Records Committee Utah Ornithological Society Web Site

Records Committee
Utah Ornithological Society

Status & Comments
Year 2009 (records 16 through 31)

2009-16 Upland Sandpiper

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	4 Sep 2009	Acc	Superb photos.
Steve H.	30 Sep 2009	Acc	Excellent photos of distinctive species.
Eric H.	4 Sep 2009	Acc
Colby N.	6 Sep 2009	Acc
Ron R.	4 Oct 2009	Acc	Excellent photos--unmistakable.
Larry T.	20 Oct 2009	Acc
David W.	8 Sep 2009	Acc	Voting to accept mostly based on photos, some of which are wonderful.

2009-17 Baltimore Oriole

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	12 Nov 2009	No, ID	I have enough concerns about this bird that I would at least like to see others comments. I don't believe this is a pure Bullock's Oriole, but I am not convinced that it is not a hybrid.
2nd round	2 Dec 2009	No, ID	I still have suspicions that this could be a hybrid.
Rick F.. 2nd round	14 Jan 2010	Acc	Timing is correct, and although the photos are marginal at best, I think this bird looks pretty good for a Baltimore Oriole
Steve H.	20 Nov 2009	Acc	The photos are poor but the color of the underparts fit a first-year male Baltimore Oriole.
2nd round	31 Dec 2009	No, ID	I voted to accept this record on the first round, but there are concerns that this may be a hybrid. The photos are not clear enough to distinguish between a "pure" Baltimore and a hybid, so I am voting no on this round.
Eric H.	29 Nov 2009	No, ID	I don't think this bird was seen well enough. Some of the views between the observers seem to contradict each other. The streaking on the back is less bold than female bullock's? I think the photos are misleading. In one photo the bird appears to have a lot of dark on the top of the head and the face. On another photo the bird appears to have a clean yellow crown and head with dark limited to around the bill and chin. In the description of this part of the bird the observer admits to being uncertain of the extent of dark on the face. The overall orange on the underparts and belly seams like a better fit for Baltimore (or other orioles) than Bullock's. I think this was probably a Baltimore Oriole and I can imagine how maddening it must of been for the observers trying to get a clean view. Someone please point out something I am missing and I will change my vote if it goes to a second round.
2nd round	24 Jan 2010	No, ID	I think the observers' view of this bird was not complete enough to rule out a hybrid.
Colby N.	25 Oct 2009	No, ID	I think the photos and description are sufficient to pin this bird to either a pure Baltimore or a Bullock's X Baltimore Oriole hybird. Unfortunately, I have yet to find anything that allows the two possibilities to be distinguished. As a result, I submitted this record primarily because I'm not exactly sure what we should do in these types of situations, and I thought I would let the committee decide. Can we only accept adult male Baltimore Oriole records? On the one hand, this makes sense, but on another, one could argue that we are throwing out a great number of potential records. Looking back at sight records, Rick Fridell and Larry Tripp have both had first year male 'Baltimore' Orioles in late August and early-mid September so it appears a pattern is emerging...whether these birds are pure Baltimore or hybrids remains unknown at this point.
2nd round	29 Jan 2010	No, ID	I still have found no literature/information regarding reliable field marks that separate first year and/or female Baltimore Orioles from possible hybrids.
Ron R. 2nd round	22 Jan 2010	No, ID	This individual has way too much white on the wing to be a pure Baltimore oriole, although it appears that the median coverts are orange as in Baltimore. The coloring of the head (as best as can be discerned) has intermediate coloration, and does not seem to follow the progression of "filling" of black of a subadult Baltimore. The wing and head coloration are most consistent with a hybrid.
Terry S. 2nd round	7 Jan 2010	No, ID	I think enough concern has been raised that we will have let this one go, but as Larry has stated the timing is perfect for a stray Baltimore and other records have been seen in the west this time of year.
Larry T.	1 Dec 2009	Acc	The pics aren't the greatest but the description and the first 2 photos seem to fit a Baltimore Oriole.
2nd round	28 Dec 2009	No, ID	First of all the photos are terrible. But you can see how bright orange the bird is in a couple of the pics. I was voting to accept the bird on the fact that the observers were getting a better look at the bird than we are (in the pics) and were calling it a Baltimore. Which is a bird that is not that uncommon in the west desert in Fall. Cal. and Nevada get multiple records every year in their desert area vagrant traps. But now if the observers aren't sure what they were looking at I guess we have to let this one go.
Merrill W.	28 Nov 2009	Acc	The photos were useless, but the description ruled out any other oriole.
2nd round	24 Dec 2009	No, ID	I voted yes before, but am changing my vote to a "no" because I just don't feel the description justifies calling this a Baltimore Oriole for sure. Sometimes we just have to be content with the notion that it's an oriole and let it go at that.
David W.	30 Sep 2009	No, ID	What an interesting bird. I do not think this is a pure Bullock's oriole, but I also feel the observer didn't adequately rule out a male hybrid "Northern" oriole (Baltimore x Bullock's). When I look at the photos, especially photo D, it APPEARS to me that the white wing patch is too large for a pure Baltimore, but is consistent with a hybrid male. I realize the photos are extremely blurry, but since nothing in the text eliminates the possibility of a hybrid, I am voting NO. Certainly the two species are known to hybridize fairly readily. Hopefully this record will go to the second round so that others' opinions might be aired before the final vote.
2nd round	14 Dec 2009	No, ID	The hybrid possibility is hard to rule out.

