Records Committee
Utah Ornithological Society
   
Status & Comments
Year: 1999

  
8-1999 - Yellow-footed Gull

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Similar to L. Black-back G. on many marks, but overall seems closer to YFG.
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 Acc  
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 D (Discuss as a Lesser black-backed gull L. fuscus)  From the photo, this bird appears to be a lesser black-backed gull (L. fuscus graellsii).  Reasons: eye appears to have red orbital ring, dark smudge on bill (3rd winter/summer), mantle is not dark enough, foot and let color too uniformly similar.  Size seems not much larger than ring-billed gulls in photo, but could be perspective problem. I would like to see original photo to these details.  Also bird is a bit out of season for YF Gull.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 Abs I cannot fully evaluate this record from the information provided. It appears others have had access to more information and are convinced. So rather than vote to reject this record, I am deferring to those who have had access to more information.
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 D Has this observation been sent to any out of state gull experts(?)
   Terry S.
  2nd round		 8 Jan 2002 D It seems there were better photos viewed at an earlier date. I would sure like to see them.
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Good photo - I have seen other photos of this bird as well.
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 Acc Does anyone have access to any of the other photos of this bird? I have seen some other photos of it, which were better than the one posted here.
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 Acc I think if the original photos we voted on through the mail were put on this web voting site this record could be better evaluated. I believe this bird has been accepted by Arizona.
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 22 Oct 2001 Acc I accepted it the first time so this is no change in my vote.
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Looks like a yellow-footed Gull to me.  I do not question Charled LaRue's identification
Rick F.
 2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 Acc  

   

9-1999 - White-rumped Sandpiper

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 Acc  
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Description good. I would like to see original photos, but shape and color seem consistent with white-rumped.  Late date is consistent with records in Wyoming and Pacific NW. Migrates in Wyoming directly north of this portion of Utah.  Perhaps not unexpected.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 Acc (see previous comments)
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
Terry S.
  2nd round		 8 Jan 2002 Acc Good description. No narrative in destinguising it from a Baird's though. 
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 Acc The photos aren't very clear, but the bird appears to have wing tips beyond the tail (photo E), and the bill appears to be too massive for Baird's, but just right for White-rumped. Also, the rust on the crown, which is visible in photo C, suggests White-rumped. Overal, the darkness (and brown-ness) of the bird seems better for White-rumped than Baird's, but this can be difficult to tell from photos. I would guess that this is the same bird reported by Rich Hoyer.
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc The photos, although small, certainly match this species for plumage at this time of year and the observer describes a white rump seen in flight. I believe though  that the report is too casual in mentioning other White-rumped Sandpipers seen around the area and I accept only the one bird in the photo. It appears to me that the photo was taken of the bird seen at Pelican Lake on 28 May.
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 Acc Still accepted for first round reasons and comments
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 D Photos don't show white rump & remind me of a Baird's Sandpiper.  Narrative says they saw white rump when bird was preening, but they don't mention it being seem in flight - not convinced entirely.
  2nd round 22 Oct 2001 Acc My first vote was to discuss. I have read the comments by the other members of the committee and I am willing to accept their judgment for acceptance.
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc I can not readily tell from this photo, but I suspect it is same bird seen by Arizona group - no. 12-1999
Rick F.
  2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 Acc Good description, and although photos are low resolution, I believe they can be used to rule out Baird's.

 

11-1999 - Northern Cardinal

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Undoubtedly from the introduced population
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 N Acc Undoubtedly one of the introduced population.
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 D I don't doubt identification.  However, I am uncertain of the origin of this species, a common cagebird in Mexico.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 N Acc likely an released bird or escapee.
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 N Acc "see Fieldguides" for description unacceptable  If these have been coming for 2 years, could someone check out
Terry S.
  2nd round		 13 Jan 2002 N Acc Every Cardinal seen in Utah Co. is suspect of being from the introduced population.
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 N Acc probable introduction (or descendant)
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 N Acc All cardinals in the Provo area must be considered to be from the introduced group. We can accept them in 10 years, if they're still here.
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 N Acc This record has to be rejected on the basis of origin questionable alone.
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 N Acc As Mark stated Provo cardinal records cannot be accepted as these are most probably escaped and not established birds.
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 N Acc Cardinals are pretty hard to misidentify. But 2-3 pairs of Cardinals were released in the Provo area 5-6 years ago. Can't accept because it is an introduced species.
  2nd round 22 Oct 2001 N Acc 11-1999 Northern Cardinal N Same vote as before because I believe it is an introduced species to the area.
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Others saw it in Orem also. Not unexpected.
Rick F.
  2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 N, Nat Questionable origin.

    

12-1999 - White-rumped Sandpiper  (Voted on before records were posted on the internet.  Accepted 7 to 0 - possibly same as 9-1999).

