A Siberian Stonechat at Gibraltar Point November 16th 2024 and personal musings about past Lincolnshire eastern stonechats

As a new subscriber to British Birds in 1975 the anticipation of the monthly mail delivery of the next issue revolved around the unknown content; would there be an article on identification of some tricky species or accounts of the finding of rare birds or a write up on an extraordinary influx of some scarce migrant or winter visitor or would it be a bit of a non-interest issue! Prior to subscribing I had been given a run of issues from the 1950’s all of which had been devoured searching for inspiration and information on rare birds to be honest. While at the BTO I had spent countless hours trawling through all issues from 1960 onwards reading and re-reading accounts of the finding of rare birds like the mythical Red-flanked Bluetail and photocopying identification articles like the Dusky – Radde’s Warbler paper by Ron Johns and Ian Wallace complete with Ian’s pen and ink sketches that spoke a thousand words. All of this information was of course to be hopefully applied in the field when the Lincolnshire coast was blessed by Easterly autumnal winds, or at least that was the theory.

The June 1977 issue of BB contained a paper entitled Identification and European Status of eastern Stonechats by Iain S. Robertson. Complete with some very grainy black and white images and a pencil sketch this threw up a potential rare bird that most people had never heard of or contemplated but the first European record dated back to October 11th 1883 on, where else but that fabled isle of Heligoland with the second on the Isle of May on October 10th 1913 but more to the point there had been an upturn in records since the late 1960’s with 10 in 1974 alone so there was hope of discovering one of these gems. In Lincolnshire we did not have to wait long as the Donna Nook stalwarts unearthed a first-winter female on October 7th 1978 that stayed to the 8th and allowed the avid few Lincs twitchers to watch it feeding around the rusty barrels and barbed wire dump. I even managed a couple of very distant Kodachrome slides of said bird. Later a spring male at Donna Nook in the previous May 1978 was also considered an eastern bird but identification of males is harder to prove than immatures.

first-winter eastern stonechat Donna Nook October 8th 1978 presumably Siberian Stonechat maurus

Two years later, a late autumn search at Donna Nook on November 9th 1980 revealed a dark looking first-winter eastern Stonechat that I identified as stejnegeri probably the first for Lincolnshire though at that time all eastern birds were simply classified as a race of Stonechat and it was not until 2004 that these eastern birds were split as Siberian Stonechat with races maurus, variegatus, armenicus and indicus, stejnegeri and przewalskii.

I was fortunate with further finds at Donna Nook of first-winter maurus probably male, from my notes on head pattern, on October 2nd 1987 by Ponderosa and an early first-winter female at Pye’s Hall on September 22nd 1994. I also saw another first-winter female maurus at Saltfleet Haven between October 1st – 3rd 2000 but that was it until 2016 when a first-winter male stejnegeri was found by Steve Lorand at Donna Nook on October 6th 2016 curtailing our search at Pye’s and involving some brisk southward walking. In the same glorious autumn, we found another eastern bird by Stonebridge car park on October 14th and assumed just on the paleness of the plumage and obvious differences from the earlier Donna bird that this second bird was maurus. The 2016 birds were written up with annotated photographs in a short paper in the 2016 Lincolnshire Bird Report pages 238 – 244.

The superb Challenge series thought provoking two volume series by Martin and Ray, thanks to Ray for permission to reproduce these images and I am sure Martin would not have mionded either

maurus now Siberian Stonechat, at least for a while

stejnegeri now Amur Stonechat as most people struggled to spell stejnegeri including me

As more identification features came to light firstly in Martin Garner’s Birding Frontiers, Challenge Series, Autumn, then in a new paper in BB we started to question whether the second 2016 Donna bird may also have been stejnegeri? The BB paper ‘Eastern Stonechats’ in Britain; by Andy Stoddart and Martin Collinson in the September 2019 BB noted that: Recent taxonomic changes to ‘Eastern Stonechats’ have separated Stejneger’s Stonechat Saxicola stejnegeri from the five taxa that now comprise Siberian Stonechat S. maurus. Images of birds trapped and confirmed by DNA analysis and new plumage features in the paper laid out a set of criteria for identification but two birds identified as one species were in fact confirmed as the other by DNA so things were clearly not that clear cut. The following two paragraphs probably sum things up nicely:

However, the fact that the provisional field identifications of some DNA-tested birds did not align with their genetic identity is a cause for concern. Individual variation and the lack of an absolute feature clearly pose a problem. At the same time, the questions around intergrades/hybrids remain unresolved while, to complicate matters further, could there even be, as suggested earlier, a lack of congruence between the morphological and genetic divides between the two species? In other words, could a proportion of ‘Eastern Stonechats’ be apparent Stejneger’s on plumage but genetically Siberian (or vice versa)? These (and other) lingering taxonomic questions also suggest that caution is in order.

