ID-FRONTIERS for February 15-21, 2004

Messages are displayed in the order they were received.  Subject  From  Date   Time   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET   Sun, 15 Feb 2004   11:28am   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Phillip Pickering    Sun, 15 Feb 2004   12:54pm   Incidence of Canadian California Gulls in California   Joel Weintraub    Sun, 15 Feb 2004   12:56pm   Re: Incidence of Canadian California Gulls in California   chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET   Sun, 15 Feb 2004   2:08pm   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Barb Beck    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   12:19am   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Bruce Mactavish    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   4:44am   Olympic Gull in Texas?   Martin Reid    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   8:01am   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Paul Lehman    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   9:38am   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Jerry Tangren    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   10:38am   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Phillip Pickering    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   10:51am   Large dark eyed gull mystery; solved?   Egil Ween    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   11:16am   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Norman D.van Swelm   Mon, 16 Feb 2004   3:52pm   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Chris Elphick    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   4:50pm   subspecies   Chris Elphick    Mon, 16 Feb 2004   6:21pm   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Phoebetria(AT)AOL.COM   Mon, 16 Feb 2004   8:01pm   Re: subspecies   Chris Elphick    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   5:52am   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Martin Reid    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   6:18am   Strange FL Gull, again... could this be a Yellow-legged Gull?   jbouton2(AT)EARTHLINK.N   Tue, 17 Feb 2004   8:00am   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Phillip Pickering    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   10:19am   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Ted Floyd    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   10:19am   Interesting article in -Science- (Was: subspecies)   Ted Floyd    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   10:41am   Comments on linear classification   Floyd Hayes    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   12:08pm   Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery   Phillip Pickering    Tue, 17 Feb 2004   5:35pm   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM   Tue, 17 Feb 2004   8:37pm   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Cliff and Lisa Weiss   Tue, 17 Feb 2004   9:59pm   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   David C. Bailey   Tue, 17 Feb 2004   10:05pm   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Phillip Pickering    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   12:18am   Tufted Duck eclipse plumage   DSUDDJIAN(AT)AOL.COM   Wed, 18 Feb 2004   12:49am   the actual Olympic-type gull in Texas....   Martin Reid    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   7:54am   Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?   Phillip Pickering    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   9:07am   IDAHO gull   Lethaby, Nick   Wed, 18 Feb 2004   9:15am   Re: Tufted Duck eclipse plumage   Peter Pyle    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   9:50am   Re: IDAHO gull   Phillip Pickering    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   10:15am   Re: subspecies   Floyd Hayes    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   12:03pm   Re: the actual Olympic-type gull in Texas....   Steve Hampton    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   1:31pm   Fwd: another Great Black-backed Gull photo   birdbooker(AT)zipcon.ne   Wed, 18 Feb 2004   10:08pm   Re: subspecies   Matt Kenne    Wed, 18 Feb 2004   10:13pm   Re: Fwd: another Great Black-backed Gull photo   Phillip Pickering    Thu, 19 Feb 2004   12:34am   AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark   Daniela.Detlef.Grube   Thu, 19 Feb 2004   12:02pm   Re: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark   Bert-Jan Luijendijk    Thu, 19 Feb 2004   2:01pm   AW: Re: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark   Daniela.Detlef.Grube   Fri, 20 Feb 2004   3:18am   RE : AW: Re: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark   =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pierr   Fri, 20 Feb 2004   6:05am   Re: AW: Re: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark   Peter Adriaens    Fri, 20 Feb 2004   9:15am   Iding molt in gulls   Martin Reid    Sat, 21 Feb 2004   6:47am

To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'. This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET
Date: 15 Feb 2004 11:28am

Hi folks,

  Writing in from Chile, where my mind is on canasteros and earthcreepers more
than gulls. Rather than give another opinion on what this mystery gull is, I
would like to comment on Paul´s first sentence. With all due respect to the gull
 afficionados that have written in, I don´t think that anyone really
´knows´albertaensis. There are few birders that live in the range of
albertaensis, and fewer that have looked at them in detail and really basically
nothing (2 papers?) has been published on their variability and particularly on
non adult or non breeding plumages. On the west coast we see lots of California
Gulls, and even looking very carefully it is a struggle to come up with many
that one can really be confident in their ID as albertaensis. This winter after
looking at many Cal Gulls (thousands), I am happy with one, only one. I am sure
that the percentage goes up during migration, but still I don´t think that even
those of us that really look hard at gulls find that many,
 or really have much confidence in identifying albertaensis. Perhaps I am wrong
on this, and this form is being confidently identified, and I am just being too
conservative in my home patch. I think that this has been an educational
discussion, and certainly the discussion on the id as a Caspian Gull has to
continue, before calling this a California Gull. But when considering California
 Gull, it has to be considered as a general entity, to try and specifically
address points as albertaensis would be a mistake since we really know so little
 about this form. This is my opinion after looking closely at this bugger during
 several trips to Alberta and as a wintering bird here in California.

conservatively yours

Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)comcast.net

now back to thinking about furnariids. I wish we had furnariid-chat, man we need
 to figure some of these guys out for good - lots of unanswered questions down
here!
> Hi,
>
> this is certainly a very interesting discussion, given the appearance of the
> bird, but also the enthusiastic support it is receiving from those who know
> albertaensis, which on the face of it may be the least likely explanation.
>
> I can't add any input on CAGU, but can say that this bird doesn't ring true
> as Caspian Gull to me.
>
> I did want bring up a couple of points:
>
> o Someone asked if there was any evidence of immaturity apart from the marks
> on tertials (and scapulars? Are they also marked?). It seems to me that on
> the shots of the bird on the water, including the wing detail, and the last
> picture of the standing bird, from behind, that the tips of black greater
> primary coverts are also visible. Surely this is indicative of a
> not-yet-adult bird. It's pretty hard to say what the primary coverts look
> like from the flight shot.
>
> o I find the shape of the white apical tips on the closed wings odd, and
> wonder if this is infomative with respect to either age or form. I can't
> recall seeing an adult Herring Gull (in Europe) with black bleeding down the
> shaft into the apical tip (bang, he is shot down swiftly and mercilessly),
> and to my recollection, if the proximal edge of the tip on the folded wing
> departs from a straight (possibly staggered) line, then it will be for white
> to bleed back up the feather shaft, rather than black to bleed down it. I
> would hazard that this also applies to adult Caspian Gulls. Do 4W gulls
> commonly show tips with this feature?
>
> o The underside of P10 is not the classic pattern for adult Caspian Gull in
> W Europe; ; the mirror doesn't join with the tip (there is a black
> subterminal bar) and may not reach the outer web of the feather. The black
> on the outer web seems to extend too far back up the feather, with no white
> in sight. Is this typical for a 4W cachinnans?
>
>
> Regards, Paul Bright-Thomas
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself with cool emoticons - download MSN Messenger today!
> http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 15 Feb 2004 12:54pm

>  or really have much confidence in identifying albertaensis

My personal use of the term is just to refer to the largest, palest
California Gulls that migrate along the west coast, from which the
gull in question appears indistinguishable.

I don't know for a fact that any of these pale Cals originate in
Central Canada, but there is at least a lot of indirect evidence
that many likely do. Large numbers of Cals have been noted
suddenly showing up and staging in spring on the southern
BC coast ~3 days after a massive concentrated movement
including many large/pale-end birds passed the central Oregon
coast. Also, there is clearly a tremendous annual spring and
fall north/south semi-pelagic movement of adult Cals, noted I think
as far north as central Washington (or further?), most evident
when coinciding with stormfronts or west winds. At least
on the central Oregon coast these flights typically involve
numerous larger birds that are hard to differentiate from Herrings
by mantle shade at any significant distance, and they are often
thoroughly mixed with migrating Herring and Thayer's. On a few
occasions during fall migration, including this past fall, I've also seen
compact onshore flocks of several thousand birds consisting
of almost nothing but mixed Herrings and large-end Cals (almost
all adults).

From what I've seen on the Oregon coast there appears to be
a cline (perhaps north/south?) in Cal size and mantle shade. Don't
know how that relates to studies comparing different breeding
populations - will have to look up the papers. Is albertaensis
really a distinct isolated form? Or is it just one end of a cline
as in barrovianus Glaucous?

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Incidence of Canadian California Gulls in
         California
From: Joel Weintraub <jweintraub(AT)fullerton.edu>
Date: 15 Feb 2004 12:56pm

Group,

Alvaro Jaramillo discussed the possible abundance of "albertaensis" in
California, and was happy with only one possible from thousands of Gulls he
observed.   I haven't looked up the distribution of this form, but if this
form of the California Gull comes from Canada (such as Alberta), I do have
information that might change Alvaro's mind as to their abundance in
California.

During the winter of 1997-1998 I read bands of gulls frequenting Doheny
State Beach, Orange County, California.  This site is in southern
California, probably not where Alvaro was observing gulls.  I read  hundreds
of bands of 3 gull species.  Obviously not all populations of California
Gulls have a banding program, and thus the population of banded gulls I
sampled is biased.

Looking at a sample of my records ("Certificate of Appreciation Cards" from
the USGS) reveals the following.  (I have more banding return records on
printouts from the USGS.)

As one might expect, banded California Gulls from Mono Lake (and also from
south San Francisco) accounted for most of the banded sightings for the
species.  Mono Lake had/has? an active banding program for the species.  I
accumulated at least 64 Certificates of Appreciation for California born
California Gulls.  I haven't tallied these, but most represent a single
individual rather than multiple sightings.

Fifteen banding records were from Nevada, and one from Utah.

