allow for an easy
separation from Long-billed. The overall shape
is quite streamlined, lacking the rotund body
and long-legged look often associated with
Long-billed. The bill is quite long on this bird,
suggesting a female.
JULIAN HOUGH

THREE: Juvenile Long-billed Dowitcher

(Burravoe, Yell, Shetland, 9 September 2015).
Juveniles of this species are more muted in
appearance than Short-billed. The scapulars
are more solidly dark, with dull chestnut or
buffy fringes, and fresh individuals show a
subtle, peachy blush restricted to the upper
breast. More importantly note the plain tertials,
lacking the contrasting internal markings of
Short-billed. The overall shape is often more
rangy (‘godwit-like’) due to the longer bill and
legs than Short-billed. The white lower eye
crescent, although not diagnostic, is often
more prominent on Long-billed and may be
useful when combined with a suite of other
characters.
HUGH HARROP

95
FOUR: First-winter Long-billed Dowitcher
(Connecticut, USA, 18 February 2008). By early
winter (Nov-Dec), some individuals have
replaced their juvenile head, body and
upperpart feathers with greyer, winter-
plumaged ones, but retain their diagnostic
juvenile tertials. Some birds, like this one, can
retain a scattering of juvenile chestnut-fringed
scapulars well into winter. The two generations
of feathers allow the bird to be aged and the
patterning of these retained juvenile feathers
separates it from similarly aged Short-billed.
The newly moulted scapulars also show a dark
shaft streak with a darker, diffuse centre which
is pro-Long-billed. The overall length of the bill
is quite short (thus overlapping with Short-
billed), but is not so deep based.

JULIAN HOUGH
FIVE: First-winter Short-billed Dowitcher, (Corvo,
Azores, 10 October 2016). Bill length and shape
are ambiguous, but the retained juvenile
tertials, lower scapulars and inner greater
coverts, with broad, buffy internal markings,
identify this bird as Short-billed. The replaced
adult-like grey mantle feathers are pale greyish
with a narrow white-fringe and a thin shaft
streak, and lack any noticeable darkening
around the feather shaft. With experience and
comparison, Short-billed often shows a deeper-
based bill than Long-billed, with an obvious kink
along the bill, though this is more apparent in
some individuals than others. Many have a
brownish-mustard colour (more olive in Long-
billed) to the bill base as shown, although again
this is not diagnostic.

MIKA BRUUN
SIX: Adult winter hendersoni Short-billed
Dowitcher (Texas, USA, 14 September 2006).
Aged by the uniformly grey upperpart feathers
lacking any retained juvenile wing coverts or
tertials. Separating both dowitchers in this
plumage can be very difficult. Key features are:
more discernible mottling/stippling of the breast
band; more defined barring at the carpal area;
and a whiter, more extensively pale chin. The
upperpart feathers are subtly different: more
uniformly greyish with a narrow pale fringe and
indistinct shaft streak (compared to the browner
fringes with more darkening around the feather
shafts in Long-billed). Short-billed is often paler,
less contrasting above (particularly hendersoni),
but this can be hard to appreciate on lone
vagrants.
KEVIN T KARLSON

96
 SEVEN: Adult winter Long-billed Dowitcher
(Texas, USA, 13 November 2007). This
(presumably male) Long-billed has a short bill,
so is likely to cause the most confusion. Note
the overall uniform plumage, with the grey of
the neck sides extending up higher onto the
throat and blending into smooth grey upper
flanks. This imparts a more ‘cloaked’ look
compared to Short-billed. The lower breast and
carpal area is often more solid (less stippled/
spotted) grey and the carpal area barring
(especially when worn) is often broad and
forms a diffuse, smoother grey area, compared
to the more defined barring of Short-billed.
Upperpart feathers show less paler fringes with
a darker shaft streak and slightly more diffuse
darker feather bases that often make Long-
billed a bit more contrasted above.
KEVIN T KARLSON

EIGHT: First-summer Long-billed Dowitcher

(Connecticut, USA, 23 August 2009). Even
without looking at plumage details, the
upright, front-heavy look, with a long bill and
sloping forehead, elicit a woodcock-like
appearance that screams Long-billed. Other
less subjective clues are the worn blackish
scapulars that have squared-off tips (pointed in
Short-billed). This individual has acquired
newly moulted, greyish upperpart feathers and
at least four freshly moulted inner primaries,
contrasting with a very worn, brownish-
looking, retained juvenile outermost primary.
Given the date, this is consistent with a first-
summer (one-year-old) moulting into second-
winter plumage. An adult at this date would
still retain more breeding plumage and not be
as advanced in its primary moult.
JULIAN HOUGH

