It was about a week ago (the time difference plays havoc with my internal calendar) that we said goodbye to the vineyards and the outlaws, climbed aboard a Q300 and took the (relatively) short flight up to Auckland, where we tried to avoid the giant crocs
giant croc at AKL
and, seeing as we had eight hours to kill before the flight out, hired a car for the day and drove up to Takapuna, where there’s a church that looks exactly like the one in Sione’s Wedding, and a view of Rangitoto
that can’t be beat. Rangitoto is a dormant volcano, which means—as we told the Pawns—that it could blow any minute. That’s probably stretching it a bit, but the girls seemed completely unfazed by the thought of fire and brimstone and volcanic rocks hurling through the air and lava flows across the bay, and watched it intently for signs of activity.
Albatross
Then we drove back across the harbour bridge and went up One Tree Hill (the last time I was there, there was one tree on the top of the hill. It’s not there now, sadly). After that it was back to Auckland International and on board EK407—the flight which three days previously had doinked its tail taking off from Melbourne—for Dubai via Melbourne. Which is one hell of a long trip.
But after a few hours in the lounge at Dubai we boarded a four-fifths empty 777 bound for London: after crossing the mouth of the Persian Gulf we flew up the side of Iran (which is surprisingly beautiful). I slept for an hour, and when I awoke we were approaching the Black Sea. I was too excited to sleep, and the flight was only seven hours, so I peered out of the window and watched Top Gear until the coast of Holland hove into sight. And then it was no time at all until we were overflying the rolling green hills and plains of east England
This looks familiar
and circling London
No city like it
I start work on Monday next week: I’ll see you at the RI, twice, and all I have to do now is find somewhere to live.
I’m back. And I have an iPhone!
“I’m back. And I have an iPhone!”
No wonder we’ve hardly seen you around here…
He had to come all the way to civilization to buy one.
Seriously. They wouldn’t sell me a contract in Australia.
Bloody criminals.
Well, probably because you were leaving the country, right? The minimum iPhone contract here is 2 years (insert favourite rants about Apple / Rogers / networks / contracts here).
If iPhones were available with prepaid plans I’d have one. As it is, I’ll make do with the ghetto iPhone – the iPod Touch.
Here is a list of things I dislike more than cell phone contracts:
crocs
iPhone eh- Beta Gal is green with envy
Nice story. But I’m 99% sure that ain’t no albatross.
And I’m glad to hear you were flying on a nice reliable Canadian plane.
Also, how was the temperature on the 777? My brother worked on the software controlling the environmental systems. If you were too hot, or too cold, it might be his fault (or maybe you can just blame the cabin crew).
Glad you’ve arrived. Now get back to work. 😉
Eva, if you move to London too you can get a pay-as-you-go iPhone. Unless they don’t sell them to riff-raff.
Are you implying Eva is riff-raff, Jenny?
Richard, I think it’s Phoebetria rather than Diomedea. It has the beak and the classic wing shape in flight.
The thing about buying a phone in Aus is that they wanted to see a passport, and because I had a visa application in but my current one was expiring in a few months they didn’t want to know. At that stage I didn’t know I was leaving.
And if you get an iPhone in the UK, folks, get the business contract. It’s two years rather than 18 months but seems like a better deal.
the only thing worse than crocs… Giant crocs
Awesome pics
Riff-raff? =P
Also, that is a seagull. I’m also 99% sure. But this is a debate that
ChechovGrrl Scientist can easily settle, isn’t it?Nostrils look to be in the wrong place, even for a Phoebetria albatross, or for a mollymawk (_Thalassarche_). Also, the end of the beak doesn’t appear to be sharply hooked. But then I’ve never seen an albatross in the wild, so what do I know?
It was twice the size of the seagulls
So is that a groove, for channeling the salt gland secretions, rather than a nostril?
Seagulls come in different sizes. The ones I’ve seen in North America are all twice as big as the ones I’ve seen in Holland.
And the beak is hooked. Also wasn’t gull wing shape in flight.
I love how we’re all ignoring Richard’s triumphant return to the homeland in favour of iPhone contracts and bird identification.
He’s been back for a week. It’s old news.
I’m insisting on the seagull.
Seagull-supporting facts:
-some seagulls are really big (like the size of cats, or even bigger if you have a small cat!) and have hooked beaks.
-that looks exactly like those seagulls
-I can’t find a picture of any kind of albatross that looks like this bird
-I can find lots of pictures of seagulls that look like this bird, only most of them have prettier plumage, because those are the ones people tend to take pictures of, I guess. But I’ve seen greyish spotted ones too.
-It has that coloured spot on the bottom part of the beak that seagulls have. To be honest, I don’t know if albatrosses maybe have that too, so that might not be supporting evidence.
Kelp Gulls (_Larus dominicanus_) are large, like their Northern Hemisphere Larus counterparts (such as the Glaucous-winged Gull). And Larus gulls go through a variety of plumage changes as they mature; if you look at most field guides, there are pictures of “first-year”, “second-year”, and “third-year” gulls. The beak doesn’t look both hooked and pointed at the tip, as an albatross beak would be. I’m with Eva – I think it’s a large Larus gull.
I vote for seagull too. In fact, I think that that ragtag seagull must be very proud indeed to have been confused with an albatross!
Welcome home R! Hope you find a place to live, or that you already have that!
[see, I focus on the important stuff 😉 ]
…and even if the beak might look a bit hooked I think it is a giant sea gull “Big sea gull” – I am sure birds come in giganormous sizes as well as spiders in Aussie/Zealand
No, no: carry on, do.
