Godt tegn at den er på vej sydpå igen, og den ved hvor den vil hen.
Mvh.

Hi Martin

Judging by the upper mandible, which seems slightly longer than on most birds, it appears to be identical to the Danish bird.
What is the current German view on the birds origin?
Do you consider it likely to be an escape or a wild bird?

To my knowledge there are only two former records in Northern Europe. One in Britain (in category A) and one in Germany (category D). If the 2010 records in Germany and Denmark truly involves the same individual it would be very interesting to know which category the German RC is most likely to place this record. I think most Danish birders favours category A - at least they did until it (if it's the same?) turned up in Germany looking all scruffy and being watched up close.
If the German RC will place the record in category D, I would imagine that the Danish RC would do the same (again assuming the records involve the same individual!).

All the best

Sebastian

Hvis det er den samme fugl, er det et rigtigt godt tegn på spontanitet at den har overlevet så længe i det fri, da en fangenskabsfugl med stor sandsynlighed ville være blevet byttedyr for et eller andet, specielt fordi arten opholder sig meget eksponeret. Det må vel være det Danske SU som i første omgang som tager stilling til spørgsmålet om spontanitet og ikke opføre sig som "underhunde", især da det Tyske SU har ry for at være særdeles konservativt. Det var jo også det Polske SU som først tog stilling til den Krøltoppede pelikan.
Mvh.

Fuglen i Tyskland er fanget og ringmærket jf. indlæg på club300.de. Så får vi se, om der bliver foretaget en isotop analyse...

Hej Jørgen
Hvis den tyske fugl er identisk med den danske og den i Tyskland har udvist afvigende karakterer eller adfærd, som måske indikerer en fortid bag tremmer, er det ret naturligt, at det påvirker kategoriseringen af fundet - i begge lande (jeg ved dog endnu ikke om det er tilfældet her?).
Som du selv påpeger kan det sammenlignes med den Krøltoppede Pelikan. De polske observationer af den Krøltoppede Pelikan fra 2006 var jo netop stærkt medvirkende til at SU i sin tid placerede fundet i kategori A.
Det siger sig selv, at SU skal indhente så meget materiale om den pågældende fugl som overhovedet muligt inden udvalget tager stilling til kategorisering. Det tror jeg egentlig også du er klar over...

Mvh Sebastian

Jeg undrer mig også over at dansk SU tilsyneladende "ser over skuldrene" på andres landes afgørelser, før SU selv tør tage stilling til en række fund. Det virker på mig pinligt, at SU ikke tør tage et standpunkt.
Husk, at man altid kan skifte standpunkt sidenhen, hvis nye oplysninger dukker op. Det er sket nogen gange gennem tiden i SU.
Mvh. Allan

And in English:

Hi Jørgen
If the German bird is identical to the Danish and in Germany have shown a different behavior that may indicate a past behind bars, it is only natural that this affects the categorization of this record - in both countries (I still don't know if this is the case here?).
As you point out it can be compared with the Dalmatian Pelican in 2006. The Polish observations of the same Dalmatian Pelican in 2006 played a major part in the A-categorization of that bird.
It goes without saying that the Danish Rarities Committee must collect as much material on the White-crowned Wheatear as possible before the committee decides on whether the bird should be in category A or D. But I think you already know that...

Regards Sebastian

Hej Allan

Hvad snakker du dog om!?
Jeg er godt nok ikke med i SU mere, men jeg er helt frisk på at diskutere det her. Hvis du har nogle eksempler på noget du mener er foregået forkert i SU-regi, så skal jeg gerne forklare dig hvorfor du tager fejl. Opret gerne en tråd i forum (denne tråd handler jo om noget andet), med dine spørgsmål/kommentarer- Så skal du få kam til dit hår...

Mvh Sebastian

According to Poul Ulrik the bird has now been captured and ringed. Can anyone confirm whether or not sambles have been taken (feathers or blood) for future isotop analysis?
In that case category D might not be an option any longer?

@SeK: Jeg synes det er en spændende og relevant diskussion, så klø bare på :-). Kunne du eller en anden kyndig ikke lige forklare, hvad en isotop sample er? (jeg har prøvet at lede, men ikke fundet noget svar).

