I am trying to get an "ID" on this bird .  The photo is by John Judge - please respect his copyright.

The "history" is that John Judge took the picture at Draycote, UK in August of 2003. He labeled it "Arctic Skua". I put the picture into the BDI online field field guide as an immature Parasitic Jaeger (based mostly on the photographer's initial ID and secondly on my references). This ID has been challenged. I have asked several knowledgeable birders for their input and I have placed their comments below. The colors separate the remarks from different people.

The comments below are dated in the order I received them. The authors are (in alphabetical order):  Paul Buckley, Bob Budliger, Jack Dozier, Björn Johansson, John Judge, J Harry Kreuger, Tony Leukering, Todd McGrath, Klaus Olsen, Phil Pickering, Paul Sykes, Noel Wamer, Cliff Weisse.

See comments (updated 11:00am  Sept 26, 2004) below the picture - please send YOUR thoughts to  
<barbolink1@earthlink.net>   THANKS


PS  On Sept 25, the ID question was sent to Frontiers of Identification
http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/FRID.html#1096209814
Please check there for more comments.


Arctic Skua
copyrighted by John Judge

The comments that started this inquiry:
(Sept 4) There's a photo on the BDI Feild guide on the Parasitic Jaeger page that I think is of a light juvenile Long-tailed.  It's by John Judge.  Points that I feel suggest Long-tailed include:
-bill structure; short thick bill with gonydeal angle closer to base of bill than the nail;compare to the other birds on the page, especially the one below it.
-cold tone of plumage with whitish feather edges
-undertail coverts barred black and white
-flanks barred black and white
-face appears concave in front of bill
and then he added this:
I just realized I didn't explain one point correctly regarding the possible LT Jaeger on the Parasitic page.  The gonydeal angle is on the basal side of the end of the nail.  On Parasitics it is on the tip side of the end of the nail. 
-bill structure; short thick bill with gonydeal angle closer to base of bill than the nail;compare to the other birds on the page, especially the one below it.


After sending the picture and the above comments to several friends, this is what they had to say:
(Sept 13) Juv. Jaegers are really tough. This bird looks to me like a Parasitic (Arctic Skua in British parlance). I can't tell you why--it just doesn't have the small-headed, delicate look of Long-tail, and I think the tips of the primaries have too much white.

(Sept 22) I don't see much on this bird that would be out of the range for Parasitic.  The bill structure looks like Parasitic to me. Although the bill is not in complete plan view in the picture, it looks like the distance from the proximal to the distal end of the nail is much less than the distance from the proximal end to the base of the culmen.  Also, the dark tip of the bill appears to be much less than 45 to 50 percent, as would be expected in Long-tailed.  Other points for Parasitic...  The overall impression of the mantle plumage is dark rusty, not dark grayish that would indicate Long-tailed and the pale primary tips are more prominent than I would expect in Long-tailed, which can lack them entirely.  Also, the bird looks to be to be rather bull-necked.

(Sept 22) ...my first impression was LTJA due to the "whiteness" of the checkered back and the lateral and underneath striping.  The overhang of the hooked top mandible seems stronger for LTJA in Sibley than that of PAJA, and it seems strongly hooked in this photo.  I'm looking at Sibley and Olsen & Larsson (SKUAS AND JAEGARS), and I am even more confused.  ...since last night my thought processes are different. (Not that strange, considering...).  I feel it is a Parasitic Jaeger.  The streaking on the nape, the size (hard to judge), and its not so dainty bill, head shape, not dove-rounded, lead me towards that choice.  I blew up some Internet photos to check it out again, and came around to this decision.  I remain a very uncertain amateur concerning this family.

(Sept 23 ) Well, I think he was right in the first place. Looks like a fine juv Parasitic to me, for any number of reasons:  head size and shape; bill size and shape; light:dark ratio and position of bill color; heavy dorsal streaks and scaling; overall coarse, contrasty brown color.
Another definitive fieldmark I would like to see but can't is nicely pointed (Parasitic) vs rounded (Long-tail) central rectrices, but it really isn't necessary here.