What surprised me was that we weren’t shown a dressed carcass in the next photo with a clove of garlic and a sprig of thyme shoved up its guano-producing aperture.
The thought had occurred but my hunting knife was in the checked in baggage.
Oh, I thought that was the 4/5ths empty 777. I will now go with gull.
Congrats on the safe arrival.
It occurred to me that a DNA sample of the bird could settle what species it is. Then it occurred to me that I was a geek.
But we knew that.
Good to see you had an uneventful trip… Apart from the Pawns getting too close to a giant croc.
I could be wrong but I don’t think you get Albatross in Auckland. Plus that thing doesn’t much resemble one, to me at least.
Asa. New Zealand used to have 14 foot tall birds called Moa. Unfortunately they were tasty.
Damn. A moa would have made a good recipe entry.
I am giggling like a loon at Jenny’s “sprig of thyme shoved up its guano-producing aperture” comment. I am also four years old.
Regarding albatrossness, (and I apologize for cross-posting this on RPG’s Flickr photo comments), trust National Geographic to have an interactive albatross information guide. Hovering over the nostrils (how many times have you heard that said, hm?) gives lots of information, and I’m now prepared to recant and say that yes, they look a lot like the beak of Richard’s bird.
Given the size and if it had silly-looking crooks in its wings (like an Osprey, but
fiftyfives times the size and much more seabird-ish), I guess I’m willing to go with Albatross. All this talk of Phoebetria vs. Diomedea is a bit technical for me, though, and I’m more than willing to defer to Kristi’s expert opinion.Where’s Steffi?
P.S. Not a Moa, but I believe Charles Darwin snacked on Rhea while in South America. Sadly, there seems to be no discussion in The Voyage of the Beagle as to whether it was tasty, or not.
I’m sticking with seagull, based on how the beak is attached to the head. Seagulls have feather coverage over what would be the bridge of their nose if they were human, and so does the “mystery bird”, but every albatross picture (including the National Geographic one) has the beak-material of the beak much higher up on the face between the eyes.
I’d draw a picture, but I’m in a rush.
Not only they used to have moas in NZ, but they also boasted a ginormous thing called Haast’s Eagle that apparently snacked on moas regularly. Naturally, when the moas were gone, they found it hard to make a living.
And BTW, I’m from South America and can confirm that rheas are definitively NOT tasty. Now, back to the Great Seabird Controversy.
Thanks, Cristian. I suspected as much. 😀
Perhaps it’s a Petrel, or a Fulmar – no, wait, wrong kind of nostrils. Urgh. The main problem is that whatever it is, it looks like a juvenile (with brown barring on the breast). Immature gulls and their allies are notoriously difficult to identify, unfortunately.
why was Top Gear playing out the window of your plane? Clarkson or Hamilton getting adventurous again?
har har.
And yes, Richard, it was definitely juvenile-looking. Somewhere I’ve got video of its family in flight, and that wing-shape ain’t no gull.
I still have this strange feeling that the only place you get albatross in mainland (har har- I know) New Zealand is near Dunedin.
Auckland’s too far north.
Auckland’s too far north.
Indeed. (But see wikipedia for a distribution map)
So it’s either a juvenile, weird-looking, lost albatross, or a gull.
39 comments and still no decision 😉
Don’t you just love Web 2.0? It’s better than wikipedia.
BTW, any plans to change the name of your blog when you start the new job? (Not that you – or I – have stopped being scientists, IMO, but some people have a very precise definition of the term).
This might help. Or not. Kelp Gulls seem to hang out in New Zealand quite frequently.
4 ft. wingspan and 2 ft. body is a pretty good-sized bird, IMO.
Being a scientist, like summer, is a state of mind.
Nope, the wing shape is wrong, Kristi. And the beak was more hooked.
I think we need some reference images:
This is an albatross
Could this be Richard with one?
Very artsy…but it’s hard to spot the nostrils!
Nope, the wing shape is wrong, Kristi. And the beak was more hooked
Well, I have only the one photograph to go on for this. When Grrl Scientist posts her “Mystery Birds” for identification (which is the best game going on Science Blogs, IMHO), she doesn’t reappear in the comments with “no the wings, which you can’t see, are a different shape”. The commenters might disagree about the field marks, but they all are working from the same photo.
Granted Kristi: but you’ll notice I wasn’t actually asking for identification! If I were I’d have presented more data. Blame Wintle, bloody Canadians.
Fair enough, Richard … but wasn’t the rallying cry in the South Park movie “Blame Canada”? Poor Wintle!
I’m rather embarrassed that I know about the South Park movie, actually.
Perhaps I’ll put together a bird ID quiz for my blog here. I’ve got lots of excellent photos from a friend; birds in Texas, Costa Rica, and the Galapagos.
That’s a brilliant idea, and an excellent example of nominative determinism.
Nominative determinism in science and medicine always amuses me.
I should never have stopped working on chicken and quail embryos, really.
I’ll try to get the first quiz up this evening … five Texas birds to start with, I’m thinking.
Granted Kristi: but you’ll notice I wasn’t actually asking for identification! If I were I’d have presented more data. Blame Wintle, bloody Canadians.
Eva started it. She’s Norwegian, or something.
*runs
Asa. New Zealand used to have 14 foot tall birds called Moa. Unfortunately they were tasty.
Nathaniel> I knew it. All big huge things there 🙂
Richard> so, a place to live now? (since I am avoiding the other part of the discussion… obviously)
Not yet
EvaÅsa, no: but I’m having a hunt around on Saturday. Wish me luck…I’m not an ornithologist, but that does look remarkably like a seagull.
Oh, Wilson. It’s a bloody seabird.