Finally, even without these difficulties, any attempt to cherry-pick ‘distinctive’ individuals would still be problematic. How could ‘dark enough’ or ‘pale enough’ be defined? What about the more ‘intermediate’ birds? And, perhaps most importantly, given the difficulty of establishing true plumage hues, how much reliance can really be placed on field notes (if available), and, in particular, how useful are photographs?

The latest identification handbook, ID Handbook of European Birds by Nils van Duivendijk shows the most reliable features for separating what are now called Siberian maurus and Amur stejnegeri Stonechats and confirms at least that the Gibraltar Point bird is a first-winter male.

With all this in mind, and assuming I had not seen a Siberian Stonechat since 2000 a visit to Gibraltar Point to take in the features of the first-winter Siberian Stonechat found by Sam Goddard and still present early morning on the 16th, seemed in order. The weather men had typically got it all wrong and the afternoon was peppered by thick cloud and showers of light to moderate rain. None of the images below were taken in anything other than dull, though flat light and most were at ISO 3200 or above. The bird was at times fairly close to a male and female Common Stonechat but was generally on its own.

First winter male Siberian Stonechat (maurus) Gibraltar Point November 16th 2024. Images taken in slightly different lights, there was no sun while I was there, and different toned backgrounds could have the effect of changing the subtle colour tones of the bird’s plumage. Images taken later in the afternoon after a series of showers emphasise the blackish feathering in the crown and ear coverts partially due to the crown being wet. The bird could appear strikingly obvious and pallid at times but at others could look quite dark and at a distance could almost be passed off as a Common Stonechat.

The unmarked white undertail coverts and vent contrasted with the peachy underpart colouration. Depending on the angle of the head the mask formed by the blackish feather bases in the ear coverts could also appear striking or much less obvious. According to some published images the small very pointed bill is also a maurus feature with stejnegeri being thicker and blunter tipped.

After several showers the crown and head feathers became a bit matted with water. The buffy – cream tips to the greater coverts and greater primary coverts rule out this being an adult male.

In duller light there was more contrast in the mantle and scapular feathers with the dark feather centres appearing blacker. On the underparts the upper breast also showed a deeper orange colouration than the remainder of the underparts.

The darker orangy area on the upper breast shows well on this image taken in dull light just after some rain.

Also shown is the orangy colour on the upper breast in this flight shot where the throat appears to be marked with black feathers, actually feather bases and also note the black underwing coverts with pale whitish fringes another feature of first-winter males.

Most of the rump was essentially white to pale cream with a faint apricot wash to the uppertail coverts and distal part of the rump feathering. In flight at any sort of distance the rump looked uniform and pale creamy coloured but frozen images show the peachy wash.

The chin and throat were mainly white and contrasted with the peachy breast and underparts but faint blackish feather bases were visible in the throat patch.

The narrow white-buff fringes to the lesser and median wing coverts are shown here with the creamy – buff outer web fringe and tips to the greater coverts. The tail feathers were essentially black with a narrow and worn whitish tip. The pointed tips are usually a feature of juveniles.

In particularly dull light with thick dark clouds the apparent colour of the bird changed making it less contrasting and more female Common Stonechat like.

Unlike the Common Stonechats nearby nearly all of the Siberian’s feeding forays consisted of aerial pursuits of insects and this made it easy to locate. It used high perches in the buckthorn and elders and occasionally resorted to a nearby barbed wire fence. At one point if lew 150m out onto the saltmarsh to bathe quickly in a shallow area of water before quickly drying and preening and returning to the dunes.

The black underwing coverts contrasted markedly with the paler flight feathers typical of a first-winter male

The black tertials with crisp white broad fringes and the white-cream outer webs of the secondaries formed the typical striking wing panel.