(Sept 23) The bird looks to me like a light to intermediate morph Parasitic Jaeger (Arctic Skua). The white tips to the primaries is pretty diagnostic (both LT and Pom either lack these completely or or they are quite faint). The bill seems OK for Parasitic, but the angle of the photo makes this hard to judge. light LT jeagers often look gray rather than brown, and this looks brown, although not as rusty brown as many Parasitics. The shape also looks better for Parasitic, a LT jaeger would be slimmer and slighter. I wouldn't have any trouble calling this a Parasitic, but it is hard to judge jaegers from one photo, but I think the primary tips are enough (when combined with the shape and overall appearance) ot safely ID this bird.

(Sept 24) It's hard to be 100% confident based on one photo but it definitely looks like a L-t to me. Contra someone's comment, it does not look bull-necked at all to me. The shoulders are quite narrow, and the body appears slight and quite attenuated at the rear. The head and eye appear too large in proportion to the body for Parasitic. The overall jizz is like a small gull, while Parasitics typically look more like fat chickens to me :)
I think I can see the distinctive L-t pinched look to the face in front of the eyes, but would like a closer photo to feel more confident using that as a mark. Forehead/bill angle is probably not as flat as it appears at a glance because the head is turned away from the camera slightly. Obviously a subjective statement, but to me the jizz of the head shape and facial expression is all
L-t.
Bill appears quite stubby with black 1/3 or more along the culmen - great for L-t. I haven't looked much at the nail/gonys
placement that you mention as a mark, will have to try that.
If the nape and neck are really as contrastingly pale as that area appears that would be better for L-t. Also while parasitics can
have pale barring on the sides and undertail coverts, it's usually not as clean and stark as it appears on this bird - more typical of
L-t. Cold plumage tones here do look more typical of L-t, although often not safe to judge that in photos. Does not look
"rusty" at all on my monitor in any case.
Pale fringing to primary tips may be more typical of Parasitic, but L-t can unquestionably at least show some pale tipping. In fact the fringing on this bird really isn't that pronounced, probably less so than you would expect on an average Parasitic. In any case that's only a supportive mark at best, certainly not definitive either way.
As a side note since it was brought up, I also think the shape of the central rect tips is a somewhat overrated mark. Perhaps it works for juv's in fresh plumage in the hand, but in photos and in the field I've more often than not found it misleading - far from
definitive, even with what I felt were good looks. I suspect it's at least somewhat variable in both species.


The photographer (John Judge) wrote this on 9/25/04:
Although we do not get many Skua's inland at this site I have seen quite a few elsewhere. I first picked up the bird as it flew in and the size shape and "jizz" of it made me think it was either an Arctic or Pomarine Skua. Admitidly it does look like a very cold colour and I have not seen Arctic's as grey as this. Th bill of the bird is mentioned by one birder as short but the angle of the picture makes this very hard to assume that. About 8 birders managed to see the bird before it flew off and all were happy with the ID that it was an Arctic. The pale edges to the primaries point to Arctic and th bird was quite "heavy" as apposed to the Tern like "jizz" of a Long-tailed.   Hope this sheds a bit more light on it

(Sept 25) Body, head, bill comparison give the bird the delicate, yet still somewhat proportional look characteristic of LTJA that at first glace is very similar to a mid-size larid
The feather edgings are very chrisp and light whitish, not buff as in PAJA
The very neat, clear, crisp black and white barring on the tail coverts is characteristic of light morph juvenile LTJA
Even on a light juvenile PAJA, the nape should be much more buffy and streaked...this is good for LTJA
The tips to the primaries are very, almost imperceptibly narrow - very charactereistic of LTJA
I super-enlarged the bill and the exact measurement of nail is half the bill (realizing that it is an angled picture), as well as the gonydeal angle being at about the beginning point (going left to right) of the nail, or about half way on lower mandible


On Sept 25, the ID question was sent to Frontiers of Identification
http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/FRID.html#1096209814
Please check there for more comments.