Three California Gulls were encountered during my observation period in
southern California that were banded near Garo, Colorado.  At least 14
individuals came from a breeding site near James Lick, Wyoming.  In
addition, I had 5 banded individuals that were recorded in the banding
records as "unidentified" (because they banded young from a colony of mixed
gull species and in retrospect the banders decided they couldn't tell which
species they had banded), but all were California Gulls, and they were
banded as young from near Irma, Alberta, Canada.

I obviously don't know what the original population of banded gulls are from
each site to equate band returns with population sizes, but from my
perspective California Gulls from southern Canada are regular winter
visitors to southern California, and probably are well represented.

Joel Weintraub, Dana Point, CA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Incidence of Canadian California Gulls in
         California
From: chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET
Date: 15 Feb 2004 2:08pm

Joel

  Thank you, thank you, thank you. Nothing I enjoy more than hard data. Yours
has been a most educational message. I should clarify that I have always thought
 that we should be seeing a good number of birds from Alberta in the flocks I
watch, but I personally have not been able to see that many that fit the classic
 phenotypic definition of albertaensis. Your data confirms that they are almost
surely going through here as well, and I thank you for sharing this with us. I
am another ardent gull band reader but so far all I get are banded Western Gulls
 from the Farallon Islands, which are only about 30 miles or so from my house,
so not as interesting as what you have seen. As a staff member of the San
Francisco BAy Bird Observatory I thank you for taking the time to read bands on
many birds that we likely banded!!

cheers

Alvaro
> Group,
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo discussed the possible abundance of "albertaensis" in
> California, and was happy with only one possible from thousands of Gulls he
> observed.   I haven't looked up the distribution of this form, but if this
> form of the California Gull comes from Canada (such as Alberta), I do have
> information that might change Alvaro's mind as to their abundance in
> California.
>
> During the winter of 1997-1998 I read bands of gulls frequenting Doheny
> State Beach, Orange County, California.  This site is in southern
> California, probably not where Alvaro was observing gulls.  I read  hundreds
> of bands of 3 gull species.  Obviously not all populations of California
> Gulls have a banding program, and thus the population of banded gulls I
> sampled is biased.
>
> Looking at a sample of my records ("Certificate of Appreciation Cards" from
> the USGS) reveals the following.  (I have more banding return records on
> printouts from the USGS.)
>
> As one might expect, banded California Gulls from Mono Lake (and also from
> south San Francisco) accounted for most of the banded sightings for the
> species.  Mono Lake had/has? an active banding program for the species.  I
> accumulated at least 64 Certificates of Appreciation for California born
> California Gulls.  I haven't tallied these, but most represent a single
> individual rather than multiple sightings.
>
> Fifteen banding records were from Nevada, and one from Utah.
>
> Three California Gulls were encountered during my observation period in
> southern California that were banded near Garo, Colorado.  At least 14
> individuals came from a breeding site near James Lick, Wyoming.  In
> addition, I had 5 banded individuals that were recorded in the banding
> records as "unidentified" (because they banded young from a colony of mixed
> gull species and in retrospect the banders decided they couldn't tell which
> species they had banded), but all were California Gulls, and they were
> banded as young from near Irma, Alberta, Canada.
>
> I obviously don't know what the original population of banded gulls are from
> each site to equate band returns with population sizes, but from my
> perspective California Gulls from southern Canada are regular winter
> visitors to southern California, and probably are well represented.
>
> Joel Weintraub, Dana Point, CA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Barb Beck <barb(AT)BIRDNUT.OBTUSE.COM>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 12:19am

Alvaro Jaramillo Said "There are few birders that live in the range of
albertaensis"

Right - Well we are too busy keeping our igloos from melting!  After all you
guys have highways to travel on and we only go across muskegs in dogsleds!

I think  the Alberta birders stand up well with any group anywhere.  We have
a pretty good number of birders here. The gulls are here in our short summer
where there are a lot of things to look at and a lot of things to do.  In
general Alberta birders feel much more strongly about getting information
about our birds into many of the volunteer studies like the BBS and CBC than
those in other areas of North America.  We are very concerned about the
birds about which we do not have enough information which are in habitats
which are very very rapidly being developed.  Sorry gulls are interesting
but our set we usually have to deal with here is small and easy to
differentiate.  We do not have populations of both subspecies standing side
by side for a lot of comparison as you guys do.  We have limited resources
for research and gulls are numerous, in habitats which are not being
destroyed as rapidly as those of some of our other birds.  Basically there
are a lot of other things we are worried about.  If it is any measure of the
number of birders we have look at our participation in things like BBS
routes.  How many states with even a much larger population can match what
is done here.  Even our butterfly watchers(many of whom like myself are also
birders) do our part in butterfly surveys.  We do far more than the state of
California. We do almost as many BBS routes as that state and some on road
conditions which are very bad.  How many of you expert birders have had to
winch yourselves down a logging road to do your survey in order to get some
of the information about remote places into a database that is after having
to drive for 6-7 hours to get to the start of your route and having to camp
on a cold rocky knoll at 4,000 feet below freezing because you cannot drive
to the start of the route when it is dark?  How many of your great birders
south of the border even bother to try to get information about nocturnal
owls into the CBC database. I know because we tried to find something useful
there a few years ago. We are out at 12:01 usually even at temperatures
of -30.  Our results have shown that we have a large number of owls that
many of you assume "migrate" to the states like the Saw-whet Owl because a
few disperse down the east coast.

You guys have the gull side by side for comparison - you have over 10 times
the number of people in California that we have in Alberta.  What are all
the great California birders doing?

Just spouting you hit a hot button.

Gotta sweep up the igloo - cut a slab off the frozen moose for dinner.

Barb Beck
Edmonton

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET
Sent: February 15, 2004 11:28 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Large dark eyed gull mystery

Hi folks,

  Writing in from Chile, where my mind is on canasteros and earthcreepers
more than gulls. Rather than give another opinion on what this mystery gull
is, I would like to comment on Paul´s first sentence. With all due respect
to the gull afficionados that have written in, I don´t think that anyone
really ´knows´albertaensis. There are few birders that live in the range of
albertaensis, and fewer that have looked at them in detail and really
basically nothing (2 papers?) has been published on their variability and
particularly on non adult or non breeding plumages. On the west coast we see
lots of California Gulls, and even looking very carefully it is a struggle
to come up with many that one can really be confident in their ID as
albertaensis. This winter after looking at many Cal Gulls (thousands), I am
happy with one, only one. I am sure that the percentage goes up during
migration, but still I don´t think that even those of us that really look
hard at gulls find that many,
 or really have much confidence in identifying albertaensis. Perhaps I am
wrong on this, and this form is being confidently identified, and I am just
being too conservative in my home patch. I think that this has been an
educational discussion, and certainly the discussion on the id as a Caspian
Gull has to continue, before calling this a California Gull. But when
considering California Gull, it has to be considered as a general entity, to
try and specifically address points as albertaensis would be a mistake since
we really know so little about this form. This is my opinion after looking
closely at this bugger during several trips to Alberta and as a wintering
bird here in California.

conservatively yours

Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)comcast.net

now back to thinking about furnariids. I wish we had furnariid-chat, man we
need to figure some of these guys out for good - lots of unanswered
questions down here!
> Hi,
>
> this is certainly a very interesting discussion, given the appearance of
the
> bird, but also the enthusiastic support it is receiving from those who
know
> albertaensis, which on the face of it may be the least likely explanation.
>
> I can't add any input on CAGU, but can say that this bird doesn't ring
true
> as Caspian Gull to me.
>
> I did want bring up a couple of points:
>
> o Someone asked if there was any evidence of immaturity apart from the
marks
> on tertials (and scapulars? Are they also marked?). It seems to me that on
> the shots of the bird on the water, including the wing detail, and the
last
> picture of the standing bird, from behind, that the tips of black greater
> primary coverts are also visible. Surely this is indicative of a
> not-yet-adult bird. It's pretty hard to say what the primary coverts look
> like from the flight shot.
>
> o I find the shape of the white apical tips on the closed wings odd, and
> wonder if this is infomative with respect to either age or form. I can't
> recall seeing an adult Herring Gull (in Europe) with black bleeding down
the
> shaft into the apical tip (bang, he is shot down swiftly and mercilessly),
> and to my recollection, if the proximal edge of the tip on the folded wing
> departs from a straight (possibly staggered) line, then it will be for
white
> to bleed back up the feather shaft, rather than black to bleed down it. I
> would hazard that this also applies to adult Caspian Gulls. Do 4W gulls
> commonly show tips with this feature?
>
> o The underside of P10 is not the classic pattern for adult Caspian Gull
in
> W Europe; ; the mirror doesn't join with the tip (there is a black
> subterminal bar) and may not reach the outer web of the feather. The black
> on the outer web seems to extend too far back up the feather, with no
white
> in sight. Is this typical for a 4W cachinnans?
>
>
> Regards, Paul Bright-Thomas
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself with cool emoticons - download MSN Messenger today!
> http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Bruce Mactavish <bruce.mactavish1(AT)NF.SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 4:44am

At the beginning it seemed preposterous that Caspian Gull and California
Gull could be a challenging identification duo.  I am pretty green on
both fronts and have been sitting back reading the comments on the
Norwegian gull.  My experience with California Gull boils down to a week
in mid June 2002 in Red Deer, Alberta where it was common in parking
lots and fields near the local landfill.  Caspian Gull experience is
limited to a day  assisting researcher Jacek Betleja catch and band
Caspians in a breeding colony of 100 pairs in southeast Poland in late
April 2003.