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. ? batch 7/20/2000 Accept Possibly the same bird as record 9-1999
Ronald R. ? Accept Good description, includes key marks of chevron on flank and white rump. Late date consistent with records in Wyoming and Pacific NW. Migrates in Wyoming directly north of this portion of Utah. Perhaps not unexpected.
Ella S. ? Accept  
Mark S. ? Accept  
Steven S. ?   It’s always dangerous to accept records from out of state birders when they say things like “I didn’t make the connection hat this was a rare species for where I was observing it”. To many things are assumed and not looked at. But the main field marks for this species were observed and described and the observer seems very familiar with this species so I somewhat reluctantly accept this record.
Merrill W. ? Accept Long time between sighting & write-up without notes. I accepted this because he described what the one at top of page didn’t.
Clayton W. ? Accept see above under 9-1999

    

13-1999 - White-eyed Vireo

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 Acc  
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 D Description lacks some details which would help (e.g., general color of head, throat, back).  Also did not mention yellow around eye (spectacles), only lores. That the observer is very familiar with this species is a plus.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 Acc The description is minimal but adequate to eliminate other vireos or warblers. The observer's experience with this bird is important in accepting this record.
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 N Ac I am uncomfortable with single observer records, when the significance of record isn't realized, and a thorough description of all characteristics is not supplied.
Terry S.
  2nd round		 13 Jan 2002 A  
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc I thought the description was a bit scant, but this should not be a difficult i.d. for those with experience (like the observer) - the behavior checks out - in my experience, this is the most (except maybe warbling) responsive vireo to pishing
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 Acc  
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc It's always dangerous to accept records form out of state birders when they say things like "I didn't make the connection that this was a rare species for where I was observing it".  To many things are assumed and not looked at. But the main field marks for this species were observed and described and the  observer seems very familiar with this species so I somewhat reluctantly accept this record.
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 Acc Still accept based on first round comments but still a little reluctant.
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 22 Oct 2001 Acc Same as previous vote.
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc His experience & description are convincing. Has occurred in Utah.
Rick F.
  2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 Acc I hesitantly accept this record. Interesting timing, minimal description, and since observer admits he did not realize the significance of the record, he may have assumed the identification. However, nothing else has a white eye and yellow lores.

   

15-1999 - Mew Gull

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 N Ac Bill too thick for Mew.  Photos show a narrow white band on end of tail. Mew has black band on end of tail
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 N Ac  
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 N Ac The photos are not clear enough to see the distinguishing marks (i.e., shape of central area of wing coverts, pattern on tail, color of wing coverts) and the written description does not consider these.  I base my rejection on the excellent review posted by M. Stackhouse on the hotline, 22 Nov 99 concerning this bird.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 N Ac (see previous comments)
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 D  
Terry S.
  2nd round		 8 Jan 2002 N Looks like a Ring-billed Gull to me. There is variability in bill length in gulls and this looks like a rather short billed Ring-billed.
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 N Ac This is probably a small, small-billed Ring-billed Bull - the tail band is too indistinct, among other factors - I wrote a lengthy analysis of this bird and posted on Birdnet
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 N Ac See my previous comments, and my birdnet review, which includes comments from many "experts" from around the country, none of whom though this was a Mew Gull.
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 N Ac The photos are of a Ring-billed Gull
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 N Ac  
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 N Ac Turned out not to be the bird.  Looked exactly like the one in the Stoke's Field Guide which gull experts say is misidentified.  Too bad.
  2nd round 22 Oct 2001 N Ac Same reason as before.
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Good careful observers. good photos
Rick F.
  2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 N, ID I think the gull in the photos is a first winter Ring-billed Gull.

  

16-1999 - Gyrfalcon

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 Acc  
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Photos clearly show immature gyrfalcon (narrow mustache stripe, w-toned underwings, bulky large size). Lack of band and appropriate time of year strongly suggest this was a wild bird.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 Acc (see previous comments)
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
Terry S.
  2nd round		 8 Jan 2002 Acc  
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc I have questions about the date - it seems early, especially for a warm fall, but I can't imagine that a falconer would leave such an expensive bird unbanded
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 Acc  
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Great photos of a bird in hand. I guess there is no way of telling if this is an escaped falconers bird or not so I accept.
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 Acc  
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 D Can't read "Behavior of Bird" on record form.  How was bird obtained?
  2nd round 2 Jul 2002 Acc  
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc I saw bird. But Gyrfalcons are not that uncommon. Why are we evaluating it?
Rick F.
  2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 Acc  

  

17-1999 - Zone-tailed Hawk

Evaluator Date Vote Comment
Steven H. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
  2nd round 11 Sep 2001 Acc  
Ronald R. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Description good and key field marks listed.  Photo as sent to me too dark to ID and shape does not rule out black hawk.  However, written description convincing.
  2nd round 20 May 2002 Disc  The description is sufficient to accept this record. However, there apparently are photos and I would like to see these before voting.
Ella S. 20 Jul 2000 Disc  
Terry S.
  2nd round		 8 Jan 20002 Acc  
Mark S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc I also saw and photographed these birds (at least 3 when I was there).
  2nd round 19 Sep 2001 Acc There have been many sightings of these birds over the past three years. I have a photo of one of them, which I will submit - it's on one of my brochures!
Steven S. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Again photos are so nice to have when judging records. Man people saw this bird.
  2nd round 26 Sep 2001 Acc  
Merrill W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc Photos weren't much help.  Description was adequate.
  2nd round 2 Jul 2002 Acc  
Clayton W. 20 Jul 2000 Acc  
Rick F.
  2nd round		 10 Jun 2002 Acc Very good description. There have been several Zone-tailed Hawks in the Pine Park area over the last few years.