• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

The Grey Heron can it be called a Bird Of Prey? (1 Viewer)

I didn't know the talons definition, but birds of prey are so called if they are related to hawks, eagles, falcons and the likes. A great many other birds are predatory. Look at the larger gulls, for example, or ravens. In Perth, Western Australia in 2008 I watched an australian pelican swimming in a pond that was the home of a family each of eurasian coots and australasian grebes. I could tell from the behaviour of the smaller birds and of the pelican itself that it wasn't just there for exercise! Actually, back to wildirishswan's original species, the grey heron, it reminds me of an occurrence reported in the British Birds magazine back in the 1980s or 1990s. The observer was at the Dee Estuary between England and Wales in very cold weather and saw water rails catching and eating greenfinches, and the rails were in turn falling prey to grey herons.

Allen
 
Just to follow on to Allen S Moore's comment.
The Cape May Bird Observatory in New Jersey has a notoriously predaceous GBBG.
The MO of this bird is to attack when the local American Coots are foraging in shallow water. The GBBG selects a victim, who cannot escape by diving as the water is too shallow to escape from the gull.
This GBBG has received the nickname "Cooter" for that reason.
Of course, the big Marabou Stork in Africa or the corresponding Jabiru in Latin America are hunting birds by any definition., even though they do not qualify as birds of prey.
 
Here's the OED definition:
". . .bird . . .of prey: one that kills and devours other animals; a predatory or rapacious bird, esp. one belonging to the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes."

So, according to this, herons can be legitimately referred to as birds of prey, but I must say I’ve never seen the term applied to anything not either an owl or an Accipitriform.
 
ok I found where I read that definition it's from http://www.theraptortrust.co.uk but all the dictionary definitions I can find state that they have talons and a sharp hooked beak, so a heron would not qualify

But the OED--the mother of all dictionaries--says otherwise as per my previous post. I think the case here must be that birders tend to use the term in a more restricted sense than the general public. I know I do.
 
Last edited:
The trouble with most dictionaries is that they are generic and do not go into enough depth for specialised subjects, which includes the OED; many specialised subjects use words in a much more restricted way that are not used as such by the public in general. Or, look up any number of isms for example in a dictionary and it will rarely help in telling you what exactly the ism is all about.

Dictionaries are also usually descriptive rather than prescriptive so they show actual usage rather than what some/few people think it should be. Usage also changes over time, hence why dictionaries have to be revised (along with any neologisms).

Then again, the OED does specify Falconiformes or Strigiformes in particular.
 
Last edited:
Here's the OED definition: ". . .bird . . .of prey: one that kills and devours other animals; a predatory or rapacious bird, esp. one belonging to the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes." So, according to this, herons can be legitimately referred to as birds of prey.

In the company of several people, some years ago I saw a Grey Heron flying in leisurely fashion across the artificial lake in the grounds of Holkham Hall. Sailing across its path was a female Mallard followed by nine ducklings in a row. As the heron approached, eight ducklings dived, and in one smooth movement the heron picked up the duckling, tossed it in the air and caught it in an orientation in which it could be swallowed. It was. The heron's wingbeat cadence did not vary throughout, and as it flew away the submerged ducklings surfaced. Then there were eight...

We immediately discovered those among us who were squeamish.
MJB
 
It just occured to me that this would exclude vultures so can't be correct.

Depends on your definition of "correct" - it's quite easy to find 'birds of prey and vultures' as a phrase in older bird books...
MJB
 
Last edited:
Surely the grey heron is in a class of its own, the self propelled dustbin class;);)
I have seen them have a go at eating most things, especially during the hard winters of late.
They sure are survivors.
Over the last few months I have seen them eating startlings, blue and great tits, mice, a rat and fish when the water wasnt frozen.
 
it does eat animals like frogs, and birds occasionally but then again so do crows ,ravens and magpies.
I think birds of prey have talons and hooked beaks .
 
I quite like gowerboy's concept of a 'dustbin class'.
It usefully unites starlings, house sparrows, pigeons and most gulls.
Surely some molecular biologist can identify the epigenetic changes that provide the unifying thread to this large and increasingly pervasive group.
 
My two peneth,i think we all know what makes a bird,a bird of prey and a grey heron although it eats live prey aint a bird of prey,nor is a Gull eating the young of other birds or a blackbird pulling a live earthworm from the lawn.
 
Here's the OED definition:
". . .bird . . .of prey: one that kills and devours other animals; a predatory or rapacious bird, esp. one belonging to the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes."

So if you take this definition literally,all insect eating birds are birds of prey as they also "kill and devour other animals".
 
So if you take this definition literally,all insect eating birds are birds of prey as they also "kill and devour other animals".

A good point. I don’t think we’re seeing the OED at its best here, since I’m sure they’re simply using “animal” in this context to mean “largish animal” as people sometimes do. Not very impressive, I must admit, particularly since they fail to include this sense in their definition for “animal”. It only goes to show, I guess, how slippery the meanings of common words & phrases can sometimes be (& so the discussion in this thread).
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top