A collection of images of Tree Creepers mainly from a local nature reserve. More will added over time.
The female Tree Creeper can be identified by the damaged right hand tail feathers. I assume this occured due to the bird being responcible for the nest bulding and brooding of the eggs and turning around in the nest cavit. Due to fecal sacks now being seen removed, this pair of birds are now feeding young.

Over the weeks watching this pair of birds I noticed that if both adult birds arrived together to feed the young, the male paused and allowed the female to enter the nest first. Between them, the parents visited the nest with food on average 40 times an hour. Four young eventually were seen in the nest cavity and the last left the nest at around 10.15am May 5th.

Within four days of the young leaving the nest, the female began building a second nest while continueing to feed the young in the immediate area. She is now incubating a second brood at time of writing (25th May) and is continued to be fed on occasion by the male.

I have written an article about this pair of Tree Creepers for the magazine Bird Watching. I will give the date of publication as soon as I know when.

To update the Tree Creepers, They have had a second brood which left the nest today ( 22nd June ) I do not know how many young they had this time. The magazine artilce was also published today In Bird Watching, a coincidence with their young fledging.

Below is the text which became the magazine article in Bird Watching.

TREECREEPERS’ PRIVATE LIVES.

In March, 2009, I was excited to find a pair of Tree Creepers nesting in an area of old alder and will carr adjacent to Amwell Nature Reserve, Hertfordshire. Previously most views of Tree Creepers had been of brief glimpses of small well camouflaged brown mouse-like birds creeping up a tree trunk or branch with occasional flashes of brilliant white under parts. Here, however, was a wonderful opportunity to enjoy observing and photographing one of our possibly less studied species at the nest. At first I hadn’t intended to become so involved in the life of these birds but the fascination proved too great.

The nest chamber was behind a large piece of loose bark in a Crack Willow close to a public footpath. It was so well hidden that the birds carried on nest building and later feeding their young unnoticed by most passers-by.

After the male had selected the nest site and built the initial platform inside, the female completed the nest using small twigs and splinters of wood which I found out that had been produced from work done with chainsaws on willow trees 200 yards away, and then lining it with thin strips of plant stems, feathers, and what looked like man made fibres from a discarded cushion on the towpath of the nearby canal. Although the male made occasional visits to the nest chamber it was never seen to assist the female in completing the nest. As my photographs show a broken tail feather, this enabled me to identify the female when she left the nest, sometimes to be fed by the male.

Once the eggs were laid and the female had begun incubating, the male would bring her food to the nest entrance. Often he was away for three quarters of an hour or more before returning to feed her. When he did return, landing low on the tree and climbing upwards, the female would immediately come to the entrance of the nest chamber begging to be fed. Perhaps she heard the male landing on the tree or he gave a call out of the range of my hearing. The female occasionally left the nest to forage herself but usually returned within ten minutes. It was difficult to identify the food at this stage, as the main bulk of it seemed to be small black invertebrates including spiders and flies. Occasionally the male would offer the female a grub or larger spider. Being April, and cool, the few visible species of flying insects included large numbers of St Mark’s-flies which were frequently caught and eaten.

This behaviour continued throughout the incubation period of 15 days until the first egg apparently hatched on the afternoon of April 17th. Thereafter the female increasingly joined the male foraging for food; both returning with only very small invertebrates obviously selected as suitable for newly hatched young. As the other eggs hatched collecting food and removing the increasing numbers of faecal sacs from the nest occupied much more of the adults time. At first the female spent most of her time brooding the young, never leaving the nest for more than a few minutes. Soon, however, both adults were busy finding food from first light till late evening. As the young grew they were brought larger food items. Particularly large items such as caterpillars and mayflies were brought in singly, otherwise a good beak full was collected before returning.

After a week or so of both brooding, and collecting food, the female began to show some strain. After a period of brooding the young she would leave the nest chamber, and cling to the bark a few inches away from the entrance. With her beak open as though panting because over heating, her eyes would droop and close briefly and she took what appeared to be a micro-nap.

It soon became possible to hear the young calling inside the nest when food was brought to them, and at times they could be heard from almost 20 yards away. Their movement was also noticeable through a small hole in the bark just above the centre of the nest. A head would appear and an eye looked through to the outside world. The nestlings were growing quickly.

Something else I had noticed was that if the male arrived on the tree before the female, he would pause below the nest entrance and let her pass and feed the young first. She would also at times arrive with food on her own, but instead of taking it directly to the young, she would land lower on the tree and sit there for 30 seconds or more, taking a rest while she could before carrying on up to the nest entrance. A possible sign of the physical effort she was putting in to raising her family. It was around this period that I counted how many times food was being brought to the nest. Between both adults, they were feeding the young on average an amazing 40 times an hour.

As the date drew nearer for the young to fledge, I was spending more and more time watching, and waiting for the event. I had already spent most of three weeks sitting in front of the tree usually for 8 to 12 hours a day. By Sunday 3rd of May, the young were becoming very active and could be clearly seen moving around. As the date I expected the young would be leaving came and went I kept coming back earlier and earlier. On the morning of the 6th May, the young were spending more time at the entrance, and were very clearly seen being fed by both adults and one brave nestling decided to try out its climbing skills. It climbed about 8 feet above the nest, lost its grip and luckily fell behind some loose bark before returning to the safety of the nest. The fledglings disappeared deep inside the nest chamber later that morning, and things became quiet. What I realised was happening was that they were leaving the nest through a crack in the bark further around the tree, nicknamed the “back door” so within a short time they all had left and flown in to the nearby trees. By about 10.15am that morning all that could be heard were the scattered calls of the newly fledged Tree creepers begging to be fed.

From what I was able to observe, four young were successfully reared and at the time of writing, ten days later, they were still in the area calling for attention and being fed by the adults.

I showed some of the photos to a regular walker who had taken an interest in the birds. Jokingly he said that had if I had still been sitting there the following weekend, he was going to keep me talking while his wife called the men in white coats to take me away. He knew, however, just how much pleasure I had enjoyed following the lives of such wonderful and interesting birds.