NINE: Adult griseus Short-billed Dowitcher

(Connecticut, USA, 24 May 2018). An average
individual in brightness and colour and
showing worn wing coverts. Many shorebirds
in spring have not replaced these winter
feathers by the time they migrate north. The
dull orange-peach colour to the foreneck and
upper breast is muddied by dark brown
streaking/barring and it lacks the deep brick-
red tones and prominent white and black
barring shown by fresh Long-billed. The fresh
upper scapular feathers are dark with a broad
buffish ‘v’-shaped fringe that makes them
appear less dark above.
JULIAN HOUGH

97
TEN: Adult or first-summer griseus Short-billed
Dowitcher (Connecticut, USA, 21 May 2010). A
brighter bird, with peachy-orange underparts
extending to the legs, with a paler, whitish
central belly and ventral region. Many griseus
show patches of colour on the rear flanks and
vent but this is not contiguous. The underpart
markings appear as lozenge-shaped spots, and
extend onto the lower belly, and the more
chevron-shaped barring on the flanks lacks the
crisp white terminal fringe. Some fresh birds
may show pale fringes, but these are more
diffuse, with some orange visible between the
black barring and the paler terminal fringe. Bill
length is intermediate, but still appears deep
based.

JULIAN HOUGH
ELEVEN: Fresh adult Long-billed Dowitcher
(Cresswell Pond, Northumberland, 1 May 2014).
Often brighter, with more saturated reddish-
tinged underparts which extend past the legs
to the vent. The markings at the carpal area
and upper flanks are key: more chevron
shaped in Long-billed, with well-defined (when
fresh) whitish terminal fringes that are
diagnostic. The upperpart feathers and central
tail feathers are often washed with rufous,
making them overall darker than Short-billed.
The pale fringes to the rear scapulars and inner
greater coverts are variable (especially so in
Short-billed), but the classic white oval ‘pips’,
shown by this individual, are diagnostic. Note
the more godwit-like jizz due to the longer legs
and bill.

TOM TAMS
TWELVE: Worn adult Long-billed Dowitcher
(Texas, USA, 3 August 2012) This individual,
beginning to show a grey face with relatively
uniform brick-red underparts that extend back
to the vent, is typical of worn Long-billed in late
summer. Unlike worn griseus Short-billed, the
underpart barring on the flanks has been
almost completely worn off, giving it a uniform
impression, with a noticeable semi-collar of
spots across the upper breast. Rufous fringes
to the upperparts make them appear dark
above in the field, and on this individual,
almost all the diagnostic white feather tips
BRIAN E SMALL (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

have worn away, leaving a dark, square-tipped

feathers. Bill length is on the short side for
Long-billed, perhaps indicating a male.

98
JULIAN HOUGH

THIRTEEN: Adult summer griseus Short-billed Dowitcher (Connecticut, USA, 21 May 2018). A feature somewhat difficult to see in the
field, but which sometimes can be seen on photos, is that Short-billed often (but not always) shows more barring than Long-billed
along the leading edge of the underwing, as demonstrated here. Where the front of the wing meets the body, the lesser coverts are
heavily adorned with ‘v’-shaped markings. Also note the pale rump and tail here, with white barring of at least equal width of the
black bars.
JULIAN HOUGH

FOURTEEN: Short-billed Dowitcher in flight (Connecticut, USA, 12 August 2006). Compared to Long-billed, the underwing coverts
on Short-billed are more marked, producing a more uniformly barred leading edge to the wing. The compact shape, paler
bellies and vent and short bills of these birds lend them a more snipe-like appearance that is pro-Short-billed.

99
 JOE GRAHAM
FIFTEEN: Long-billed Dowitcher in flight (South Uist, Outer Hebrides, 22 May 2018). Compared to Short-billed, this species may appear
more godwit-like in flight. The more sparsely marked lesser underwing coverts appear as a white thumbprint at the front of the
leading edge of the wing, but this is generally only easy to assess from images. More helpful here is the saturated brick-red
underparts that extend all the way to the vent, recalling a breeding Bar-tailed Godwit. The narrow upper-flank barring with narrow
white terminal fringes are also visible on this fresh bird.