The facial expression of the bird too me looks closer to Caspian Gull
than California.  The feathering at the base of the bill comes to a
broad obtuse angle at the gape. A short, straight, rather faint gape
line extends into the face.  Checking various photographs of both
species and this pattern is more typical of Caspian Gull, though there
is overlap with a few California Gulls showing something similar.  Many
California Gulls show a longer gape line often curving downward at the
end.  Another feature affecting the facial expression of the bird, is
the bill shape.  The bill base is slightly thicker than the mid way
point of the bill. This is apparent on a number of Caspian Gull photos
while most California Gulls in the photos I looked at show a more evenly
paralleled basal half of the bill.

By the way the wingtip pattern is matched by photo # 444 in the KMO gull
book.

Bruce Mactavish
St. John's, Newfoundland
Canada
bruce.mactavish1(AT)nf.sympatico.ca

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Frode Falkenberg
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 5:43 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Large dark eyed gull mystery

Eight flightshots of the Norwegian mystery gull are uploaded today at:

http://cyberbirding.uib.no/gull/ 

Frode Falkenberg

Department of Biology, UiB
Allégaten 41
5007 Bergen
Norway
http://cyberbirding.uib.no/ 
Cell/SMS: +4793440647


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 8:01am

Dear Gullers,
Here's the pics of a fascinating gull:
http://www.martinreid.com/hybrp07.html
  - it's almost dark enough to be a Western Gull, but the head and breast
look so much like Glaucous-winged to me, that i feel it must be a
hybrid.  Perhaps someone would correct me, but I believe this would be the
first record for Texas of this hybrid combination.
I am seeking input from West Coast gullers on this bird; if consensus is
reached, this would be a significant record, as it would establish that
this well-known hybrid - thought to generally be sedentary or a
short-distance migrant at best (true?) -  is capable of being a vagrant
well east of the Rockies.
Cheers,
Martin

Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Paul Lehman <lehman.paul(AT)VERIZON.NET>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 9:38am

Martin and IDFrontiers:

I haven't looked at the gull photos yet, but numbers of G-w X Westerns
do move
a bit in the non-breeding season--south to at least central CA in
winter,
fewer south of there, and there are also a few records north of normal
to
extreme southeastern Alaska (Ketchikan). I have also seen at least 2
hybrids
of this sort well inland in Nevada, which is two more than the number of
Westerns that I have ever seen in that state! (And equals the number of
pure-looking Glaucous-wingeds I've seen there.) Based on these and other
records as well, I'd say that Western seems to wander well inland
substantially LESS than this hybrid combo does (except at the Salton
Sea,
where Western annual but hybrids extremely rare or unknown--but this
site is
well to the south). But I do not know what the all-time easternmost
record of
such a hybrid is.

--Paul Lehman
Cape May, NJ


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Jerry Tangren <tangren(AT)wsu.edu>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 10:38am

Glaucous-wingeds, Westerns and their hybrid occur regularly east of the
Cascades in Washington--they presumably follow the Columbia River
inland.
The relative numbers of the Glaucous-wingeds to the hybrids may reflect
the ratios on the coast near the mouth of the Columbia River.
However, Western appear to be represented by much fewer individuals
than
would be expected by relative abundance alone. Possibly, the few
Westerns
that do occur are not pure and carry the gene for wandering.

Because these birds do spread out along the drainage of the Columbia,
it
would not be too far once east of the Cascade crest for them to wander
further south through the Great Basin to Nevada with similar relative
numbers.

--Jerry <tangren(AT)wsu.edu>

On 2004-02-16 08:34:19 -0800 Paul Lehman <lehman.paul(AT)VERIZON.NET>
wrote:

> I have also seen at least 2
> hybrids
> of this sort well inland in Nevada, which is two more than the number
> of
> Westerns that I have ever seen in that state! (And equals the number
> of
> pure-looking Glaucous-wingeds I've seen there.) Based on these and
> other
> records as well, I'd say that Western seems to wander well inland
> substantially LESS than this hybrid combo does (except at the Salton
> Sea,
> where Western annual but hybrids extremely rare or unknown--but this
> site is
> well to the south).


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 10:51am

Very interesting gull. I don't see anything at all that is necessarily
out of range for Olympic.

Can Slaty-backed x Glaucous-winged be confidently ruled
out, though? Contrast between webs on P9-P7 seems a
bit extreme for such a dark-end Olympic gull, and there
appears to be enough of a spot pattern remaining on the
primary tips to where a Slaty-backed hybrid probably
can't be ruled out on that basis. Is P10 too dark for a
2nd-winter Slaty-backed?

How about secondary web contrast? Under secondaries
also seem kind of pale.

Also, although head shape varies with posture, on avg the crown
seems a bit on the flattish side and the eyebrow ridge perhaps
a bit prominent. The head shape is certainly within range of
Olympic gull, but at the same time it's not really typical. Perhaps
it might be subtly better for a Slaty-backed hybrid.

I'm just nitpicking, but I'd have to carefully study 2nd-winter
Slaty-backed much more than I have before I could really feel
confident that it had Western in it. Amazing find either way.

Cheers,

Phil Pickering
Lincoln City, Oregon
philliplc(AT)harborside.com

> Dear Gullers,
> Here's the pics of a fascinating gull:
> http://www.martinreid.com/hybrp07.html


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Large dark eyed gull mystery; solved?
From: Egil Ween <egil(AT)CAFE-ITALIA.NO>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 11:16am

After 1 week of discussion regarding the Norwegian "Large dark-eyed mystery
gull" there has already been a massive "twitch" and there are many "hopeful
belivers" waiting to get a final confirmation on the gulls id.

There has been questions for more photos, and for more details on the Norwegian
gull, and I hope the following links will give confirmation to unanswered
questions:

More pictures is added at Christian Tillers homepage. See this link:
http://home.online.no/~ctiller/fugler.htm
Its giving better views of the size and the gape (it is red).

Also Trond Sørhus have added new photos taken 14th February at this site:
http://www.nofnt.no/trond/Fugl/Laridae/californicus/index.htm

This together with the already published links below should cover most aspects.

Christer Kamsvåg 12th February flight shots
http://cyberbirding.uib.no/gull/ufo/4w_01b.php

Dark eyed Larus sp.  photo 4th February by the finder Kjetil Aa. Solbakken
http://cyberbirding.uib.no/gull/ufo/4w_01.php

As a summary of the comments there is no doubt that most comments from North
America confirms or strongly indicates Larus californicus albertaensis.
Supported by Martin Garners comments on eye, head&breast markings and bill;
Joseph Morlans comments on size, mantle, leg color and vagrancy potential;
strong support from Sweden; nice comparison of bills by John Idzikowski (The
Caspian Gulls are all very very white-headed as excpected..) and much more, the
big question is:

Will all the photos now avalible confirm this to be the first Californian Gull
for WP?

I surely hope so.

Egil Ween
Stavanger, Norway
egil(AT)cafe-italia.no


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 3:52pm

Bruce Mactavish wrote:>At the beginning it seemed preposterous that Caspian
Gull and California
Gull could be a challenging identification duo. <

and he wrote:> My Caspian Gull experience is
limited to a day  assisting researcher Jacek Betleja catch and band
Caspians in a breeding colony of 100 pairs in southeast Poland in late
April 2003.<

If the colours we see on screen of the Norwegian gull are reflecting reality
than the grey of the mantle is too dark for the cachinnans we see in Western
Europe. Have a look at:

 www.ncp.fi/lokitseura

www.ncp.fi/lokitseura/IGM2/NORMAN.htm

 You'll find a picture of cachinnans' (Ukraine) and argenteus' (Netherlands)
mantles and wings. The overall impression of the cachinnans we see here is
that they are slender, pale and long- and rather thin-legged birds. Some
adult birds have greenish legs most have legs with a distinct pink colour. I
have never seen them with such distinct head and breast pattern as the
Norwegian bird has. On the contrary, apart from the distinct cachinnans
'neck-shawl', a winter pattern on the head is very faint and most adult and
near-adults have white heads, even in winter. Most adult or near-adult
cachinnans have pale or palish eyes which may, from a distance look dark but
are never as dark as in the Norwegian bird. You may be tempted to bring
'eastern' barabensis in because of it's darker grey mantle but these birds
are even slenderer than cachinnans. From what I have read and seen so far I
am quite satisfied that the Norwegian bird is a California Gull.
Norman


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Chris Elphick <elphick(AT)SBCGLOBAL.NET>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 4:50pm

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

Ted Floyd probably has a better handle on the numbers, but Glaucous-winged x
Western's are annual in small numbers in Nevada.  When I lived in Reno
(1992-98), I would see at least few every winter.  Often there would be up to 5
or more at the main gull watching site in Reno, with at least a couple more at
Pyramid Lake.  Western's are extremely rare in the state (I think there are 2
accepted records).  Glaucous-winged are more common (a few records each year),
though my experience (especially early on in my time in Reno) was that a lot of
birds that got reported as Glaucous-wingeds, were probably hybrids.

I don't know how far south the hybrid records go, but I seem to remember at
least a couple frmo southern Nevada.  Again, maybe Ted could chip in .....

chris

Paul Lehman <lehman.paul(AT)VERIZON.NET> wrote:
Martin and IDFrontiers:

I haven't looked at the gull photos yet, but numbers of G-w X Westerns
do move
a bit in the non-breeding season--south to at least central CA in
winter,
fewer south of there, and there are also a few records north of normal
to
extreme southeastern Alaska (Ketchikan). I have also seen at least 2
hybrids
of this sort well inland in Nevada, which is two more than the number of
Westerns that I have ever seen in that state! (And equals the number of
pure-looking Glaucous-wingeds I've seen there.) Based on these and other
records as well, I'd say that Western seems to wander well inland
substantially LESS than this hybrid combo does (except at the Salton
Sea,
where Western annual but hybrids extremely rare or unknown--but this
site is
well to the south). But I do not know what the all-time easternmost
record of
such a hybrid is.