PFT. + MVH - Lars

By using staple isotope analysis of the birds feathers you might be able to tell its provenance. I'm not sure if it is possible with the Whitecrowned Wheatear, but it seemed to work with the Danish record of Baikal Teal. So I would think it is worth a try.

Et par henvisninger vedrørende analyser af isotope samples:

Tre abstracts:

http://www.scienceandjusticejournal.com/article/S1355-0306%2807%2900078-0/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2007.00672.x/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0908-8857.2006.03840.x/abstract

Og en hel artikel:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0908-8857.2008.04212.x/pdf

Den tyske og danske fugl er IKKE identisk!

Dette billede af halefjerene fra den danske fugl:
Danske hvidkronet stenpikker
kan sammenlignes med halefjerene fra den tyske fugl:
Tyske hvidkronet stenpikker

Er det ikke bevis nok?

As this matter has the interest of more than just Danish birders I have allowed my self to translate the comment from Erhardt (see above):

Erhardt wrote:

The German and Danish bird is NOT identical!

This image of tail feathers from the Danish bird:
http://www.snatur.dk/images/hvidkronet.jpg
comparable to the tail feathers from the German bird:
http://www.club300.de/gallery/photo0.php?id=15210

Is that not proof enough?

The answer to Erhardts question is - in my opinion - "No!".

I believe Erhardt has fallen for the old "I can see-landscape-through the tailfeathers and mistake them for black spots on the tail-trick".
There are IMO no weird dark markings on the German birds tail that can seperate it from the Danish bird. On the contrary the two tails seem very similar. In fact they seem so similar that I would think the two birds indeed could be identical.
Most White-crowned Wheatears have at least a hint of black on the outer tailfeathers. The Danish bird and the German bird have pure white outertails without even the slightest hint of black. Both birds also have prolonged upper mandibles, which surely is not that common in White-crowned Wheatear (or am I mistaken?).
I would think those two features are a good indication of the German and Danish birds actually being one and the same.
What do you think - honestly?

There is no doubt. It is the same bird in Denmark and Germany.
If you look on the right claw on the right foot on this picture:
http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=34455
You will see that it is slightly deformed or crooked. The claw points out to the side. If you check some of the photos of the WC Wheatear on the German web www.club300.de you will find the exact same feature present on several photos.
Check for yourselves if you don't belive me....

Det er meget svært at afgøre om det er samme fugl, da den Tyske fugl er i fremskredet fældning og den Danske ikke.

Hi,

Well IMO it is quite difficult to distinguish subtle details on the tail feathers on the 2 shown pictures due to the angle and different position of the tail feathers relative to the body. The tail feathers are spread in fan in the German picture and more together in the Danish picture.

But I did notice a difference in the transition area from the white to the black on the back of the birds. On the Danish bird it seems the transition is very clear and sharp except for a black trail on the right side going into the white. On the German bird the transition seems more uneven and specifically with some white feathers being visible in the black area on the left side of the bird.

Does this show that it is in fact two different birds or is such an irregularity considered normal taking in count the difference in moult as mentioned by JMP?

I am not claiming proof of this or that, simply curious of the differences in the mentioned area.

Regards

AES

Nu ser jeg at mit indlæg kom under ID, da jeg var af den overbevisning at små fjerdetaljer drejer sig om ID.

Sikke dog en redelighed.

AES

Hi Jørgen and Anders
There is really no reason to discuss this anymore. The Danish and the German bird is one and the same - period. Without a doubt!
Here is a photo that shows the Danish version of the bird with its tail spread:
http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=34401
Note the absence of black on the tailcorners.

The reason why the transisition between black and white is more uneven on the German version is because the bird is a couple of months more worn!

The bill, the tail and of course the deformed right toe/claw on the rigt foot clinches the matter.
IT IS THE SAME BIRD IN BOTH COUNTRIES.

¨Good point Jørgen...and Sebastian seems to have an even better argument: the claw's the clincher!

If the germans did not secure one of the obviously juvenile remiges for analysis, I am tempted to parrot Albert Rosenfield when he arrived at Twin Peaks and exclaimed (after having glanced at the local forensic report on Laura Palmer): "Welcome to amateur-hour!"