JULIAN HOUGH

SIXTEEN: Juvenile Short-billed Dowitcher (Connecticut, USA, 30 September 2018). Some juveniles can be tricky; this bird has reduced
internal markings in the tertials and coverts, a greyish head and breast, and a dark crown lacking pale streaking, recalling juvenile
Long-billed. However, the even proportions, short legs and medium-length bill support Short-billed, albeit a rather muted one.
Note also that some bright Long-billeds can display faint internal markings to the tertials and greater coverts.
100
 Common and
Wilson’s Snipe Words by Keith Vinicombe
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

ONE: Common and Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 20 October 2011). This photograph shows how strikingly different the two species
can look in overall plumage tone and general appearance, confirming that Wilson’s Snipe is far more than the sum of its parts. Forget
the plumage details and simply look at the two birds – they really are like chalk and cheese. The Common (left) is heavily colour
saturated with rich buff, whereas the Wilson’s shows the often-quoted ‘monochrome’ appearance. This Common is so warm brown in
tone that it may well be of the subspecies faeroeensis.

Of all the cryptically patterned wader species that

can turn up as vagrants from North America, perhaps
none has caused more headaches for birders and
record committees than Wilson’s Snipe. Though
confusingly similar to Common Snipe on first look, an
analytical approach to both good field views and
close photographs can secure a confident
identification of most birds. Keith Vinicombe shows
how to diagnose this sought-after rarity and looks
forward to a time when the bird is demoted to
scarcity.
101
 Basic Principles
O
ne of the highlights on Scilly in 2011 was • The flanks were heavily barred black on a white
another Wilson’s Snipe. Although there had background.
been credible claims there dating back to 1985, • The dark line across the lores more or less stopped
the first accepted British record was on St Mary’s in half way to the eye, contributing to a ‘bulging’ fore-
October 1998, the result of a particularly astute piece supercilium.
of field observation by Jon Baker, Bryan Bland, Andrew
Chamberlin and Pete Milford. Everything pointed to a Wilson’s Snipe, but there
Many hundreds of birders saw it, the vast majority
of whom went away happy with the identification. was another key feature that needed to be seen: the
However, it then took an agonising 10 years for the underwings.
species to be accepted onto the British list. Following this, These were obviously and solidly barred – Common
in an admirably detailed paper in British Birds (102: 425- Snipe has extensive white on the underwing coverts
434), Adam Rowlands, Brian Small and Colin Bradshaw and less densely barred axillaries. A few days later, it was
set out the criteria for the acceptance of future records. on the same pool as a presumed faeroeensis Common
This required the provision of photographs that Snipe and the two birds really were different. We
showed the ‘silver bullet’ feature: the pattern and the failed to see the details of the outer tail feathers, or the
relative width of the outer web of the outer tail feather narrower white tips to the secondaries, but these were
compared to the total width of the feather (averaging apparently photographed later.
1:5.7 on Wilson’s and 1:7.8 on Common). They also This year’s Rarities Report, published in the November
explained that the Rarities Committee would consider issue of British Birds (104: 582-583), dropped a bit of
informal submissions – not for publication – where the a bombshell. It lists four accepted records of Wilson’s
observer failed to see or photograph all the key features.
Snipe from 2007 and 2008, but one of those, discovered
The 2011 bird immediately stood out as a very cold-
looking snipe – ‘monochrome’ is a useful way of by Richard Millington on St Agnes, Scilly, in October
putting it. It lacked the warm brown-and-buff tones of 2008, was to all intents and purposes essentially a flight
Common Snipe, particularly in comparison with the record! What’s more, the observers failed to photograph
predominantly Icelandic faeroeensis subspecies, which or even see the details of the outer tail feathers.
occurs on the islands. This form is more rufous than the However, the record was superbly documented in
nominate continental form. In comparison, the Wilson’s Birding World (21: 467-469) and, in my view, the Rarities
had a very black-looking mantle, with very pale, clear- Committee was right to accept it. But the point is:
cut and contrasting buff stripes; but what really grabbed where does this now leave us? What is and what is not
the attention was the very striking ‘Aquatic Warbler- an acceptable record of Wilson’s Snipe?
like’ head pattern. The lateral crown-stripes were solidly Despite the low number of accepted records, it is
jet black and it showed a very narrow, clear-cut, pale obvious that Wilson’s Snipe is a regular transatlantic
buffish-white central crown stripe. vagrant. As such, it should be downgraded from
its current mega-rarity status. An astonishing 27
As ever, the next stage required the checking of some
further features: reportedly shot on the Azores between October
• The greater coverts were black, forming a well- 2007 and January 2008 must surely support this
defined and contrasting band across the lower edge of view. Having personally racked up 17 days of detailed
the closed wing, reminiscent of the dark greater-covert observations on Scilly, my own view is that, with
bar on a juvenile Yellow-legged Gull. experience and good views, the species is readily
• The pale barring on the tertials was relatively fine and identifiable – but good quality photographs are a
it faded towards the base. prerequisite for this subtle species.