Whitish tips to blackish tail feathers with narrow white fringe to outermost

All in all, a beautiful little bird but how does it compare to the two 2016 birds at Donna Nook?

Looking first at the presumed Amur Stonechat found at the south end on October 6th – 10th it was a dark looking bird and at a distance could have been passed over as a Common Stonechat. The following description was compiled by Steve Lorand who found the bird:

At distance, it resembled a female Common Stonechat, but differing light intensities and viewing angles could cause some variation in impressions of the bird’s general colouration. It was overall darker and more richly-coloured than any maurus birds seen by any of us, while the obvious sharply-demarcated throat patch and the deep orange rump were particularly striking features. In very good sunlight, the dark mottled crown and ear-coverts contrasted with the pale cream supercillium which met just above the base of the bill. A broad dark line from the bill passed through the eye and widened to form a patch on the ear-coverts. The creamy throat patch was very conspicuous, particularly with the sharp demarcation from the warm peachy-buff of the breast and slightly paler belly. The undertail-coverts were whitish. The underwing was silvery-grey with black axilliaries and underwing-coverts, thus determining the bird as a male. The upperparts were dark brown with orange-buff fringes on the mantle and scapulars. The greater coverts were tipped orange-buff. The primaries, secondaries and tertials were brown-black with cream fringes. The rump was a striking clean deep orange and the tail feathers were brown-black narrowly tipped with orange-white which extended along the outer webs of the outer feathers. One or two of Graham’s photographs show a creamy suffusion on the upper rump and also dark shaft streaks to two central uppertail coverts. The bill, legs and feet were blackish.

Presumed Amur Stonechat Donna Nook October 6th 2016. Note general similarity to a female Common Stonechat but clearly demarcated creamy throat and unstreaked orange underparts with obvious pale supercilium. These images are massive crops as the bird was particualrly flighty and impossible to approach

Blackish underwing coverts confirm that this was a male. The rather dark orange rump and rear flanks contrast with the black tail

Black underwing coverts contrast with paler flight feathers. Deeper orange underparts with only hint of paler colour on undertail coverts.

Orange not peachy underpart colour and dark upperparts, to some extent exaggerated by low sun, with dark ear coverts and crown make this bird look very similar to some female Common Stonechats. Note stubby looking bill with broad base a feature noted by Garner and Scally.

Deep orange rump extends over uppertail coverts with two obvious black shaft streaks on longest uppertail covert feathers.

Amur Stonechat Donna Nook October 6th 2016. Note here the pale creamy tips to the black tail feathers with the deep orange lower rump. and uppertail coverts also the fringes to the flight feathers are buff to rufous not white as are the tips to the greater coverts.

The second Donna Nook October 14th – 16th 2016. Found by GPC and ND after a long day slogging the Pye’s Stonebridge area this bird looked paler than the earlier Amur and suggested that it was a maurus but good images reveal features that appear to be at odds with that identification and suggest that it was probably a second Amur Stonechat.

The very pale underparts of this bird immediately suggest Siberian but note the heavy black centres to the scapulars and mantle and the deep orange rump just visible between the closed wings. The head is also generally dark with little sign of a paler supercilium. Tips to the greater coverts and fringed to the flight feathers are creamy as are the tips to the tail feathers. Bill looks a little stubby?

From the front underparts are richer coloured and contrast with the white throat. Head pattern is still very unremarkable with only a hint of pale supercilium. Alula and primary coverts are jet black.

Uppertail coverts are deep rufous with obvious black shaft streaks; tail black with pale whitish tips to all feathers. Fringes to flight feathers are creamy to buff but not white and mantle and scapulars quite dark with heavy black centres to all feathers.

On a duller day the underparts look much darker.

Black underwing coverts make this a male and note the rather dark coloured rump and darker uppertail coverts with white fringe to outermost tail feathers.

Blackish shaft streak on one of the uppertail coverts visible here in a poor flight image but also note the deep orange rump and uppertail coverts.

Deep orange or rump again visible in this image with general appearance of a darker duller bird than initial views suggested.

Rump and tail well shown here if you ignore the umbellifer stem

Lincolnshire eastern stonechat records:

A summary of the county records to date - details of some still need researching

Donna Nook May 23rd 1978 1, Adult Male Stejnegeri?