Hi all,

just returned from a visit on Helgoland, therefore my answers following now and not earlier. You are right with finding out that especially the claw and the bill are the features to say without any doubts the german and the danish bird are identical. The claw was the reason why I posted the comment as picture info. I just send another picture taken this morning in much better light and you see the different types of feathers - old worn brown (= juvenile) ones and fresh black ones. Have a look on lots of pictures of the bird in the gallery of www.club300.de - especially the pictures of the bird in flight. At the moment it's moulting it's primaries, thats the reason why there's a big gap in the primary spacing. The bird was caught and measured, I think it was also possible to take samples. Therefore it seems to be a Cat. A or E bird, Cat. D is unlikely. Regards, MG

Can you please post a small summary of the bird's behaviour in DK? What was it for a site where it was sitting - some scrub and open areas etc.? Or was it near a big port or near habitation? Thanks. MG

Hi Martin
The bird was seen at Store Vrøj, Saltbækvig, Sjælland. A very beautiful area near the sea (see:http://www.dofbasen.dk/googlemap.php?loknr=301007). An area where migrant passerines would be expected to rest. As far as I know (I never saw the bird) it acted pretty mucy like a wild bird. I am not sure whether the bird was approached or not, but I know it was seen at distances down to about ten metres. On the 1st July it was noted that the bird had an injury on its left leg. The bird often lay down or stood on its right leg (see:http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=34416). This odd feature has been heavily debated in Denmark and has been claimed to be a potentiel sign of a past in captivity. The birds leg did however improve drastically and there was no sign of injures during the rest of its stay in Denmark, so the problem was probably not that bad. As I have written earlier most Danes regarded the bird as a good candidate for category A. However rumour has it, that the bird acted more tame in Germany. Running around in gardens and being seen up close (to close?). This may change peoples views on the birds categorization. Can you (or any other Germans) confirm these rumours?
And can you tell us more about the birds behaviour in Germany?

All the best

Sebastian

Der Saharasteinschmätzer sass auf einem Scheunendach nah am Deich bei Saltbæk Vig, Seeland.

Der Ort ist hier auf Google Map Aufenhaltsort in Dänemark eingezeichnet.

Bilder vom Ort liegen hier

Die Beobachter konnten ganz nah am Vogel kommen.

MfG EEE

WOOPS!

There is something I don't understand?

In this picture of the Danish bird it has no white on the tips of the black central tailfeathers: http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=34401

But in this picture of the German bird it has obvious white tips to the same central tailfeathers: http://www.club300.de/gallery/photo0.php?id=15210

Is it because it has changed its tailfeathers or have I made a mistake by calling it the same bird???

Puzzeling greetings

Sebastian

Hmm... The tail of the German bird seems to be quite worn. I am not so sure about it being the same bird now.
I am confused!?

Statistically, highly improbable that more
than ONE specimen of a White-crowned with
damaged Left Foot*/leg should be found
North of the Pyrenees/Alps in the same
season...

* The above bird doesn't bend Left foot
toes.

DANSK:
Venstre fods stive tæer må
indikere Saltbækvigfuglen.

KR / VH ........... C.

Sebastian,

Just my thought (the white on the tips of the central tailfeathers)

If it IS the same bird, the remarkably slow progression of the wing/tail moult, and the spiky feathers on the crown of the bird from Germany, suggests a bird in poor condition.
Normally I would expect the moult to begin in June/July (especially for a non-breeding bird), and it would certainly have completed its moult by now. That is IF it is the same bird in good condition.

Since at least some of the remiges have been renewed, it is IMO possible that the bird did indeed shed the central tail-feathers in mid-summer, and could thus easily have grown new, white-tipped ones by now.

I guess we will have to rely on further reports, analysis? from the germans.

In answer to the question posed to me above concerning evidence of captive birds, I have no such whatsoever.

It is well-known, however, that collections of captive (and breeding) passerines do exists, so the possibilty of an escape cannot be completely eracidated.

Another scenario is the bird came to N.W.-Europe by ,say, a container-ship from a port within the breeding-range.

In answer to Poul Ulrik's excellent and informative post, I must conclude that the British rarities commitee had good reasons to name the birds as a true migrant.
The time of year, and particularly the specific weather-conditions weighed heavily in favour of the decision.

The danish record does not, of course, resemble the English one in this respect.

