Page 3 of 3

Re: Longtails - Is Forshaw's new book wrong? Or is Morcombe?

Posted: 14 Sep 2012, 12:07
by woodstockaus
tonytoast wrote:Too hard to follow....are Hecks red or yellow billed or both? Or is there no right answer?
Tony - I think we've wound up agreeing that the original edition of Morcombe was wrong, which is why it was corrected later - so the answer is that "normal" longtails have yellow bills and Hecks have red. Having said that, it's not clear-cut because there's a range of colours in between which may or may not depend on location.

Re: Longtails - Is Forshaw's new book wrong? Or is Morcombe?

Posted: 14 Sep 2012, 15:15
by tonytoast
woodstockaus wrote:
tonytoast wrote:Too hard to follow....are Hecks red or yellow billed or both? Or is there no right answer?
Tony - I think we've wound up agreeing that the original edition of Morcombe was wrong, which is why it was corrected later - so the answer is that "normal" longtails have yellow bills and Hecks have red. Having said that, it's not clear-cut because there's a range of colours in between which may or may not depend on location.
Cheers...I think! You know, I have always called Chestnuts, Bullies and Redbrows, Redheads and Spice, Nutmegs (the list goes on)....I appreciate that at some point someone has to document a name BUT as long as we speak a similar language, ie Red Billed are Hecks, then all is well. I just get a bit embarrassed when I have been calling something a particular name for a long time and then find out that I have mislead....in this case, it would appear that I was ok! :thumbup:

Re: Longtails - Is Forshaw's new book wrong? Or is Morcombe?

Posted: 14 Sep 2012, 16:59
by Myzomela
This confusion is why the Europeans just call everything by their scientific name- then there is no confusion (except perhaps in this case because the literature is confusing).

I know that this is "Un- Australian"-way too formal for most of us but it does avoid confusion.

Re: Longtails - Is Forshaw's new book wrong? Or is Morcombe?

Posted: 16 Sep 2012, 16:31
by arthur
Yes, I am looking out as I type at about 300/ 400 examples of 'lonchura castaneothorax'

Dry season and they flock . . always manage to find the old discarded seed

I'll bet if I could do a quick survey they would volunteer for aviary life :thumbup:

Re: Longtails - Is Forshaw's new book wrong? Or is Morcombe?

Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 08:14
by mickw
Myzomela wrote:This confusion is why the Europeans just call everything by their scientific name- then there is no confusion (except perhaps in this case because the literature is confusing).

I know that this is "Un- Australian"-way too formal for most of us but it does avoid confusion.
Well said Myzo.......it would indeed be confusing if we were to refer to you as Honey :?

Re: Longtails - Is Forshaw's new book wrong? Or is Morcombe?

Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 09:53
by Myzomela
:lol: :lol: :lol: -

I hope that's not a pick up line Mick!!!

Thanks but no thanks mate. I'm happily married. :D