--Paul Lehman
Cape May, NJ

Chris Elphick
Storrs, CT
elphick(AT)sbcglobal.net
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: subspecies
From: Chris Elphick <elphick(AT)SBCGLOBAL.NET>
Date: 16 Feb 2004 6:21pm

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

There are a couple of papers that have been published in the Proceedings of the
Royal Society in the last couple of weeks that might interest people who read
this list.  Neither deals with ID directly, but both relate to the issue of
subspecies designations, a topic that frequently rears its ugly head here, and
which is the basis for many ID discussions.

Both papers derive from Bob Zink's lab at the University of Minnesota.  The
first paper focuses generally on the issue of how well currently described
subspecies reflect the evolutionary history of a species.  The bottome line
appears to be: not very well.  Reviewing genetic studies from about 30-40
species, Zink finds (a) that there are usually many more described subspecies
than distinct lineages (on average 5-6 named subspecies, vs. an average of 1.9
lineages), and (b) that the subspecies frequently do not reflect the lineages.
The paper focuses on the conservation implications of these results, but there
are clearly a number of other ways in which the findings are of interest.  You
should be able to read the abstract of the paper at:
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=n9a4b9f0tmdypja1hh1k&referrer=parent&backto=issue,17,19;journal,1,162;linkingpublicationresults,id:102024,1

The full paper will probably only be accessible if you are at an institution
with subscription access to the journal.

The second paper provides an example of the mismatch between subspecies
designations and actual evolutionary divisions within a named species, in this
case winter wren.  The conclusion is that, worldwide, there are 6 very distinct
lineages of winter wrens (two in North America) -- I think compared to some 30+
named subspecies.  The genetic differences among these 6 groups are large -
easily equivalent to those typically found among taxa considered to be
uncontroversial species.  Within each of these lineages there is very little
genetic structure, suggesting that subdividing each group further is not well
supported.  Again, the abstract (but probably not the full paper) should be
accessible at this site:
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=gpt919g22p1juvbf0e86&referrer=parent&backto=issue,15,15;journal,2,162;linkingpublicationresults,id:102024,1

References:

Robert M. Zink. The role of subspecies in obscuring avian biological diversity
and misleading conservation policy  Proceedings: Biological Sciences Currently
only ppublished on line)

Sergei V. Drovetski, Robert M. Zink, Sievert Rohwer, Igor V. Fadeev , Evgeniy V.
 Nesterov, Igor Karagodin, Evgeniy A. Koblik, Yaroslav A. Red'kin.  Complex
biogeographic history of a Holarctic passerine.  Proceedings: Biological
Sciences.  Volume 271, Number 1538 / March 07, 2004  Pages: 545 - 551

Chris Elphick
Storrs, CT
elphick(AT)sbcglobal.net
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Phoebetria(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 16 Feb 2004 8:01pm

This is surely very little & very late, but I agree that this bird looks in
no way different from the _albertaensis_ California Gulls I've seen in s.
Manitoba (at landfills) and in no  way different from the presumed
_albertaensis_
we have found annually since 1990 in Virginia and North Carolina, mostly
adults, all birds being of the paler-mantled sort (thus the presumption of
_albertaensis_).  We have seen up to four adults in a day (Cape Point, Buxton),
and the
Norwegian bird is a dead-ringer for these birds -- in overall size and shape,
head and bill shape, eye color and orbital ring color, leg color and
proportion, bill structure, bill pigmentation, upperpart coloration, and
primary
pattern (which, as in other larger species, shows variation).  I can't for a
moment
think of one distinction from the birds we see on the East Coast, in fact.  I
believe that most of the specimens of California Gull (surely almost 30 by
now) have been _albertaensis_ as well, so maybe there is something to be gained
by a look at those specimens, for those seeking further confirmation.

Ned Brinkley
ed., North American Birds journal
Cape Charles, Virginia USA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: subspecies
From: Chris Elphick <elphick(AT)SBCGLOBAL.NET>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 5:52am

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

Joe Morlan helpfully pointed out that the links I posted yesterday do not work. 
 Unfortunately, those that worked for Joe don't seem to work now either.  The
Royal Society must have a system to direct everyone to their home page or
something.  So, I cut and pasted the abstracts in below.  If you want to see the
 online version, you can probably google the titles or go the links I put up
before, click on Proceedings: Biological Sciences, and search on Zink from
there.

Chris

>
Robert M. Zink. The role of subspecies in obscuring avian biological diversity
and misleading conservation policy Proceedings: Biological Sciences Currently
only published on line)
Subspecies are often used in ways that require their evolutionary independence,
for example, as proxies for units of conservation. Mitochondrial DNA sequence
data reveal that 97% of continentally distributed avian subspecies lack the
population genetic structure indicative of a distinct evolutionary unit.
Subspecies considered threatened or endangered, some of which have been targets
of expensive restoration efforts, also generally lack genetic distinctiveness.
Although sequence data show that species include 1.9 historically significant
units on average, these units are not reflected by current subspecies
nomenclature. Yet, it is these unnamed units and not named subspecies that
should play a major role in guiding conservation efforts and in identifying
biological diversity. Thus, a massive reorganization of classifications is
required so that the lowest ranks, be they species or subspecies, reflect
evolutionary diversity. Until such reorganization is accomplished, the subsp
 ecies
 rank will continue to hinder progress in taxonomy, evolutionary studies and
especially conservation.

>
Sergei V. Drovetski, Robert M. Zink, Sievert Rohwer, Igor V. Fadeev , Evgeniy V.
 Nesterov, Igor Karagodin, Evgeniy A. Koblik, Yaroslav A. Red'kin. Complex
biogeographic history of a Holarctic passerine. Proceedings: Biological
Sciences. Volume 271, Number 1538 / March 07, 2004 Pages: 545 - 551
Our analysis of the ND2 sequences revealed six clades within winter wrens
(Troglodytes troglodytes). These clades corresponded to six geographical
regions: western Nearctic, eastern Nearctic, eastern Asia, Nepal, Caucasus and
Europe, and differed by 3-8.8% of sequence divergence. Differences among regions
 explained 96% of the sequence variation in winter wren. Differences among
individuals within localities explained 3% of the sequence variation, and
differences among localities within regions explained 1%. Grouping sequences
into subspecies instead of localities did not change these proportions.
Proliferation of the six clades coincided with Early and Middle Pleistocene
glaciations. The distribution of winter wren clades can be explained by a series
 of five consecutive vicariant events. Western Nearctic wrens diverged from the
Holarctic ancestor 1.6 Myr before the present time (MYBP). Eastern Nearctic and
Palaearctic wrens diverged 1 MYBP. Eastern and western Palaearctic bir
 ds
 diverged 0.83 MYBP. Nepalese and east Asian wrens diverged 0.67 MYBP, and
Caucasian birds diverged from European wrens 0.54 MYBP. The winter wren has a
much greater degree of inter- and intracontinental differentiation than the
three other Holarctic birds studied to date--dunlin (Calidris alpina), common
raven (Corvus corax) and three-toed woodpecker (Picoides trydactylus)--and
represents an example of cryptic speciation that has been overlooked.

Chris Elphick
Storrs, CT
elphick(AT)sbcglobal.net
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 6:18am

Dear all,
I feel that the Norway Gull is very CAGU-like, but I also feel that not
enough has been discussed/is known about the forms of Cachinnans-like birds
found to the east of the populations that normally donate birds to NW
Europe and Scandinavia.  These normal visitors are nearly all typical of
the form/subspecies L. c. ponticus, or Pontic Gull - and I agree with the
commentators who note the differences between the NORW. gull and these
typical ponticus-types that most Euro/Scand. birders are used-to.
I spent time in Bahrain in mid March 1999, and saw a number of birds that
looked intermediate between the obvious ponticus-types (a minority) and the
numerous barabensis-types.  My priority on the visit was first-winter
birds, so I did not take many photos of sub-adults, but i may have some
pics of these birds (I'll look.)  Dick Newell saw some puzzling birds in
Kazakstan that seemed intermediate between eastern cachinnans (i.e. not
ponticus) and barabensis:
http://magikcircle.com/birds/image.asp?title_id=173&show_thumbnails=False
- I wonder what sub-adults look like in Feb (as opposed to late March)?
Which brings me to another point; does anyone have photos of subadult
Caspians of ANY form taken in early Feb?  many of us have visited the
ranges of the various Caspian forms in March/April, when you'd be
hard-pressed to find even a CAGU with much winter markings.....
Having studied the newer images of the NORW. gull I now think I was wrong
in my earlier analysis of the P-tips assignments; the flight shots clearly
show the three outermost Ps being very close to each other in length with
P10 >P9>P8, then a large gap to the tip of P7.  Also, the extent of black
in Ps 7-5 is quite limited - these factors all indicate that on the folded
wing we are seeing P10 sticking out just beyond P9 with P8 just back from
that; then a large gap to the tip of P7, and a similar gap to the tip of
P6, with P5 hidden under the tips of the tertials.  This being the case,
the tail aligns with P7 (or just inside it.)
Compared to my small collection of open-wing CAGU pics, the limited amount
of black in Ps 7-5 is only approached by the least well-marked (older?)
adult CAGUs, with the "norm" for CAGU having a bit thicker black (and at
more of an angle) than the NORW. bird.  Of course, the NORW. bird is NOT an
adult, but a probable 4th winter (maybe advanced 3rd winter?)  Surely the
next set of primaries for this bird will contain even less black?   Look at
the underwing in the closest flight photo of the NORW. gull; draw a line
from the black on P5 to the base of P10 - the extent of gray on the distal
side of this line seems too large even for an adult CAGU - ?
The leg color in all the pics looks pale pinkish with a tinge of gray on
the tibia...this is typical of HERG-types (and many subadult Caspians).  I
acknowledge that digital images tend to lessen yellows and exaggerate pinks
in gull legs - yet the legs of this bird look similar to those of the
argentatus in the same pics, and I've yet to find an image of CAGU older
than 1S with any sign of pink in the legs....
So, I ask all of you in CAGU-land to go outside and get us some images of
subadult CAGUs, preferably ones that:
- have legs that look pinkish in the pics.
- have the tail aligned well beyond P6 (almost under P7.)
- have such limited amounts of subterminal black on primaries P7-5.
- have obvious gray on the bases of the inner webs of P9 and P8 (see
closest flight shot of NORW. gull.)
- look as long-legged as other large gulls (see pics of NORW. gull standing
with argentatus.)