TWO: Common Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 18

November 2011). Compared with Wilson’s,
Common Snipe is much more colour
saturated, with strong brown and buff tones
throughout its plumage. This is particularly
true of faeroeensis, the subspecies that breeds
in Iceland, the Faeroes, Orkney and Shetland
and occurs as a migrant elsewhere. Note in
particular the brown tones to the head pattern,
the more heavily patterned mantle, the strong
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

and regular pale buff barring on the tertials,

the relatively plain breast and the buffy flanks,
which show duller, browner and less
prominent barring.

102
 THREE: Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 12
October 2007). Very obvious in this photograph
is the sharply defined ‘Aquatic Warbler-like’
head pattern: a clear-cut white crown-stripe
and solidly black and contrasting lateral crown-
stripes. Note also the very black mantle, with
limited internal markings, the fine, pale buff
mantle lines, the weak fringes to the scapulars
and the narrow buff bars on the tertials (fading
towards the base). All these features, plus the
heavy and extensive black flank barring and
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

the heavily mottled breast, are typical of a

classic Wilson’s.

FOUR: Common Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 18

November 2011). This is a slightly paler
individual than the one in photo two, but it is
nevertheless very buffy, particularly on the
head, lacking Wilson’s crisp, monotone
plumage. Again, compared with Wilson’s, the
lateral crown-stripes are flecked with buff and
therefore browner, the mantle is more heavily
patterned and less solidly black, the mantle
stripes are buffer, the tertials are more heavily
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

and more evenly barred, the breast is both

plainer and paler, and the flanks have dull,
grey-brown barring.

FIVE: Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 8 October

2011). This 2011 bird was distinctly browner than
the 2007 one shown in photo three – this is not
just photographic effect. It nevertheless shows
the Aquatic Warbler head pattern and the fine
brown barring on the tertials, fading towards
the base (this tends to be more usual on
Wilson’s). Note also the contrasting black
greater-covert bar, which tends to stand out
more on Wilson’s, and the breast, which is
heavily streaked and mottled with black.
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

103
 DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)
SIX: Common Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 18 November 2011). Note the thick white tips to the secondary feathers, which are deep and
squarely cut off, forming a more prominent white trailing edge in flight. On Wilson’s, the tips are narrow and tend to hook around the
outer web. The outer tail feather appears to be more thinly, more weakly and more irregularly barred than Wilson’s. Again, note the
overall brown and buff plumage tones and the brown internal markings in the mantle and scapular feathers.

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

SEVEN: Common Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 16 October 2010). The most striking thing about this bird is how brown it looks: its entire
plumage is suffused with rich buff, producing a more colour-saturated look than Wilson’s. Also, the breast is less coarsely patterned.
Note the obvious brown internal markings in the black mantle feathers – Wilson’s tends to have only inconspicuous pale marks
here. Note in particular the white tips to the secondaries, which are deeper and more conspicuous than on Wilson’s (compare
with photo 11).
104
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

EIGHT: Common Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 18 November 2011). Although the underwing on this bird appears to be completely barred,
this is in fact misleading. Because of the angle at which it has been photographed, it does not reveal the presence of any white areas
on the underwing coverts (see photo nine). The photograph does, however, show that the white barring on the axillaries is obviously
thicker than the black. On Wilson’s, the black is usually thicker, creating a darker appearance overall.
DANIELE OCCHIATO (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

NINE: Common Snipe (Querciola, Italy, 21 August 2009). Note the large white wedge up the centre of the underwing coverts, the
white line along the lesser coverts, and thick white tips to the greater coverts. Although these differences from Wilson’s are
obvious, remember that not all Common Snipe show this large extent of white. In addition, note also that on the axillaries,
the white bars are much wider than the black ones, and the white tips of the secondaries are very thick and squarely cut
off.
105
 STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)
TONY MILLS