If the bird had been killed by a car, and the record only after several years been submitted to the rarities commitee, would it then have had so many supporters for admission to category A?

Or if the bird had been seen by just a lone twitcher ( for instance Jørgen Munck, the current Danish top-lister)???

Hmm...Hvis der er tale om 2 fugle er det vel en "invation" når der er tale om arter af denne kategori?

Sebastian, i Netfugls galleri finder du adskillige fotos fra udlandet, der viser at næbformen er ganske normal for arten, dvs relativt langt næb der dypper lidt i spidsen. På flere fotos (af bl.a KMO fra Israel og Jan Thomsen fra Marokko)ligner næbbene til forveksling den danske (og tyske fugls) hvor overnæbbet dypper lidt i spidsen.
De hvide spidser på de sorte centrale halefjer på den tyske fugl undre mig såre...i galleriet er der et foto fra Eilat af en indfanget flot 3k+ fugl, og den har ikke hvide spidser på de sorte halefjer (ser ikke slidte ud), men nogle individer har det måske??

Sebastian, i Netfugls galleri finder du adskillige fotos fra udlandet, der viser at næbformen er ganske normal for arten, dvs relativt langt næb der dypper lidt i spidsen. På flere fotos (af bl.a KMO fra Israel og Jan Thomsen fra Marokko)ligner næbbene til forveksling den danske (og tyske fugls) hvor overnæbbet dypper lidt i spidsen.
De hvide spidser på de sorte centrale halefjer på den tyske fugl undre mig såre...i galleriet er der et foto fra Eilat af en indfanget flot 3k+ fugl, og den har ikke hvide spidser på de sorte halefjer (ser ikke slidte ud), men nogle individer har det måske??

Hi Sebastian,

the bird is in an area of a hotel (http://www.upstalsboom.de/deichgraf) and a now closed campground in front of the dijk next to mudflats of the river Weser. It is moving around on the green dijk and the campground and behaves in this way a wheatear normally does. It is a good migration area and there's a good migration route along the river. The whole area fits perfect as a resting habitat for a wheatear. The bird behaves natural, there's no sign of a damage on the legs. It has some favourite roosting sites at the hotel, the only building there and the only place where to get some cover of the strong wind. If you walk towards the bird, it'll fly off, but when you are waiting on it's favourite sites it'll come down to less than 10 metres sooner or later. But the behaviour is no sign of a non-wild bird, e.g. all other rare wheaters I observed in Germany (10 individuals of 4 species) behaved the same.

MG

Last sunday when the bird was found it had growing fethers along the sides of the crown and single on the neck. For the stage of the wing moult see pictures of the bird in flight on www.club300.de - gallery. Yesterday there was no sign of any growing fethers in the above mentioned regions.

The bird is in good condition (fat/muscle). It is known from looking at the bird in the hand.

Birds from different breeding areas have different timings of breeding, therefore it is possible that the bird is moulting now.

Maybe the analysis of any taken samples will give any answers.

MG

Hi All

Nice to hear that the Wheatear didn't act that tame in Germany afterall (rumours travel fast in the birding community!).
Concerning the hooked upper mandible I realize that this can be shown regularly by WC Wheatear (see below). But I expect you wouldn't normally expect a WC Wheatear to show this feature - and as such it would still work as an individual feature.

The white markings on the tip of the central black rectrices on the bird in Cuxhaven could perhaps be newly moulted rectrices. If the bird is now moulting its wings it would be normal for a passerine to start its tailmoult at the same time. Usually passerines start by moulting the central rectrices, but I haven't checked if that goes for WC Wheatear too (but I would think so). Some Wheatear species may even moult the entire tail at once (for instance Common Wheatear).

By looking at the tail of the bird I stumbled across another really weird thing. The five right rectrices appear all white, whereas only the three left rectrices are white.
This could be perceived as a sign of moult in the tail even though the fact that two rectrices missing in the left side would be strange - but could still be possible, I guess... (tail of the German bird:http://www.club300.de/gallery/photo0.php?id=15210)
The weird thing is however that the bird in Denmark showed the exact same pattern!
The five right rectrices are all white, but only the three left ones are white (tail of the Danish bird:http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=34401).
How strange is that!?
Surely no bird takes two months to grow a couple of tailfeathers?
I have no explanation for this, but it seems like another indication of the birds relating to the same individual.