Looking forward to seeing the pics,
Martin

Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Strange FL Gull, again... could this be a
         Yellow-legged Gull?
From: jbouton2(AT)EARTHLINK.NET
Date: 17 Feb 2004 8:00am

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

All,

I while back I posted a request for opinions on an odd gull I'd =
photographed at Jetty Park in Cape Canaveral, FL last November. Derek =
Hill has been kind enough to post said photos at his site.
http://nctexasbirding.com/florida_gull.htm
Three opinions kept coming up from the few who replied: Lesser =
Black-backed Gull, Great Black-backed Gull, and Yellow-legged Gull. =
Lesser was my own first guess but I couldn't explain the lack of the =
dark mantle or the advanced soft part coloration (although the latter =
didn't bother me as much). Also the bird appeared too large and chesty =
as compared to the other LBB's around it. The second group was =
represented by 3 individuals who just flatly said it is a Great =
Black-backed Gull but never offered any explanation for the small size, =
or the straw or fleshy yellow soft part coloration evident in the side =
by side comparisons with LBB's and young Herring Gulls. I agree, that =
from a plumage standpoint it most closely resembles a GBB, but don't =
want to force a round peg in a square hole simply because it is a more =
likely candidate.=20

The last candidate, Yellow-legged Gull, also fits the mold well from a =
plumage standpoint as well as size and coloration, and 4 people =
suggested this as possibility. Since then I've looked at some pics on =
Nick Rossiter's Yellow-legged Gull page and have to admit there are some =
similarities to members of the atlantis race. Especially through the =
mantle and wing coverts, as this species appears to molt in spring.=20
http://www.nrossiter.supanet.com/ylg/

Unfortunately all that suggested the latter prefaced by saying, "... I =
don't have much experience with the species, but... " At any rate, I =
would welcome comments from those who do have experience with this =
species. Please no it's a .... with no further explanation. Anyone with =
a good valid point for why any one of the above can be definitively =
excluded would be wonderful and welcomed as well. If Yellow-legged can =
be exluded then I can handle putting the critter away accepting it's an =
unidentified oddball. However, a Yellow-legged Gull would be of great =
consequence obviously. There is no accepted FL record for YLGU at =
present.

Thank you all for any comments you have.

Best,=20

Jeff Bouton
Port Charlotte, FL
jbouton2(AT)earthlink.net

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 10:19am

> - have legs that look pinkish in the pics.
> - have the tail aligned well beyond P6 (almost under P7.)

I'll work on getting photos of the above. I suspect the latter
is normal, but it's hard to prove without getting both standing
and flight shots of the same individuals. The former is normal
through at least 3rd-winter.

> - have such limited amounts of subterminal black on primaries P7-5.

Looks within normal range of variation to me - similar to Grant 486.
I am more concerned with the spot on P4.

> - have obvious gray on the bases of the inner webs of P9 and P8 (see
> closest flight shot of NORW. gull.)

See lower wing (upper is Ring-billed) at -
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/RBGU-CAGUwing1.jpg

> - look as long-legged as other large gulls (see pics of NORW. gull
standing
> with argentatus.)

Although it's not standing up straight, Grant 477 is a large-end bird
that looks to me like it has a similar leg length, particularly a very
long tarsus for Cal. I'll also try to dig up the video I previously
referred to and post captures.

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd(AT)aba.org>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 10:19am

Hi, all.

Paul Lehman and Chris Elphick have provided some interesting
commentary on the dispersal of "Olympic" (i.e., Western X
Glaucous-winged) Gulls inland in North America.  The basic
problem, as I see it, is stated (in both word and picture!)
on p. 202 of the 2001-2002 Winter Season issue of North
American Birds (vol. 56 no. 2).  In a nutshell, my impression
is that Olympic Gulls are uncommon but regular in winter in
the Great Basin, that Glaucous-winged Gulls are rare but
regular, and that Western Gulls are casual or accidental.

During my years in Nevada (1999-2002), we had just two "good"
records of Western Gull: one at Lake Mead, Clark County, 8 May
2000, seen by Jim & Marian Cressman; and one at Pyramid Lake,
Washoe County, found 19 November 2000 by Martin Meyers and seen
the next day by Jon Dunn and me.  There are two earlier records
of "good" Western Gulls from northern Nevada, along with a
scattering of earlier, questionable (or so I opine) records
from southern Nevada.

Meanwhile, it was customary, during the 4 winters that
I spent in Nevada, to find birds of Glaucous-winged Gull
parentage on the large lakes in the state, especially in
the northwestern part of the state.  And there were multiple
reports of such birds from western Utah, too, during that
period.  Along with Chris Elphick, I question the extent to
which bona fide pure Glaucous-wings were dispersing into
the Great Basin.  Nearly every bird that I saw (maybe
10-15 in total?) was either: (1) obviously a hybrid or (2)
not definitively a pure bird.

And even though they want to hound me out of Colorado,
these days, for saying so, I just don't see how most of
these far-inland Glaucous-winged Gulls thingies really can
be considered "good" (i.e., countable/listable) Glaucous-wings.
For example, you might want to check out Bill Schmoker's
photograph on SurfBirds of a Glaucous-winged thingie that
Chris Wood and I found in Boulder County, Colorado, last
month.  (I never know for sure how to use the SurfBirds
site; but if you search for "Schmoker" and "Glaucous-winged",
you should find the bird soon enough.)  Bill indicates the
identification with a question mark, and I think that his
caution is warranted.  (Incidentally, I am NOT saying that
the current Colorado Glaucous-winged thingie is a hybrid
with Western, but, rather, with something else, perhaps
Herring Gull.)

The bottom line: Birds of Glaucous-winged Gull parentage
certainly disperse well inland, every year.  But I suspect
that we are calling too many of them Glaucous-wings.  Given
that this species is a wanton and profligate hybridizer,
I would question *any* record of a subadult Glaucous-winged
inland.  Quick!--How can you prove that your hypothetical
first-cycle Glaucous-winged from <enter-a-non-coastal-state-
or-province-of-your-choosing> didn't have a Herring Gull
great-grandparent? ...

Best,
Ted

----------------------------

Ted Floyd

Editor,
Birding

American Birding Association
P.O. Box 7974
Boulder, Colorado 80306-7974

303-444-6365
tedfloyd(AT)aba.org

Please visit the website of the
American Birding Association:
http://www.americanbirding.org


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Interesting article in -Science- (Was:
         subspecies)
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd(AT)aba.org>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 10:41am

Hi, all.

Chris Elphick writes:

> There are a couple of papers that have been published in the
> Proceedings of the Royal Society in the last couple of weeks
> that might interest people who read this list. Neither deals
> with ID directly, but both relate to the issue of subspecies
> designations, a topic that frequently rears its ugly head here,
> and which is the basis for many ID discussions.

There's also a good (and commendably short and readable!) article
in the 30 January 2004 issue of -Science-.  The topic is taxonomy,
not ID; but like the topic of subspecies, taxonomy is near-and-
dear to many of us on this list, so I thought there might be some
interest. Here is the citation:

  Scotland, R.W., and M.J. Sanderson. 2004. The significance
  of few versus many in the tree of life. Science 303:643.

Yes, folks, it is just one page long!

Arguing from first principles, the authors look at whether
certain higher-order taxa (including the class Aves, viz.,
birds) are typically subdivided into lower-order taxa (e.g.,
orders, classes) that contain an artificially "even" or
"balanced out" number of species.  This might happen for
the reason of convenience that very large vs. monotypic
taxa are hard to study.  But, instead, maybe most taxa
should be either very large (e.g., Passeriformes) or monotypic
(Bring Back Pandionidae!).  In many ways, this is a result
that Sibley & Monroe anticipated decades ago (I'm thinking
of the result that, basically, everything is in the super-taxon
Ciconiiformes-Passeriformes, with a handful of monotypic or
species-depauperate outliers, e.g., woodpeckers--and this
pattern "trickles down" to lower-order taxa, too).  When
the AOU catches on, look for the "linear sequence" of our
life lists to be greatly altered; but, the way things go,
that won't happen 'til long after we're dead.