(Sept 26) Though identifiying a jaeger from only one picture is difficult, if I were forced to identify this bird, I would have to agree ... concerning the ID of the juvenile (not immature) jaeger and call it a Long-tailed.  Though I realize that the picture was taken in the UK where Parasitic breeds, the date is highly suggestive of Long-tailed and, in fact, would rule out all other jaeger species in the Lower 48, in my experience.  I have a few additional comments:
Though the primary tips are nearly diagnostic for Parasitic, they are not quite absolutely diagnostic -- I have seen one juv Long-tailed (seen quite well and Klaus Olsen agreeing with the ID from perusing the photos) with primary tips this broad;
The undertail coverts/vent barring is black and white, not dark brown and buff as typical of Parasitic -- the coloration is typical of Long-tailed;
The overall coloration is typical of Long-tailed -- I have never seen a juvenile Parasitic this cold; and
The bill shape and pattern is that of Long-tailed and appears to me to be too thick to be that of Parasitic.


(Sept 27) In my opinion (as earlier) the photo attached is a rather pale juvenile Parasitic (Arctic) Jaeger (Skua).   The bill structure and  its color pattern alone ID's this individual (see Sibley  2000, p. 196; Jonsson  1993 Birds of Europe with North Africa and the Middle East, Princeton Univ. Press, pp. 257, 260-261; and Mullarney, Svensson, Zetterstrom, & Grant.
1999. Birds of Europe.----a Princeton Univ. Press Field Guide, pp. 166-167).   Streaking on nape and head is characteristic of of juv. Parasitics but not juv. Long-tailed Jaegers.   The bird in the photo is atipical of  juv. Parasitic in that the feather edges are almost white rather than some shade of rusty; the  juv. plumage coloration in jaegers is notoriously variable.


(Sept 28) Regarding that jaeger, when I first saw that photo a couple of weeks ago my first reaction was: Why is that a parsiticus? Compare bill and plumage with this bird in almost identical angle of which there are other photos confirming ID as longicaudus  http://www.pbase.com/ol_coot/ltjarger_ky
The bill shape and marking is much better for longicaudus than for parasitcus.
Here is a good view of a typical parasiticus http://www.illinoisbirds.org/parasitic.jpg
This longicaudus shows pale edges to primaries, (if you look hard enough)
http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/LTJaeger1.htm
as does this one
http://www.surfbirds.com/media/Photos/ltjaeger.jpg
Finally, colour tones. As with all images and especially digital, many things must be considered: time of day when photo was taken, low sun makes colours reddish, brand of film in camera, ISO setting of film or camera, normal,  under- or overexporsure, white balance setting if digital camera, if scanned slide setting of scanner and finally calibration of computer monitor.
As if that wasn't enough, here's a photo of a brown toned juvenile longicaudus
http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery9&start=61
2nd from bottom.
My view: until a photo shows up of that particular bird showing exact shape of tail including central feathers or the upperside of the primaries I'd label it Long-tailed.
ID of jeagers are difficult and can be extremely difficult. There is overlap in most of the characters for separation and ID must always be based by adding up as many characters as possible. If in photos of sitting or standing birds not enough are visible they will have to be left unidentified, unfortunately not many birders today realise this.
For the record I have extensive experience of the three small Stercorarius, (I saw 5 juv. Long-tailed yesterday)


The ID question was sent to Frontiers of Identification
http://birdingonthe.net/mailinglists/FRID.html#1096209814
Please check there for more comments however, Klaus Olsen added the following which will pretty much end any further discussion:  
"Thanks for paying my attention to this bird, in my eyes a rather typical Long-tailed. I think the problem is, that many tries to identify the bird based on sole characters - in field ID as many characters as possible should fit each other."

Thanks for your help - Barb <barbolink1@earthlink.net>
This page:  http://home.earthlink.net/~barbolink1/BrdLnks/JaegerPage.html