2009-18 Palm Warbler

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	30 Oct 2009	Acc	Could wish for a better photo, but the description including the behavior is convincing.
Steve H.	20 Nov 2009	Acc	Tail-bobbing is a key feature of the species. Photo shows most other fieldmarks.
Eric H.	29 Nov 2009	Acc
Colby N.	25 Oct 2009	Acc	Photo and description is sufficient
Ron R.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Description brief but contains important details, especially bobbing tail, yellow undertail coverts, white tips to tail, dark eyeline, pale eyebrow, and mustache line. Time of year typical for this species. Photo of minimal use. I've also seen this species near this location and in Grand Canyon in late September.
Larry T.	1 Dec 2009	Acc
David W.	19 Oct 2009	Acc	Combination of behavior & field marks are convincing. Photo also helps.

2009-19 Lesser Black-backed Gull

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	30 Oct 2009	Acc	Good description, Excellent photos.
Steve H.	20 Nov 2009	Acc
Eric H.	29 Nov 2009	Acc
Colby N.	25 Oct 2009	Acc	Good photos
Ron R.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Excellent photos show typical non-breeding adult.
Larry T.	1 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	24 Dec 2009	Acc	Nice photos, all of them were useful in separating out other species.
David W.	26 Oct 2009	Acc	Excellent photos. Writeup is weak but adequate considering the quality of photos.

2009-20 Black-legged Kittiwake

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	12 Nov 2009	Acc	Excellent find.
Rick F..	6 Jan 2010	Acc
Steve H.	20 Nov 2009	Acc	Excellent photos. Inland adult records of this species are rare.
Eric H.	29 Nov 2009	Acc	Many observers saw this bird and many great photographers took fantastic photos.
Colby N.	10 Dec 2009	Acc
Ron R.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Excellent photos of non-breeding adult.
Larry T.	1 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	17 Nov 2009	Acc	Nice photos.
David W.	10 Nov 2009	Acc	I accept this with the presumption that the observer meant "wing tips" rather than "tail" when he described it as being all black with no white tips. The photo shows this to be true.

2009-21 Little Gull

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	12 Nov 2009	Acc
Rick F..	6 Jan 2010	Acc	Very nice record
Steve H.	20 Nov 2009	Acc	Excellent photos.
Eric H.	29 Nov 2009	Acc	Many observers saw this bird and many great photographers took fantastic photos.
Colby N.	10 Dec 2009	Acc
Ron R.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Excellent photos and descriptions of a non-breeding adult.
Larry T.	1 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	17 Nov 2009	Acc	Nice photos.
David W.	12 Nov 2009	Acc	Again, amazing photos.