All best,
TF

----------------------------

Ted Floyd

Editor,
Birding

American Birding Association
P.O. Box 7974
Boulder, Colorado 80306-7974

303-444-6365
tedfloyd(AT)aba.org

Please visit the website of the
American Birding Association:
http://www.americanbirding.org


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Comments on linear classification
From: Floyd Hayes <floyd_hayes(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 12:08pm

In response to Ted Floyd's comments on linear
classification, a member (who seemingly prefers not to
be identified) of the AOU Committee on Classification
and Nomenclature asked me to make the following
points:

Do me a favor and point out on BIRD ID that the
Sibley-Ahlquist DNA-DNA hybridization classification
is nearly universally regarded with suspicion,
especially since the analyses themselves have been
shown to be flawed. To get some facts, one could
perhaps start with:

HARSHMAN, J.  1994.  Reweaving the tapestry: what can
we learn from Sibley and Ahlquist (1990)?  Auk 111:
377-388.

... which attempts to resolve what is and isn't
supported by S/A's OWN DATA.  There are many other
critical reviews of the S/A data and its use in
classification.

You might also point out that the linear sequences we
use are not just AOUCL but basically global (except
for a few field guides whose authors didn't know
better than to follow S/A); for example, the linear
sequence and family arrangement in Dickinson (2003)
was designed by none other than Joel Cracraft, an
arch-enemy of use of DNA-DNA hybridization studies.

Further, you might also point out that the AOU does
indeed alter its linear sequences when TWO or more
independent analyses support the rearrangement. We
think that waiting for at least two analyses is the
only responsible way to operate.  One recent example
is the movement of ducks and chickens next to each
other and to follow paleognaths, a "radical" shift of
the traditional sequence:

http://www.aou.org/aou/birdlist.html

Further, you might point out that the number of
component taxa in practice has been irrelevant not
only to the AOU but to ornithology in general, e.g.,
Passeriformes has > 50% of all species, whereas
Opithocomiformes has 1 species.

Further, you might point out that the AOUCL and other
classifications use categories like subclass,
superorders, subgenera etc. are officially recognized
WHEN supported by data.  The problem, as anyone who
works with higher-order phylogeny knows, is that the
actual relationships among orders and families is in
most cases not yet known, and that use of the precise
branching pattern in the tapestry would be regarded as
absurd by anyone, AOU CL or not.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Large dark eyed gull mystery
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 5:35pm

Found the video. Unfortunately in almost the entire thing the
gulls are standing in water, so I picked out the best frames
I could, hopefully to help a little with the leg length issue.
Video was shot in June. Front bird is large-end 1st-summer
fairly long-legged Cal, middle is small-end 2nd-summer
Cal, back two birds are Western/Olympic. I think the front
bird is easily within the normal size and leg length range of
Herring (smithsonianus).

http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/cal001.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/cal002.jpg

(central Oregon coast as usual)

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 17 Feb 2004 8:37pm

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

Greetings All

Ted raises an interesting question.

How can one ever be certain that a Glaucous-winged Gull is "pure." Or for
that matter, what is "pure?"

Gulls in general, and GWGUs in particular, are incredibly variable and
promiscuous. GWGUs happily breed with Westerns, Glaucous, and Herring. Living in
 NW
WA, I sometimes feel like I've lost all touch with what a "real" GWGU looks
like. And with so much hybridization, how would one ever know if some other
species genes lurk within.

Philosophically Yours

Steven Mlodinow

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Cliff and Lisa Weisse <october(AT)IDA.NET>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 9:59pm

As long as the subject of what a "pure" GWGU is I've been
wondering about the birds I've seen in Idaho and Utah.  I
managed to get decent photos of a darker first winter bird
in Boise, ID and wondered if anyone cared to comment on its
"purity".  In the field the P's were the same shade of brown
as the tertials and tail.  Under side of wings was pale in
flight.
www.octoberweb.com/birds/gwgu

Thanks.

Cliff Weisse
october(AT)ida.net


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: "David C. Bailey" <baileydc(AT)PDX.EDU>
Date: 17 Feb 2004 10:05pm

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM=20

Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Olympic Gull in Texas?

How can one ever be certain that a Glaucous-winged Gull is "pure." Or =
for that matter, what is "pure?"

The quick and honest answer is "no."  There is no way to tell for sure.  =
We apply the process of elimination in determining bird species =
identities in the field.  If other species can be eliminated than the =
bird represents what remains "on the table" so-to-speak and we identify =
it as such along with some template that has been agreed on by some =
(though often not most e.g. Thayer's Gull).  This is an example of the =
FACT that species are figments of the imagination of human beings and =
our wont to pigeon hole; simplify phenomena in order to make sense of =
our entropic universe.  The species concept (any of them) attempts to =
put individual organisms into arbitrary boxes based on particular =
criteria that seem to have biological (and therefore phylogenetic) =
meaning.  The fact is that organisms are players in a continuum of the =
process of evolution and entropy and therefore don't always reflect the =
rules we would like to apply to them.  That evolution is in human terms =
a slow process helps us to be able to do this.  This gray area for =
species identification (literally for groups like the Larids) will =
always exist.  The confusion we have in bird id is very much testiment =
to the simplification of the concept species we employ.  We are often =
trying to fit a square peg to a round hole.  Fun, isn't it?  The =
challenge is to try to fasion our "pegs" to be better fit our "holes."  =
For the most part we suceed in our assigning of organisms to species, =
but I am afraid that for the gulls our sucess will alway be mediocre. =20

What about DNA?  This is not immutable (thankfully), or without =
variation, so the problem will not be solved by sequencing the genetic =
code for all organisms.  Some very "distinct" species can hybridize and =
produce furtile offspring, so what does that mean for the concept of =
species?

For the purpose of identification of (a hypothetical) Glaucous-winged =
Gull then one can struggle with each individual to match its plumage to =
the "true field marks" that separate it from all other species (have =
fun; and yes I do this) or one can say this bird matches (or doesn't) =
the accepted field marks of the species well enough (subjective, and I =
do this too) to call this a G-w Gull and leave it at that.  This second =
protocol will identify a subset of all the gulls and the ones that don't =
fit in will be called something else or left unidentified to species.  =
Unidentified is realistic since Glaucaus-w. x (fill in the blank) seem =
to successfully breed with other Larids all the time.

Happy Gull identification,

David

baileydc(AT)pdx.edu
David C. Bailey
Portland Oregon

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 12:18am

> As long as the subject of what a "pure" GWGU is I've been
> wondering about the birds I've seen in Idaho and Utah.  I
> managed to get decent photos of a darker first winter bird
> in Boise, ID and wondered if anyone cared to comment on its
> "purity".  In the field the P's were the same shade of brown
> as the tertials and tail.  Under side of wings was pale in
> flight.
> www.octoberweb.com/birds/gwgu

I think this is probably a 2nd-winter Thayer's - looks like it has
adult gray in the greater coverts. Primaries are too dark for
pure Glaucous-winged, and appearance of the primary stack, with
obvious pale edging to the tips and a sharply contrasting pale
line running up the inner edge of the stack, is distinctive for Thayer's.
Herring x Glaucous-winged can look similar, but the size compared
to the Herring and Cal, proportionately large eye and short legs,
and head and bill shape all seem fine for Thayer's (presume male).

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Tufted Duck eclipse plumage
From: DSUDDJIAN(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 18 Feb 2004 12:49am

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

I have not found much in the sources I have in my library about the eclipse
plumage of the Tufted Duck. I am specifically interested to learn if it is
unusual for an adult male to retain a full length tuft all the way through his
period of eclipse plumage (i.e., to the beginning of December), only to lose
the
tuft as he completed molting into breeding plumage in early December. Such a
male was in Santa Cruz County, California, this winter, now spending his third
winter. He was found this past fall on November 21, 2003, in eclipse plumage
but with a full tuft. He was molting out of eclipse by the very beginning of
December, molted the tuft feathers ca. Dec 4-8, and was essentially in breeding
plumage but tuftless by Dec 9.

The only reference I have that has much of anything about eclipse plumage is
"Waterfowl" by Madge and Burn, which on p. 255 says, "In eclipse still shows
signs of a vestigial tuft, as do birds in female-like plumage." And "Adult male
eclipse: crest short." The illustration of an eclipse male on plate 39 shows
one that is essentially tuftless. Thus, it would seem that the local bird was
unusual in retaining his tuft "to the bitter end."

Any comments will be appreciated.

David Suddjian
Capitola, CA
dsuddjian(AT)aol.com

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: the actual Olympic-type gull in Texas....
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 7:54am

Dear all,
My email sparked a very interesting and valuable debate on the occurrence
and ID of WGWU, WEGU, OLGU types away from the west coast - thank
you....but what about the Texas bird?  there's been just one public reply
on the actual bird, plus three private comments to me; I have one for a
purish WEGU, one for a typical dark-end OLGU, and two for perhaps a
GWGUxSBGU combination.  Thus I'd really appreciate more feedback on the TX
bird - thanks!
Martin

Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Olympic Gull in Texas?
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 9:07am

> I agree with Phil P. that your Boise gull is not a Glaucous-winged.
> Primaries and tail certainly too dark, and pattern on coverts not quite
> right as well. But I disagree with Phil that it is a Thayer's

Paul is right. I was tired and was a little hasty in my analysis last night.
Oops..

I'm not sure if the Idaho bird is necessarily too bulky for male Thayer's
- they can look pretty large next to small-end Cals, but certain shape
aspects are much better for Glaucous-winged. The body is turned
so it's hard to tell, but it looks like it's probably pretty rounded
and thick-reared rather than elongated and attenuated at the
rear. Also the eye is quite centralized in the face, and the line
of the forehead where it meets the bill appears straight or slightly
convex, which is normal for Glaucous-winged, but unusual for
Thayer's. Thayer's more typically show a slightly concave line
to the forehead just above the bill. In the top photo at least the
bill size also appears extreme for Thayer's as Paul stated.