Here are some pictures of hookbilled WC Wheatears:
link 1

link 2

I just spoke with Henrik Haaning Nielsen, who said he has a nice photo of The Wc Wheatear from Denmark where it shows 5 white tailfeathers in both sides of the tail - so not so weird then....

nogle har spurgt mig om nogle yderlige billeder af den stenpikker fra Vrøj 30/6-2010 til samlingning med denne her, er der tale om 2 fugle eller er den blevet ringmærket i Tyskland? der ligger nu 2 yderlige billedr hos net-fugl så må vi se om de kommer på.
mvh Per

I have today received a photo of a dead White-crowned Wheatear from Wremen. I looks like it has been killed by a cat.

According to club300.de the bird has been present since the 28th of August.

It is now in the freezer of the nearby hotel and it is planned to be handed over to further investigation.

Morten

Marc Förschler (Institut für Vogelforschung, Wilhelmshaven) writes in the forum of club300.de:
"We have now the deuterium value for one of the feathers of the WCW. They found interestingly, that the measured value for the Wremen bird is similar to comparative values from the southern Mediterranean and some breeding areas of the species. From this one can deduce that the bird actually probably came from southern climes. However, we still don't know for sure if it's come on his own wings, by passive transport (ship, truck ...) or illegal animal trade to Denmark and later to Germany."

Best regards,
Martin Gottschling

When the Danish Rarities Committee treated the record of the shot Baikal Teal from Skælskør I obtained info about international wildfowl-trading. I found out that no Baikal Teals had been traded legally between Asia and Europe in those years. Illegal trading is of course a possibility, but not a very likely one. Baikal Teal is quite common in the captive market and therefore not very expensive. Wildfowl like for instance King Eider are much more expensive and more likely to be traded illegally (and have been in recent years!).
It might be interesting to know how many White-crowned Wheatears are traded legally between the breeding areas and Europe?
How many of the captive-held wheatear-species are in fact bred in captivity and how many are caught in the wild?
I would probably think that most were caught in the wild, but I honestly don't know.
If the majority are caught in the wild I would think the German analysis doesn't really indicate anything about the birds origin., or am I mistaken?
I stil favour category A, but it would be nice if we could be as sure as possible.

All the best

Sebastian

Legal trade of WCBW to EU/DK

I guess none.

To my knowledge the import ban of captive birds from third countries to EU is permanent. Maybe North Africa

More information:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/40&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en


I don’t know, but don’t think that North Africa as nearest WCBW area belongs to this:

only specific countries or regions which have already been approved to export live commercial poultry will be allowed to export captive birds to the EU. These approved countries have demonstrated high standards of animal health and the ability to cope with international animal health concerns.

Cheers,

Morten

You write: "If the majority are caught in the wild I would think the German analysis doesn't really indicate anything about the birds origin., or am I mistaken?"

In my opinion the analysis confirmes an origin of the bird from their natural range, therefore very probably a bird grown up in the wild. Therefore not Kat. E. For everything else nothing can be said, therefore I prefer also Kat. A oder Kat. D. Cheers, Martin

Category E seems highly unlikely, as Martin says.
The question is whether A or D is the more likely category. The analysis seems to indicate category A, but it would be nice to have all the results presented. For instance what feathers were analyzed? Were both brown (unmoulted) feathers as well as black (newly moulted) feathers analyzed? And did the analysis show a clear difference between the moulted and unmoulted feathers? - as it did in the case of the Danish Baikal Teal.
As Morten Bentzon Hansen wrote (5th January) import of birds to the EU from Northern Africa and the Middle East might very well be banned/illegal as a result of the birdflu-epidemic. I actually promised Morten to check up on this, but haven't done so yet (sorry!). If import is illegal from countries where WC Wheatears is distributed A-categorization seems to be the obvious option (it probably already does).
This bird would undoubtedly have been accepted into category A of the Danish List straight away if it had not stayed so long at the same German location (such longstayers are after all very unusual among passerines!).
I expect that the German rarities Committee will make a decision on the birds categorization and that the Danish Rarities Committee will follow this decision. I expect the Danish Rarities Committee will wait for the German Committee an let the Germans decide whether or not the bird should be accepted in category A (or D?). The bird has been analyzed in Germany and the bird stayed unusually long at the same German site, so it would seem silly if the Danish RC didn't wait for the German opinion on this bird. As already stated the bird behaved perfectly like a wild bird in Denmark - It did not seem tame, it only stayed for a few days and was at a perfect location by the sea.
So as I see it - we gotta wait for the Germans to decide the birds "fate":-)