TEN: Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 17 October 2011). The outer ELEVEN: Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 8 October 2011). A
tail feathers of Wilson’s have contrasting bars that are thicker, significant feature in this photograph is the pattern of white on
darker, better defined and better aligned across the inner and the tips of the secondaries. On Wilson’s, it is narrow and curves
outer webs. From this photograph, the ratio of the width of outer around the tip of the feathers and tapers to a point, particularly on
web to total feather width is about 1.56, which is in the range of the outer web. Most Commons show a broad and square-cut
Wilson’s (see text). As this cannot be measured in the field, good- white tip (see photo seven). In flight, this difference gives Wilson’s
quality photographs are extremely beneficial in confirming the a narrower white trailing edge to the wing. Note also the heavily
identification of Wilson’s Snipe. barred underwing and axillaries.

STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

MARTIN SMART

TWELVE: Wilson’s Snipe (Vancouver Island, Canada, 10 October THIRTEEN: Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 8 October 2011). The
2006). One of the key features to look for is the heavily and extensively and heavily barred axillaries and flanks of Wilson’s are
uniformly barred flanks, axillaries and underwing coverts. These very striking in this photograph. On the axillaries in particular, the
areas are best seen when the birds wing-stretch. On Wilson’s, black bars are usually equal to or slightly broader in width than
the black bars are usually equal to or broader than the white the white bars, contributing to a generally darker appearance
ones. Common Snipe typically shows less dense barring on the compared with Common. Again, photographs are useful, but it is
axillaries and has a large wedge of white up the middle of the nevertheless possible to gain an accurate impression of this in
underwing, as well as thick white tips to the under greater the field, even in flight.
coverts.
106
IAN LYCETT

FOURTEEN: Probable Wilson’s Snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, October 1985). This is a record shot of a bird seen 13 years prior to the first accepted
British record. Given the blurred nature of the photograph and the strong colour reproduction, it is not possible to make a firm identification
from the three available images. However, supporting documentation suggested that it was indeed a Wilson’s Snipe. It seems likely that not
only has the species been overlooked in the past, but also that it is not really the mega rarity that the handful of accepted records would
currently suggest.
DAVE MCGOUGH

FIFTEEN: Unidentified snipe (Rainham Marshes, Greater London/Essex, 17 November 2010). This interesting bird is strongly suggestive
of Wilson’s Snipe. The underwings appear to be completely barred and it shows a good ‘Aquatic Warbler-like’ head pattern, as well
as a coarsely patterned breast. However, the white bars on the axillaries appear to be broader than the black ones and other
photos indicate that the tertials are quite thickly and evenly barred with buff, and that the head, breast, mantle and scapulars
are also quite colour saturated.
107
 DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)
SIXTEEN: Unidentified snipe (St Mary’s, Scilly, 19 November 2011). The identity of this snipe is unconfirmed, but it looks a good candidate for
Wilson’s. The pale background tones, the crisply patterned ‘Aquatic Warbler’ head pattern, the black and relatively unmarked mantle, the
heavily mottled breast and the well-barred flanks all point to that species. The next stage would be to see the underwing, the tips of the
secondaries and, if possible, photograph the outer tail feathers. Wilson’s Snipe is in fact easier to identify in the field than it is from
photographs!

Find your own Common and Wilson’s Snipe

Currently, Wilson’s Snipe has only been confirmed on Scilly, all but once at Lower Moors,
St Mary’s, but the species has been suspected on the mainland at several sites from
Cornwall to Essex.
Elsewhere, it is likely that Wilson’s can potentially turn up at any coastal saltmarsh
margin, inland pool or pond, or marshland reserve anywhere in the country, just like its
congeners and the commoner American vagrants. The numbers of snipe at any wetland
can be phenomenal, especially during a cold snap, but views can be distant or obscure.
As the island form faroeensis is more varicoloured and buffier than both nominate
Common and Wilson’s, only dull nominate birds are likely to be confused with the
American species. Observers noting a dark and monochrome-looking snipe in the field
should prepare for a long sit-in to make notes complete enough or capture images
detailed enough to nail the species, but with regular Long-billed Dowitchers and Spotted
Sandpiers inland and on the east coast, there is no reason why Wilson’s Snipe should not
be occurring regularly in Britain.
Helpful field pointers include a Jack Snipe-like jizz (along with the similar dark
appearance and creamy-white ‘tramlines’ on the mantle), as well as the Aquatic Warbler-
like head markings. Differences in flushing style and call are minimal, and Wilson’s can
be just as hard to observe as ‘our’ birds, often flushing from a distance on approach.
However, as is apparent from one recently accepted record, flight views can afford
enough information to correctly identify and successfully submit a Wilson’s, though
photographs will certainly aid credibility to non-committee members.
Still, as with Caspian Gull, the species is identifiable in the field with patience and
experience. Like Semipalmated Plover and female Green-winged Teal, Wilson’s Snipe is
likely a more regular visitor at the frontier of field identification – but it can be done!
108
 Common and Great
Snipe and Eurasian
Woodcock Words by Andy Stoddart
RICHARD BROOKS (WWW.RICHARD-BROOKS.CO.UK)