In my experience Western x Glaucous-winged do not normally
show the pale line on the inner edge of the primary stack, because
they typically don't have such contrastingly pale inner webs of
the outer 2-3 primaries. However more obvious Herring x Glaucous-
winged tend to have more strong (Thayer's-like) web contrast, so
for whatever it's worth I think if it's a Glaucous-winged hybrid it
would most likley be with Herring.

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: IDAHO gull
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby(AT)TI.COM>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 9:15am

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

I don't agree at all this is a second winter Thayer's. For a start, a 2W
Thayer's should show an extensive pale bill base. By December it would also
show extensive gray in the mantle, etc. I would call this a 1Y GW x HEGU
hybrid.

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Phillip Pickering
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 11:03 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Olympic Gull in Texas?

> As long as the subject of what a "pure" GWGU is I've been
> wondering about the birds I've seen in Idaho and Utah.  I
> managed to get decent photos of a darker first winter bird
> in Boise, ID and wondered if anyone cared to comment on its
> "purity".  In the field the P's were the same shade of brown
> as the tertials and tail.  Under side of wings was pale in
> flight.
> www.octoberweb.com/birds/gwgu

I think this is probably a 2nd-winter Thayer's - looks like it has
adult gray in the greater coverts. Primaries are too dark for
pure Glaucous-winged, and appearance of the primary stack, with
obvious pale edging to the tips and a sharply contrasting pale
line running up the inner edge of the stack, is distinctive for Thayer's.
Herring x Glaucous-winged can look similar, but the size compared
to the Herring and Cal, proportionately large eye and short legs,
and head and bill shape all seem fine for Thayer's (presume male).

Cheers,

Phil

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Tufted Duck eclipse plumage
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle(AT)BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 9:50am

Hi David -

With limited specimen material I tried to answer this question and
concluded that most (all?) adult males retained their tuft through the
summer, molting it only once per year (typically Sep-Nov, with the tuft
perhaps still growing into Dec) during the molt following the simultaneous
wing molt, what I call part of the prebasic molt. The molt into eclipse
plumage (what I call the prealternate molt) is rather ephemeral in Aythya,
and in older males it can include just a limited proportion of body
plumage, a few wing coverts, and often the rectrices. I would be interested
in other observations on the tuft situation (in females too) from those who
know the species well.

Peter Pyle

At 11:49 PM 2/17/2004, DSUDDJIAN(AT)AOL.COM wrote:
>I have not found much in the sources I have in my library about the
>eclipse plumage of the Tufted Duck. I am specifically interested to learn
>if it is unusual for an adult male to retain a full length tuft all the
>way through his period of eclipse plumage (i.e., to the beginning of
>December), only to lose the tuft as he completed molting into breeding
>plumage in early December. Such a male was in Santa Cruz County,
>California, this winter, now spending his third winter. He was found this
>past fall on November 21, 2003, in eclipse plumage but with a full tuft.
>He was molting out of eclipse by the very beginning of December, molted
>the tuft feathers ca. Dec 4-8, and was essentially in breeding plumage but
>tuftless by Dec 9.
>
>The only reference I have that has much of anything about eclipse plumage
>is "Waterfowl" by Madge and Burn, which on p. 255 says, "In eclipse still
>shows signs of a vestigial tuft, as do birds in female-like plumage." And
>"Adult male eclipse: crest short." The illustration of an eclipse male on
>plate 39 shows one that is essentially tuftless. Thus, it would seem that
>the local bird was unusual in retaining his tuft "to the bitter end."
>
>Any comments will be appreciated.
>
>David Suddjian
>Capitola, CA
>dsuddjian(AT)aol.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: IDAHO gull
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 10:15am

> I don't agree at all this is a second winter Thayer's. For a start, a 2W
> Thayer's should show an extensive pale bill base. By December it would
also
> show extensive gray in the mantle, etc. I would call this a 1Y GW x HEGU
> hybrid.

Agreed about the Herring x Glaucous-winged conclusion based
on shape, but 2nd-winter Thayer's are quite variable in the respects
mentioned. Many show a lot less gray in the mantle in December
than the Idaho bird. On some the bill base is a bit faded but still
looks dark from a distance, and on a (very small) minority of 2nd-
winter birds the bill base shows no fading at all.

See (2nd-winter in Feb):

http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/th001.jpg

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: subspecies
From: Floyd Hayes <floyd_hayes(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 12:03pm

If you'd like a pdf file of the Zink paper on
subspecies, I'd be happy to supply it.

Floyd Hayes
Angwin, CA

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: the actual Olympic-type gull in Texas....
From: Steve Hampton <SHAMPTON(AT)OSPR.DFG.CA.GOV>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 1:31pm

Martin,

I'll comment on your bird at http://www.martinreid.com/hybrp07.html

I'll go along with a 2nd year dark-end Gl-W x Western Gull.

The bill shape, head shape w/ beedy eye, bulky posture, visible
secondary skirt, and fairly short primary extension are all very good.

The fine horizontal barring on the breast is unique to Gl-W, so I think
we can safely say there's some Gl-W parentage.  Also, the mantle shade
may be a tad pale for pure occidentalis (although that's a function of
the photo).  The sooty face and lores are quite reminiscent of Western,
as well as the tone of gray on the mantle.  I see no need to look beyond
to Slaty-backed as a possible parent-- indeed, I would expect possibly a
smaller gonydeal angle, less blue tone to the mantle, and a whiter and
streakier head in a Gl-W x SB combo (although I have no experience with
them).

It's a very nice find!

And a note on the Idaho bird:  It's a funky camera angle but still
doesn't feel right for Thayer's.  Gl-W x Herring seems very reasonable.

Steve Hampton
________________
Resource Economist
Office of Spill Prevention and Response
California Dept of Fish and Game
PO Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090
-----------------------------------
(916) 323-4724 phone
(916) 324-8829 fax


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Fwd:  another Great Black-backed Gull photo
From: birdbooker(AT)zipcon.net
Date: 18 Feb 2004 10:08pm

HI ALL:
 FYI

Hi Tweeters,

I was looking at the websites of other digiscopers the other day and found a
photo taken in Newfoundland of a hybrid Glaucous Gull X Great Black-backed Gull.
  Since this was discussed ad nauseam on Tweeters, I thought this would be
interesting for the gull fans in Tweeterland to see.  It can be found on Jean
Iron's website:

        http://www3.sympatico.ca/jeaniron/NFLandgulls2.htm

I e-mailed Jean with some questions about the hybrid gull and a friend of hers,
Willie D'Anna, sent me a photo he took with three gulls in it -- a 1st winter
Great Black-backed, a 2nd winter Great Black-backed (same age as the Renton
GBBG) and the hybrid GLGU X GBBG.  Willie gave me permission to put it on my
website for everyone to study.  It is in the Great Black-backed Gull folder on
my website (link is in the signature box).

Enjoy,

Denny

      * Denny Granstrand *
          * Yakima, WA *
  * dgranstrand(AT)charter.net *
          photos on-line at:
http://osprey.bardill.net/gallery/

-- END OF FORWARDED MESSAGE --

--
Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA USA
A.K.A.:Birdbooker
Rallidae all the way!


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: subspecies
From: Matt Kenne <mkenne(AT)NETAMUMAIL.COM>
Date: 18 Feb 2004 10:13pm

I was struck by this from the appendix of the Zink paper: unpublished mtDNA
data from G. Barrowclough on the recently near-and-dear subject of Dark-eyed
Juncos showed that, of seven un-named subspecies examined, ALL were found to
belong to the same monophyletic group. Despite outward appearances, there
was no genetic indication of historical divisions corresponding to what we
now consider subspecies. Hmmm....

On a more exciting note: If the finding that species include on average 1.9
historically significant units is taken to a conclusion that all species
should be split into these units, and that all these units should be
considered full and equal species, the resulting doubling of the number of
possible species for listing purposes would send hordes of birders into a
frenzy of activity!

Matthew Kenne
Algona, Iowa
mkenne(AT)netamumail.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Fwd: another Great Black-backed Gull photo
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 19 Feb 2004 12:34am

> http://www3.sympatico.ca/jeaniron/NFLandgulls2.htm

I know I've already said way more than my share on the Renton
gull, but briefly, in the above hybrid photo I was struck by how
boxy the hind-crown looks. The change in angle at the back of
the head seems quite sharp and squared off, and it also seems
fairly high above the eye. In my experience this is normal for
Glaucous (see Grant 399, 414, 417), and I think it also isn't
an unusual look for some male Herrings (smith).

However, at least based on photo study, this shape appears to
be somewhat unusual for GBBG in any posture. Even in postures
where GBBG flatten their crowns they seem to still typically
show a more rounded hind crown, and on those that show a
relatively sharp break in downslope angle, the break seems to
much more typically be at least noticeably closer to eye level, if not
at or slightly below eye level.

The Renton gull appears to show a similar boxy, high-angled shape
to the hind crown in some postures, so I thought this might be worth
at least mentioning as something to look at. Forgive me if it's
within normal range of GBBG.

Cheers,

Phil


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark
From: Daniela.Detlef.Gruber(AT)T-ONLINE.DE
Date: 19 Feb 2004 12:02pm

Hi,
it’s a really interesting gull but your aging is wrong. Look e.g. at
image DSCN 1631. The gull shows active primary molt, therefore it is a
2nd winter bird. But nevertheless, shows a number of smithsonianus
characters. On the other hand the scapulars look very dark (like Lesser
Blackback).