2009-22 Lesser Black-backed Gull

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	7 Dec 2009	Acc	I am voting yes on this bird, but in the back of my mind, with a slight pinkish cast to the legs, and more black in the bill than I would expect, I wonder a little bit if this couldn't be a Lesser-backed Herring hybrid, but that seems unlikely.
Rick F..	6 Jan 2010	Acc
Steve H.	20 Nov 2009	Acc
Eric H.	29 Nov 2009	Acc
Colby N.	10 Dec 2009	Acc
Ron R.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Definitive photos and description of likely third winter bird. Distinct individual from 2009-19.
Larry T.	15 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	24 Dec 2009	Acc	Photos were useful, especially the one standing on the rock by itself.
David W.	16 Nov 2009	Acc

2009-23 Red-throated Loon

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Photos adequate to ID this bird.
Eric H.	22 Jan 2009	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S..	8 Jan 2010	Acc
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	24 Dec 2009	Acc	Eventhough the photos were blurred, they, along with the description helped separate this species from other loons.
David W.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	It would have been nice to have the bill shape described (presumably subtly upturned) rather than how it was held (a trait common to other loons and cormorants). But I agree this was a RT loon based on the spotted back, the extent of white on the side of the upper neck area visible in the first photo, and the smudge of reddish on the throat.

2009-24 Black Scoter

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Acceptable photos for ID.
Eric H.	22 Jan 2009	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S..	8 Jan 2010	Acc
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc	This one should probably be taken of the review list.
Merrill W.	24 Dec 2009	Acc	Photos were acceptable. I have also seen this species at the same location.
David W.	17 Dec 2009	Acc

2009-25 Northern Parula

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc	Great find. Excellent description and photos
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Nice photos showing key marks.
Eric H.	22 Jan 2009	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S..	8 Jan 2010	Acc
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	25 Dec 2009	Acc	Diagnostic photos.
David W.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Nice photos and description.

2009-26 Glossy Ibis

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc	wonderful photos and description
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Excellent photos showing all key fieldmarks.
Eric H.	22 Jan 2009	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S..	8 Jan 2010	Acc	Outstanding Photos and solid narrative distinguishing from White-faced and hybrids.
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	25 Dec 2009	Acc	Seems likely that this is the species, but possibly a hybrid?
David W.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	I am glad Rick included a detailed writeup on this one because the photos show more reddish on the face than I would have like to have seen for a "pure" Glossy ibis. However, the writeup says the skin was bluish rather than purplish, so I'll believe that. The pale blue edges to the bare facial patch (visible in one photo) are a good field mark as well.