Hvorfor skal vi følge hvad tyskerne beslutter sig for, så kan du godt begynde at slette din Lille Bjergand.... her indtagerne tysker en helt speciel status i Europa. At den raster i lang tid er bestemt ikke usædvanligt for en spurvefugl. I Danmark kender vi det fx. fra Sortstrubede Drosler og Rosenbrystede Tornskader m.fl . I England har andre superhits som Golden-winged Warbler,Red-breasted Nuthatch også rastet i meget lange perioder. At den raster så lang tid kan måske betyde den ikke er i god kondition, eller måske ikke aner hvad den skal gøre..., der er mange muligheder

Jeg mener de ting der er lagt på bordet, viser fuglen har haft sin opvækst hvor den høre hjemme normalt. Om der er fugle der er blevet indført ulovligt, afviser ikke at denne her er kommet her op ved egen hjælp. Man kan gætte på begge dele, men i sidste ende vil det være ren gætværk.

Desuden ville det også klæde et Dansk SU, at tage en selvstændig beslutning, vi behøver altid at indetage "Lillebror rollen"

mvh

Henrik

Dansk SU indtager ingen lillebror-rolle.
Det danske fund er fint, men tyskerne har anden og mere info om fuglen end vi har. Det vil derfor være helt naturligt, at Tyskerne så at sige "bestemmer". Det modsatte var eksempelvis gældende i tilfældet med den Krøltoppede Pelikan. Det danske SU havde mest info om den fugl og godkendte efterfølgende fundet i kategori A. Tyskerne (som havde fund af samme fugl) fulgte efter et års tid SU's anbefaling og kategoriserede fundet i A. Indtil da figurerede Krøltoppet Pelikan ikke på den tyske liste.
Dansk SU har (såvidt jeg ved?) ikke adgang til materialet om isotop-analysen af den Hvidkronede Stenpikker. Det formoder jeg, at tyskerne enten har eller får. Jeg formoder ganske vist også at det fører til en A-kategorisering af fundet, men det er nu rimelig underordnet. Det vigtige er at dem, som har mest viden om det konkrete fund er dem som tager beslutningen. Hvis SU sætter fundet i A og Tyskerne i E er der jo noget galt et af stederne. Som sagt forventer jeg en A-kategorisering (En evt. tysk D-kategorisering må i givet fald formodes at blive ledsaget af en god redegørelse). Så derfor skal SU selvfølgelig vente på tyskerne....

Kategorisering af fund af sjældne fugle vil i øvrigt altid være en form for "gætværk". Et grundigt forarbejde kan dog sikre at sandsynligheden for at "ramme rigtigt" bliver så stor som muligt.

Hvad er det lige tyskerne ved som vi ikke er bekendt med, som gør dem så meget klogere på denne fugl??, det har jeg ikke rigtig lige gennemskuet, måske pga. mit dårlige engelsk.

Som nævnt følger de heller ikke andre landes beslutning, jeg nævnte Lille Bjergand som et ex.. Derfor kan vi da sagtens putte den i A, selv om de har en anden holdning. Holland går da deres egne vegne, så kan man mene om det hvad man vil, men de tør da noget.

Dit ex med Krøltoppet Pelikan er fint, bortset fra så vidt jeg husker(måske tager jeg fejl, og så beklager jeg), men så var det vel pga. af at man kunne følge fuglen hele vejen gennem Polen, hvor man har Pelikanerne i kat A. Jeg vil næsten godt æde min gamle sure vinterhue, at hvis den kun var set i Tyskland og i Danmark, så havde den aldrig nået i kat. A i Danmark.