Regards
Detlef Gruber
GERMANY

Hi All!

An intriguing 1st winter Herring Gull has been present for some time in
Hirtshals Harbour in Northern Jutland, Denmark. See pictures here
http://www.birds-of-denmark.dk/amsoelvmaage.htm and some additional but
poorer pictures here http://www.nordfugl.dk/maage/index.html

What stand out are its black tail, its brown body and the strange
pattern on the mantle with a few new (dark shaded) grey feathers with
only a thin black stripe at the centre and not the usual black anchor
shape as on a typical Herring Gull.

It has been suggested, that this might be an American Herring Gull and
though some of the above characters combined with its white head in
contrast to a darker body, dark stripes on the neck, the barring on the
rump etc. might support this identification it is generally agreed upon
that this is not a "classic" American Herring Gull and might probably be
just another odd Argentatus Herring Gull.

All comments and inputs on this puzzling Gull will be much appreciated!

Best Wishes

Dennis Broe Nielsen, Denmark


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark
From: Bert-Jan Luijendijk <bjluijendijk(AT)planet.nl>
Date: 19 Feb 2004 2:01pm

Dear Detlef, all,

I am rather sure this bird is a first year bird.

The picture portraying the bird in flight clearly shows that this bird does
not exhibit moult in the primaries. The left wing appears to have ten fully
grown and intact primaries, whereas the right wing also shows ten primaries
although P9 seems to be damaged or perhaps displaced.

Additional features like shape of the primary tips, the presence of juvenile
feathers in the scapulars, pattern of body and wingfeathers (to name just a
few aspects) strongly advocate a first year gull.

Best wishes,
Bert-Jan

----- Original Message -----
From: <Daniela.Detlef.Gruber(AT)T-ONLINE.DE>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 7:34 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark

> Hi,
> it's a really interesting gull but your aging is wrong. Look e.g. at
> image DSCN 1631. The gull shows active primary molt, therefore it is a
> 2nd winter bird. But nevertheless, shows a number of smithsonianus
> characters. On the other hand the scapulars look very dark (like Lesser
> Blackback).
>
> Regards
> Detlef Gruber
> GERMANY
>
>
> Hi All!
>
>
>
> An intriguing 1st winter Herring Gull has been present for some time in
> Hirtshals Harbour in Northern Jutland, Denmark. See pictures here
> http://www.birds-of-denmark.dk/amsoelvmaage.htm and some additional but
> poorer pictures here http://www.nordfugl.dk/maage/index.html
>
>
>
> What stand out are its black tail, its brown body and the strange
> pattern on the mantle with a few new (dark shaded) grey feathers with
> only a thin black stripe at the centre and not the usual black anchor
> shape as on a typical Herring Gull.
>
>
>
> It has been suggested, that this might be an American Herring Gull and
> though some of the above characters combined with its white head in
> contrast to a darker body, dark stripes on the neck, the barring on the
> rump etc. might support this identification it is generally agreed upon
> that this is not a "classic" American Herring Gull and might probably be
> just another odd Argentatus Herring Gull.
>
>
>
> All comments and inputs on this puzzling Gull will be much appreciated!
>
>
>
>
> Best Wishes
>
>
>
> Dennis Broe Nielsen, Denmark


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: AW: Re: AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing
         Gull in Denmark
From: Daniela.Detlef.Gruber(AT)T-ONLINE.DE
Date: 20 Feb 2004 3:18am

Bert-Jan, Bruce and All!

I still question if 1st winter is correct. If you take a very close look
to the following images (am-soelvmaagefront, am-soelvmaage27front &
especially DSCN 1631) you will see the following:
P10 & P9 are paler brownish, obviously more faded and different in shape
(much more pointed) compared to the rest of the left wing (the right one
is not visible).
The inner primaries are too pale (translucent) for a 1st winter Herring
Gull. The secondaries also seem to show feathers of different
generations.  There are 1st generation body feathers but some odd
individuals can show that “retarded” molt and “normal” molt combined
together. But if you are correct with 1st winter and if so the scaps are
1st winter the anchor pattern and colour is far away from any Herring
Gull and may indicate a hybrid with Lesser Blackback. This possible
influence of hybrid LBBG may also explain the rather fine bill.

Regards
Detlef

Dear Detlef, all,

I am rather sure this bird is a first year bird.

The picture portraying the bird in flight clearly shows that this bird
does
not exhibit moult in the primaries. The left wing appears to have ten
fully
grown and intact primaries, whereas the right wing also shows ten
primaries
although P9 seems to be damaged or perhaps displaced.

Additional features like shape of the primary tips, the presence of
juvenile
feathers in the scapulars, pattern of body and wingfeathers (to name
just a
few aspects) strongly advocate a first year gull.

Best wishes,
Bert-Jan

Hello,

Primary moult? I don't see it on this bird.  There is a broken tip to P9
on the right wing which shows in a the flight shot. The wing coverts
look like first winter and some scapulars look like juvenile.

Bruce

Bruce Mactavish
St. John's, Newfoundland
Canada
bruce.mactavish1(AT)nf.sympatico.ca


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: RE : AW: Re: AW:
         [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in Denmark
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pierre-Andr=E9_CROCHET?= <crochet(AT)CEFE.CNRS-MOP.FR>
Date: 20 Feb 2004 6:05am

Dear all,

That bird is a first-winter for me as well, without the shadow of a doubt (as we
 say in French). Re the species... mmm... that's where I'm anxious to hear for
others!

Pierre 

Pierre-André Crochet
CEFE-CNRS
1919, route de Mende
34293 Montpellier cedex 5
France
tel: + 33 6 07 32 60 75
     + 33 4 67 61 32 98
fax: + 33 4 67 41 21 38
crochet(AT)cefe.cnrs-mop.fr

-----Message d'origine-----
De : NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] De la part de
Daniela.Detlef.Gruber(AT)T-ONLINE.DE
Envoyé : vendredi 20 février 2004 11:16
À : BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Objet : [BIRDWG01] AW: Re: [BIRDWG01] AW: [EuroTwitch] Intriguing Gull in
Denmark

Bert-Jan, Bruce and All!

I still question if 1st winter is correct. If you take a very close look
to the following images (am-soelvmaagefront, am-soelvmaage27front &
especially DSCN 1631) you will see the following:
P10 & P9 are paler brownish, obviously more faded and different in shape
(much more pointed) compared to the rest of the left wing (the right one
is not visible).
The inner primaries are too pale (translucent) for a 1st winter Herring
Gull. The secondaries also seem to show feathers of different
generations.  There are 1st generation body feathers but some odd
individuals can show that "retarded" molt and "normal" molt combined
together. But if you are correct with 1st winter and if so the scaps are
1st winter the anchor pattern and colour is far away from any Herring
Gull and may indicate a hybrid with Lesser Blackback. This possible
influence of hybrid LBBG may also explain the rather fine bill.

Regards
Detlef

Dear Detlef, all,

I am rather sure this bird is a first year bird.

The picture portraying the bird in flight clearly shows that this bird
does
not exhibit moult in the primaries. The left wing appears to have ten
fully
grown and intact primaries, whereas the right wing also shows ten
primaries
although P9 seems to be damaged or perhaps displaced.

Additional features like shape of the primary tips, the presence of
juvenile
feathers in the scapulars, pattern of body and wingfeathers (to name
just a
few aspects) strongly advocate a first year gull.

Best wishes,
Bert-Jan

Hello,

Primary moult? I don't see it on this bird.  There is a broken tip to P9
on the right wing which shows in a the flight shot. The wing coverts
look like first winter and some scapulars look like juvenile.

Bruce

Bruce Mactavish
St. John's, Newfoundland
Canada
bruce.mactavish1(AT)nf.sympatico.ca

-- 
passerelle antivirus du campus CNRS de Montpellier
-- 

-- 
passerelle antivirus du campus CNRS de Montpellier
--


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: AW: Re: AW: [EuroTwitch]
         Intriguing Gull in Denmark
From: Peter Adriaens <peter.adriaens(AT)dutchbirding.nl>
Date: 20 Feb 2004 9:15am

Hi all,

>
> I still question if 1st winter is correct. If you take a very close look
> to the following images (am-soelvmaagefront, am-soelvmaage27front &
> especially DSCN 1631) you will see the following:
> P10 & P9 are paler brownish, obviously more faded and different in shape
> (much more pointed) compared to the rest of the left wing (the right one
> is not visible).
>

This bird's entire plumage is very worn (and even slightly damaged), and I
think that is the only reason why the outermost primaries appear so faded
(the outermost primaries are often more prone to wear and fading than the
rest of the remiges). If this really were a second winter, its moult would
be very aberrant (immature herring gulls do not normally show interrupted
moult in the primaries) and extremely retarded -- in fact, so retarded
that the bird has to be extremely sick, and should have been dead months
ago :)
Therefore, I'll stick with first winter.

It certainly shows some features of American Herring Gull, but not all
features (from a European point of view). The underparts are very
streaked, and the vent and undertail coverts are only moderately marked.
While the uppertail coverts show stronger markings than the average
European Herring Gull, their ground colour is still very white, not as
dirty-grey as in a typical American Herring Gull.
I think there are not enough typical characters to prove that this would
be an American bird.

Best regards,
Peter


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Iding molt in gulls
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 21 Feb 2004 6:47am

Dear all,
Recent observations have taught me to be more careful in assessing signs of
2nd-generation coverts in first-cycle large gulls; I thought I'd share them
with the List and solicit comment:
http://www.martinreid.com/gullsp40e.html
Cheers,
Martin

Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com