2009-27 Painted Bunting

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc
2nd round	25 Feb 2010	Acc	I still feel this is a Painted Bunting. The observer commented that the bird was definitely greenish. The poor light may have minimized the ability of the photo to show the extent of the greenish coloration, but I still feel we can see this. Under these circumstances I feel the observers description plus the photos are more than adequate to establish the ID.
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Photos satisfactory for ID.
2nd round	13 Mar 2010	Acc	Size and shape of bill eliminates other buntings. Photos show a hint of green.
Eric H.	24 Jan 2010	Acc
2nd round	24 Mar 2010	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
2nd round	17 Mar 2010	Acc
Terry S.	13 Jan 2010	Acc	While the lighting was poor when the picture was taken I can faintly see the greenish wash which is distinctive for a female Painted Bunting
2nd round	25 Feb 2010	Acc	I still feel confident in accepting this record. While the lighting was poor for the photos taken I believe the the greenish coloration is seen especially in the first photo. The conical shaped bill also looks right
Ron R. 2nd round	20 Apr 2010	Acc	Good photos and sufficient written description document this distinctive plumage of painted bunting. An escapee of this plumage is unlikely and the tail feathers seem to indicate no unusual wear that might be associated with a caged bird.
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc
Merrill W.	24 Dec 2009	No, ID	Two things bother me about this submission. First, the light was admittedly poor, so separating the bird on the basis of slightly greenish compared to brownish would be a matter of concern. The observer stated he saw the bird on two other dates, but didn't mention under what types of conditions. Second, the observer didn't mention how he would eliminate the other species of buntings that were also present. So, based on those two comments I vote no, eventhough the bill size could eliminate the Lazuli and the Indigo.
David W.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	Very nice to get a record of a female and/or immature bird because it should allay the arguments that all of our Painted bunting reports are of escapees. Nice work.
2nd round	24 Feb 2010	Acc	The bird was described as being distinctly green above, even if the photos are washed out due to poor light. That eliminates all but the Orange-breasted bunting of (south-central) western Mexico, which is not migratory and does not occur anywhere near the USA, let alone Utah (there was one Texas record, but is assumed to be an escapee).

2009-28 Neotropic Cormorant

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Excellent photos.
Eric H.	22 Jan 2009	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S..	8 Jan 2010	Acc
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc
David W.	17 Dec 2009	Acc	It was nice to get some of the background information on the two locations this species was being seen durng this period. Good record. We sure are noting a lot more of this species in recent years, probably due in large part to the fact that people are starting to look for them since they were first reported.

2009-29 Thick-billed Kingbird

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc	Great bird. I feel the photos and description are excellent for a state first
Rick F.	16 Jan 2010	Acc	Very nice observation by Claus and Connie.
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Date of this record fits the timing and reverse-migration pattern of most West Coast records of juvenile Thick-billed Kingbirds.
Eric H.	24 Jan 2009	Acc	Awesome!
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S.	15 Jan 2010	Acc	An outstanding record with wonderful photographic documentation
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc	Great record! Although I'm surprised we haven't had one of these Arizona flycatchers before now. Maybe this will open the gates. Get ready for next fall. Dusky-capped,Tropical and Sulphur-Bellied?
David W.	19 Dec 2009	Acc	The excellent photos leave no doubt. This is an outstanding record.

2009-30 Blackpoll Warbler

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc	excellent photos.
Rick F..		Abst
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Photos adequate to differentiate this bird from similar species, especially Bay-breasted and Pine.
Eric H.	24 Jan 2009	Acc
Colby N.	20 Dec 2009	Acc
Terry S.	15 Jan 2010	Acc	Excellent photos and documentation
Larry T.	28 Dec 2009	Acc
David W.	19 Dec 2009	Acc	Outstanding photos and very good description, including elimination of similar species.