ONE: Adult Common Snipe (Balranald RSPB, North Uist, Outer Hebrides, 16 May 2008). On the breeding grounds, Common Snipe will
perch readily on fence posts, allowing a full appreciation of its marvellously intricate plumage patterns – a complex mixture of brown,
black, white, cream and russet hues. The plumage is hard to describe but fortunately it is easy to enjoy.

With their skulking habits and largely nocturnal

lifestyles, these similar-looking waders might be
unfamiliar to many birders. To add to the confusion,
their attractive yet cryptic plumages offer the
perfect camouflage, allowing them to blend in with
their preferred habitats. Neither are they especially
numerous – Common Snipe and Eurasian Woodcock
are both declining in Britain, while Great Snipe has
always been a great rarity. Andy Stoddart has all the
information you need to recognise each of these
species in the field this autumn.
109
 Basic Principles
T
he snipes and their relative Eurasian Woodcock Yorkshire and Norfolk also have a good track record.
are enigmatic birds. They are cryptically and Away from these counties, however, this is a very rare
beautifully patterned and exhibit very distinctive bird indeed.
behaviour, but their skulking habits and often Vagrant Great Snipe are not particularly associated
nocturnal lifestyles can make them hard to see well.
with wet habitats and birds are most likely to be
They are also birds of conservation concern so every
encounter is one to be treasured. flushed from dry grassland and crops. They typically
sit tight and are reluctant to fly, rising from almost
Common Snipe underfoot. They take to the air heavily and are
This species has a large breeding range, extending either silent or give a very distinctive quiet croak.
across northern Europe and northern Asia. It is a Furthermore, instead of zig-zagging high into the
migrant, wintering south into central and southern distance they fly low, steady and straight for a short
Europe, Africa, the Middle East and South and South- distance before ‘stalling’ just above the ground and
East Asia.
dropping in a rather ungainly ‘pancake landing’, with
In Britain it breeds in freshwater marshes, bogs and
damp meadows. It is, however, one of our fastest- outstretched wings and a spread tail. They can then
declining native species. It is currently Amber-listed walk off, however, and be difficult to refind.
as a Bird of Conservation Concern and its wonderful In flight Great Snipe looks quite large and stocky,
‘drumming’ display flight is becoming an increasingly perhaps a little Eurasian Woodcock-like, and is slightly
rare sight. It is more commonly seen as a migrant or shorter billed than Common Snipe. It shows a very
wintering bird. distinctive white-bordered dark midwing panel and
Common Snipe is generally easily identified. Flying white-tipped primary coverts, while the white trailing
birds, often in small flocks known as ‘wisps’, draw
edge is very narrow and inconspicuous.
attention to themselves with far-carrying, dry, rather
grating kretch calls. At range they look compact and a Other features include wholly barred underparts
little dumpy, with a disproportionately long bill held at (lacking an obvious white belly) and dark-looking
a downward angle. Flushed birds rise nimbly, call loudly barred underwings. When landing, the spread outer
and fly off rapidly and high for some distance with a tail feathers are prominently white. On the ground,
characteristic zig-zagging flight. white tips to the wing coverts form obvious lines on the
They typically look quite dark, with a pale patch on the closed wing.