Donna Nook October 7th – 8th 1978 1, First-winter male maurus

Donna Nook first-winter October 8th 1978 - yep 46 years ago the barrle is long gone

Donna Nook November 9th 1980 1, first-winter male Stejnegeri

Bill black Chin whitish – creamy separated from breast which was pale orangey – buff; Paler under belly undertail coverts. Short narrow, pale supercilia to just over eye; Ear coverts dusky brown, Crown brown streaked darker blackish; Mantle brown with darker blackish streaking; Tertials black with orange fringes and tips; Primaries blackish – brown. Secondaries fringed with bright orange – buff forming a prominent pale wing panel. Rump orange and quite large, unstreaked and with a white lower edge. Tail black with buff fringe to outers and tips to all feathers; Prominent white patch in wing in flight

Donna Nook October 2nd 1987 1, First winter male maurus

Probable first-winter male maurus but note underwing coverts not seen

Feeding on seeded onion crop and weeds in field just north of Ponderosa; often in the same area as Whinchats and when perched at a distance could have been overlooked as that species. Generally pale buff above with dark wings and tail and very pale salmon below looking creamy at a distance.

Bill fine and black; a narrow pale supercilium ran back from the forecrown meeting over the bill to just behind the eye. Eye dark and large with a narrow white eye ring; lores dusky joining into a dark eye stripe/mottled ear coverts; ear coverts mostly buff-brown but with some underlying back feather bases showing through giving a mottled look; Crown buffish brown with rows of fine black spots extending backwards giving a streaked appearance from further off; nape buff-brown but only lightly streaked darker, mantle, back and scapulars all looked buff-brown with darker blackish streaking greater coverts blackish-brown with buff-brown edges and pale creamy tips forming a curved but narrow wing bar; Tertials black edged and tipped with white quite broadly on the edges; secondaries all fringed white forming a prominent pale wing panel; greater primary coverts all black with broad white edges; primaries black narrowly tipped with white; tail feathers all black tipped with white ; lower back-rump all white large and broad and often looking in flight to extend round onto flanks and cut off the tail; uppertail coverts salmon fading into the white of the rump ; throat / chin white – cream with greyish malar stripe ; breast and flanks salmon-buff at close range all feathers tipped paler ; belly and undertail coverts paler cream; legs black

Skegness October 21st – 25th 1990 1, First winter Female Stejnegeri/maurus

Skegness October 23rd – 25th 1990 1, First winter Female Stejnegeri/maurus

A Black and white image of one of these birds appears in the 1990 County bird report

Donna Nook September 22nd 1994 1, First winter Female maurus

Siberian Stonechat; first-winter female Pyes Hall September 22nd 1994.

Found feeding with four Whinchat and five Northern Wheatears on the bank of Somercotes Haven where it runs out onto the saltmarsh, perching on 1m high stalks of vegetation and making flycatching sallies from perches into the air and onto ground. Size of Whinchat alongside but paler on both upper and underparts. Overall pale buffy brown upperparts with darker wings and tail, with obvious white fringing, pale buffy-grey head, dark eye and whitish chin demarcated from pale peachy underparts.

Bill fine black; Large dark eye with a fine pale supercilium stretching back to rear of ear-coverts; crown pale brown with darker streaking, ear-coverts grey-brown with clear demarcation to whitish chin/throat; rest of underparts a lovely pale peachy colour with slightly darker area in centre of upper breast and with whiter undertail coverts. Nape and mantle pale buffy brown with darker streaking down mantle and on scapulars. Median coverts black centred with whitish fringes; greater coverts black with white tips forming a narrow but clear-cut wing bar. tertials black with white outer edges; secondaries edged prominently with white forming an obvious wing panel effect in combination with tertial edges; primaries and primary coverts black. Rump all a pale creamy/peach colour, unmarked and extending from uppertail coverts to a line level with top of tertials; when wings drooped this was seen to wrap around the whole of the rear of the bird joining up with the lower underpart colour and isolating the black tail. Tail feathers black with thin white tips. Legs dark. In flight with a scope I could not see any obvious black on the axillaries and therefore I concluded that the bird was a first-winter female.

Saltfleet October 1st – 3rd 2000 1, First winter Female maurus