2009-31 Cackling Goose

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Bob B.	2 Jan 2010	Acc
2nd round	25 Feb 2010	Acc	I still feel these birds represent Cackling Geese. The bills may not be as short as one might wish, but they are certainly shorter than the B c parvipes, also in the photo. More importantly, it appears the culmen on all the smaller geese is straight, not concave, as on the parvipes that is present. The size differential is significant. The head shape is more typical of Cackling. I am not as certain about the supspecies. The bill size makes me lean toward taverneri, as well as body size, lack of narrowing of the cheek patch behind the eye, etc.
3rd round	7 May 2010	Acc
Rick F.	14 Jan 2010	Acc
2nd round	20 Apr 2010	Acc	I believe this record adequately documents Cackling Geese
Steve H.	31 Dec 2009	Acc	Differentiating Richardson's from small Canada's is sometimes difficult, since hybrids do occur, and many are best left as "Canada" Goose. However, the subject birds in the photos appear to have correct neck length/shape, head shape, and bill size/shape for Richardson's goose.
2nd round	13 Mar 2010	Acc	Birds in the photos have short thick necks and square head shape with steep forehead that is typical of taverneri/hutchinsii. Bill size varies but is usually much shorter than Lesser Canada.
3rd round	28 Apr 2010	Acc	I still feel the photos are adequate to ID the subject geese as Cackling (taverneri or hutchinsii), especially with a Lesser present for size and shape comparison.
Eric H.	22 Feb 2010	No, ID	I can see the head shapes the observer is talking about, but the bills on the birds in the photos look too long and thin, even for the larger Cackling Geese, B. h. hutchinsii and B. h. taverneri. I would like to see what others think before I accept this record.
2nd round	22 Apr 2010	No, ID	Ditto Colby's comments.
Colby N.	29 Jan 2010	No, ID	The bills appear too long for either "Taverner's" or "Richardson's' Cackling Geese...and should be noticeably more stubby than what's exhibited by the geese photographed. At least I think so...?
2nd round	17 Mar 2010	No, ID	I think these birds are a great example of what we don't know about separating these species...and I think we should be careful accepting records when we cannot definitively say that a range of traits only fit to one species or the other. Head shape, bill shape, bill size, plumage characteristics are all variable and overlap significantly in these subspecies...and unless a goose is at the extreme end of either 'parvipes' or 'hutchinsii', I just don't think we should be assigning names to these birds. These two species are believed to hybridize and considering the bill size and proportions fit more in line with 'parvipes' and the head and culmen shape fit more in line with 'hutchinsii'...how can we sufficiently eliminate that these birds are not part of the suggested hybrid swarm that is believed to exist?
3rd round	20 May 2010	No, ID
Ron R. 2nd round	20 Apr 2010	Acc	I feel the descriptions and photos are sufficient to eliminate Canada goose. In particular, the size being smaller than the associated Lesser Canada Geese; shorter, less slender bill and straighter culmen than the Lesser Canada Geese; and shorter stockier necks than the Lesser Canada Geese together are diagnostic. Unfortunately, the photos do not show additional Lesser Canada Geese although Photo B shows the bill and size differences between the one Lesser Canada Goose and three (A, C, D) of the four Cackling Geese (the bill of bird E is clearly shown in Photo A"). Only the cackling subspecies "minima" would approach the small size of a mallard--the others would be noticeably larger (up to 10 inches greater length in taverneri).
3rd round	3 Jun 2010	Acc	No new comments.
Terry S..	16 Jan 2010	Acc	Excellent documentation (both write-up and photos)
2nd round	24 Feb 2010	Acc	While the longer, thinner bill doesn't quite fit the primary description indicators I still believe we are looking at Cackling Geese in the Photos submitted. I can see why the observer believes that some of these may be B.h hutcinsii. The overall shape of the head is squared, with a steep, almost vertical incline from the base of the culmen to the forehead. The crown is flat and the rear peak of the crown angles steeply down the nape. The bill is fairly triangular and while it is not half or less the width of the head it does have a straight culmen and is shorter than the individual bird labeled "B" and identified as B.c. parvipes. The observer believes that bird "A" is possibly a B.c. tavereni with a more rounded head. Looking at the photos I believe "E" may also be B,c, taverneri. Key description guildlines to separate out the different subspecies are still being developed by the experts. While we may have difficulty pinning down the subspecies of the cackling geese submitted for review I believe we have enough comparative information to rule out small Canada Geese.
3rd round	29 Apr 2010	Acc
Merrill W. 2nd rnd	2 Apr 2010	No, ID	In my experience a Cackling Goose is about the same size as a Mallard which is just slightly larger than a Gadwall. The Gadwalls that were pictured were noticeably smaller than the goose in question. I think this goose is one of the subspecies of the Canada.
3rd round	21 May 2010	No, ID	No new comments
David W.	28 Jan 2010	No, ID	I am confident these are not Richardson s cackling geese (B. h. hutchinsii), as claimed. The bill shape on these birds is wrong--far too long & thin.
2nd round	24 Feb 2010	No, ID
3rd round	26 Apr 2010	No, ID