wing coverts, dark and pale bands in the underwing,
barred flanks and a pale belly and a prominent white
Eurasian Woodcock
trailing edge to the secondaries.
On the ground the species shows a wonderfully This bird breeds in damp woodland right across
complex plumage full of russet, dark brown and northern Europe and Asia. It is a migrant, wintering
cream hues. The upperparts and head are noticeably in western and southern Europe and southern Asia,
stripy. When stationary, they blend beautifully into where it also seeks out dense woodland habitats.
their preferred habitat of dark pool margins and In Britain, breeding birds are thinly distributed. They
overhanging pale grasses. are rarely seen during the day, but at dusk they
perform a highly distinctive ‘roding’ flight, steadily
Great Snipe
beating the bounds of their territories and giving both
Great Snipe has a relatively restricted breeding range,
confined to north-east Europe and north-west Russia, high-pitched tiswick and low-pitched grunting calls.
where it frequents remote bogs and wet meadows. Little plumage can be seen, but the bird impresses
Unlike its commoner counterpart, it engages in a with its large size, fat, dumpy silhouette, broad, blunt
fabulous communal lekking display at dusk: calling, wings and long bill held at a downward angle.
stretching itself upright and spreading its tail to flash Eurasian Woodcock is most frequently seen here as an
prominently white outer tail feathers. autumn migrant. It arrives from across the North Sea
It is a long-distance migrant, wintering in Africa in late October and November and is typically flushed
south of the Sahara. Remarkably, it has recently
from underfoot in low coastal cover. On such occasions
been discovered that Great Snipe performs most of
this migration in one continuous very rapid flight, it rises heavily and does not call, although the sudden
flying non-stop for more than 4,000 miles at the rush of wings can be quite loud at such close range.
astonishing speed of 60 miles per hour. This is one of As the birds fly off they show some plumage – a
the world’s fastest migratory birds! Sadly, the species beautifully intricate pattern of dark brown and russet,
is of conservation concern and is classified by BirdLife but looking quite uniform with no real tonal contrasts
International as Near Threatened. or pale areas other than a rusty brown rump and tail.
Great Snipe is a true rarity in Britain, although Once winter sets in they are harder to find despite the
historically it was a little more regular. Today it is
fact that, to the surprise of many, this is said to be one
a rare mid-autumn vagrant, but it can also occur,
albeit much more rarely, in spring and has even been of Britain’s commonest wintering waders. They live
recorded displaying here (at Cley, Norfolk, in May solitary lives on the woodland floor and are only seen
2011). Predictably, Shetland – and particularly Fair when flushed, but they can also be watched as they
Isle – account for the majority of records, but fly out at dusk to feed in wet grassland.
110
 TWO: Common Snipe (Lower Moors, St Mary’s,
Scilly, 18 November 2011). This individual is
giving us a quick lesson in bird anatomy. When
fluffed up or caught by the wind, the main
feather tracts in the upperparts reveal
themselves as discrete units. Here one can
clearly see the mantle feathers which lie above
the upper scapulars and finally the lower
scapulars, each comprising a dark block of
feathers with a longitudinal cream stripe along
its outer border
DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