Hi Henrik

You remember correctly. The Danish (and German) Dalmatian Pelican was sen in south eastern Poland. I agree whith you that it had never made category A if it had not been seen in southeastern Poland. As far as I recall Danish birders contacted Polish birders to get info on that bird. I contacted the German RC to let them know, that the Danish RC considered accepting the Dalmatian Pelican i category A. At that point the Germans had not yet decided on the matter, but ended up following the Danish example. My point is that the Danish RC had gathered a lot of info (thanks to some very efficient birders here on Netfugl) on the Pelican, which made it possible to make a decision based on a quite thorough investigation of the birds movements and whereabouts.
The WC Wheatear stayed in Denmark for a few days at a site with limited access. As far as I recall two public excursions gave Danish birders opportunity to study the bird for a few hours. During its stay in Denmark it seemingly behaved perfectly and would based on this unoubtedly have been accepted in category A. The bird did however turn up in Germany and it stayed there for several months giving German birders all the time in the world to study the bird. The bird later died, whish gave the Germans further oppurtunity to study the bird and obtain feathers for anaylsis of stable isotopes. In other words this bird has been studied intensively by the Germans. In my opinion it would be absolutely stupid to categorize the Danish record before having heard the opinion of the German RC. You might not agree with this, but I honestly don't think I can explain it any better.
You say that the German RC don't have Lesser Scaup in category A and therefore cannot be trusted in categorization-matters (or did I misunderstand your point?). I don't have much knowledge on the matter of German records of Lesser Scaup. I know that there are several German records of Lesser Scaup, but I don't know anything about their categorization (maybe Martin Gottschling can verify/explain this?). I trust the German RC to make a decent job on categorizing the WC Wheatear according to the rules of the AERC. Should the Germans fail to do so (and I see no reason what so ever why this should happen!?), I have no doubt that the Danish RC won't follow a decision not supported by common sense and serious work.

Uden at skulle blande mig specielt i denne diskussion, så vil jeg mene, at fordi en fugl forbliver lang tid på samme sted, taler det hverken for det ene eller det andet.
Som Henrik nævner har vi haft en del overvintrende fugle, der forblev i måneder. At den Hvidkronede Stenpikker forbliver flere måneder i Tyskland beviser blot, at den på lokaliteten fandt rigeligt med føde. Da der samtidig er tale om en fugl der fra naturens hånd næppe er udstyret med så stringens trækdrift som en langtrækker, siger længden af dens ophold på en given lokalitet intet.
SeK skriver, at dens optræden i Danmark varede "a few days". Det ved vi reelt intet om, da der kun var mulighed for at følge fuglen i nogle få dage; selvom et begrænset antal mennesker i tiden efter har haft adgang til området, kan fuglen sagtens have været der længere tid.

At tysken ikke accepterer Lille Bjergand som A-art er et tysk problem, hvor det danske SU godt hjælpe det store grænseland med lidt seriøse argumenter.

I disagree with you, Klaus.
You are guite right that rare passerines have been known to linger for longer periods of time. Rare thrushes (for instance Dark-throated) have been known to spend several months at a site provided enough food is available. But this mainly happens during winter. However rare passerines very rarely occur as longstayers from june-november (I can't think of any other?), which really was the case with the WC Wheatear. And as Klaus correctly points out the bird could easily have turned up long before its initial discovery.

Hi Sebastian,
How about the Black-eared Wheatear in 1996? It was discovered at exactly the same time of year as the White-crowned Wheatear - and it stayed for almost 2 month at the same location!

Naturally a Black-eared Wheatear is a less unexpected vagrant to Denmark than a White-crowned Wheatear, but was there any discussion about spontaneity in 1996?

Hi Poul Ulrik
Yes, I thought of that. That is probably the one record that comes closest to the WCW record.
The Black-eared stayed the summer - first seen on 30/6 1996 and apparently left the site on the 18/8 1996. It was of course unusal, but unlike the WC Wheatear the Black-eared left during "normal migration time". I don't think anybody has ever questioned the Blackeared Wheatears spontaneity and I don't think anybody ever will.
As Poul Ulrik says WC Wheatear is a much rarer bird than BE Wheatear and records of really rare birds will always be scrutinized intensely and the "captivity-ghost" will always seem difficult to scare off...
I do however strongly believe that the points made by the commentators on this thread justifies an A-categorization. But it is better to be safe than sorry, which is why we need to get as much information on the record as possible in order to make the best decision.