THREE: Adult Common Snipe (Porth Hellick, St Mary’s, Scilly, 13 October 2005). This is a more typical view of a Common Snipe, caught
here feeding in its favoured habitat of deep mud and emergent vegetation. Note the typically intricate plumage patterns with
complex internal feather markings and contrasting feather fringes. The contrasting white belly and relatively plain appearance to
the closed wing exclude any thoughts of Great Snipe. The strongly rufous hues to the upperparts of this bird suggest that it
might belong to the Northern Isles, Faeroes and Icelandic subspecies faeroeensis.
111
 RICHARD BROOKS (WWW.RICHARD-BROOKS.CO.UK)
FOUR: Adult Great Snipe (Kalloni Lake, Lesvos, 20 April 2007). Although closely resembling a Common Snipe, this bird shows a couple
of noticeable differences. The flank barring continues onto the lower belly, resulting in no contrasting white area, and the tips to the
wing coverts are broadly tipped white, forming very prominent bars across the closed wing. These key features of Great Snipe are
backed up by the bird’s relatively portly appearance.

LISA GEOGHEGAN

FIVE: Eurasian Woodcock (Ashdown Forest, East Sussex, 26 November 2016). When seen this well, Eurasian Woodcock is truly
unmistakable, resembling no other species on the British list. Note the remarkable rusty, black and white feather patterning –
perhaps reminiscent of a European Nightjar – which affords exceptional camouflage. The typically stocky shape can be seen
well here, as can the curiously placed eye which gives the species almost 360-degree vision.
112
MIKE DANZENBAKER (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

HARVEY VAN DIEK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

SIX: Adult Common Snipe (location unknown, 23 September SEVEN: Adult Great Snipe (site unknown, Belarus, 30 May 2011).
2006). This flying Common Snipe has the typical very long-billed Compared with Common Snipe, this flying Great Snipe looks a
appearance, with the bill held at a downwards angle. Note, little dumpy, the wings are rather broad based and the bill is on
however, the characteristic upperwing pattern comprising a dark the short side also. Unfortunately the distinctive upperwing
outer wing, a diffuse pale area on the wing coverts and a pattern is not visible here, but note that the dense flank barring
prominent white trailing edge to the wing formed by white tips continues, albeit more weakly, down towards the belly, the
to the secondaries. The white belly patch is just visible, although underwings are uniformly and densely barred and, a key feature
not particularly obvious in such a side-on view, as are the pale of Great Snipe, the outer tail feathers are extensively white.
‘bands’ through the underwing coverts.

HARVEY VAN DIEK (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

HELGE SORENSEN (WWW.AGAMI.NL)

EIGHT: Adult Great Snipe (Rindal, Norway, 9 June 2011). This flying NINE: Eurasian Woodcock (Heligoland, Germany, 31 October
Great Snipe is showing the crucial upperwing features to 2016). The very dumpy appearance with ‘hanging’ belly, very
perfection. Note the rather dark upperwing with no noticeable broad, rather blunt-tipped wings and downwards-pointing bill
white trailing edge. Instead, the most striking feature is the white are key features of a flying Eurasian Woodcock. Note also the
tips to the wing coverts which form prominent white lines across rather dark and uniform overall appearance with no contrasting
the inner part of the spread wing and also continue onto the pale plumage areas.
outer wing due to prominent white tips to the primary coverts.
These lines therefore enclose a dark ‘panel’ in the centre of the

113
 TEN: Juvenile Common Snipe (Ouessant,
France, 8 August 2005). This lovely portrait of a
Common Snipe shows all its key features to
perfection. The plumage is very fresh indeed,
with beautifully crisp feather fringes. Note that
the lesser and median coverts show whitish
tips with a blackish subterminal band and a
narrow shaft streak which does not break
through to the feather tip. In addition the
tertials show well-defined, narrow rufous bars,
a narrow white fringe and a dark subterminal
band. We can be confident therefore that this
bird is a juvenile.

AURÉLIEN AUDEVARD
ELEVEN: Juvenile Common Snipe (Lower
Moors, St Mary’s, Scilly, 18 November 2011). This
young Common Snipe (aged by the same
features discussed in photo 10) shows the usual
highly complex, stripy plumage patterning.
Again, any thoughts of Great Snipe are negated
by the contrasting white belly and relatively
plain appearance to the closed wing which
lacks any prominent white bars across the

DOMINIC MITCHELL (WWW.BIRDINGETC.COM)

wing coverts.

TWELVE: Juvenile Great Snipe (Spurn, East

Yorkshire, 16 September 2013. This young Great
Snipe is also in beautifully fresh condition. It
looks similar to a Common Snipe at first
glance, but the flank barring extends well
down towards the belly, the broad white tips to
the wing coverts form lines across the closed
wing and some white is just visible in the outer
tail. However, the flank barring is a little
narrower that of the spring bird in photo three
STEVE YOUNG (WWW.BIRDSONFILM.COM)

and the white bars across the wing are

somewhat narrower too – both indicating that
this bird is a juvenile.

No suitable images of juvenile Eurasian Woodcock were available. It is very difficult to age this species in the field, but the key
feature to look out for on exceptional views (or, more realistically, in the hand) is the pattern of the primary coverts: broad,
diffuse, pale ginger tips in juveniles, narrower, crisper white tips in adults.
114
 SAVE
20%

The UK’s leading monthly magazine

for keen birders
DIGITAL Extra digital content is available only with the digital edition
including exclusive images, videos and much, much more!

PREFER PAPER?
Have the magazine posted direct to your door each
month. To find our latest subscription offers visit
PRINT www.birdguides.com or call 01778 392027.
 THE UK’S
LOWEST PRICE*
FROM
JUST

£14.00 **

Buy your paperback copy from

www.bit.ly/lowest-collins2023
*UK’s lowest price as of 01.03.2023. Prices are subject to change. ** You must be a Birdwatch or Bird News subscriber to benefit from the promotional price. Price is not inclusive of postage & packaging.