Records Committee Utah Ornithological Society Web Site

Records Committee
Utah Ornithological Society

Status & Comments
Year 2014 (records 001 through 025)

2014-001 Streak-backed Oriole

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	8 Feb 2014	Acc
Bob B.	8 Jan 2014	Acc	There is no doubt as to the ID on this bird. What a great find for the first bird of the year for the committee.
Rick F.	9 Jan 2014	abst	[sent in a third sight record]
Ryan O.	20 Feb 2014	Acc
Terry S..	10 Jan 2014	Acc	Excellent documentation for this new record.
Dennis S.	7 Jan 2014	Acc	With only the initial submitted report and photos, I would be hard pressed to accept this FOS record. But with the many subsequent excellent photographs and numerous observers (including members of this Committee) and non-resident birders who have come from several western states, this bird passes the test beyond a shadow of doubt. Let me one of the first to congratulate those responsible birders in Washington County who found and identified this great new State bird.
Jack S..	8 Feb 2014	Acc	What a start to 2014! This bird might be a HY/SY male bird based on the rectrice shape (Pyle fig 139b) in photo T, the extent of black on the top side of rectrices, and the black lores and bib.
Steve S.	5 Feb 2014	Acc
David W.	24 Jan 2014	Acc	Rick's write-up and photos are excellent.

2014-002 Neotropic Cormorant

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	8 Feb 2014	Acc
Bob B.	7 Jan 2014	Acc	We need to give serious consideration to remove this bird from the review list.
Rick F.	9 Jan 2014	Acc	Great photos
Ryan O.	20 Feb 2014	Acc
Terry S..	10 Jan 2014	Acc
Dennis S.	13 Jan 2014	Acc	Nice photo. Why so long to report?
Jack S..	8 Feb 2014	Acc	Good photographs!
Steve S.	5 Feb 2014	Acc
David W.	8 Jan 2014	Acc	Nice photos & similar species section. (24 Jan 2014): Good photos, showing how common this species is becoming in Utah.

2014-003 Slaty-backed Gull

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	16 Mar 2014	Acc	Based on the documentation provided, there's nothing which would cause me to not accept this as a Slaty-backed Gull. However, I look forward to reviewing other's comments and further discussion in the second round.
2nd round:	26 Apr 2014	No, ID	After reviewing the comments of others and carefully re-reviewing the record, and also checking additional internet/book resources, I'm changing my vote. This is a difficult bird to ID and the possibilities of a hybrid are hard to ignore. Although this could still be a Slaty-backed, I now have doubts about this identification.
Bob B.	2 Mar 2014	Acc	Ryan has done a masterful job of elucidating the differentiating marks on this bird. Obviously it is difficult for someone like myself who has no experience with this species to offer any additional commentary. I have reviewed also in detail the features of all the potential confusing species in "Gulls of the Americas" by Steve Howell and Jon Dunn, and this really does appear to be a first cycle Slaty-backed Gull.
2nd round:	2 May 2014	No, ID	Given the fact that even the experts have trouble with this identification, and all the questions that have arisen with regard to this bird, it seems inappropriate to accept this bird as a first state record and I am changing my vote to no.
Rick F.	17 Mar 2014	No, ID	I think several characteristics (bill color, gonydeal angle, overall shape, long neck, leg color, greater covert pattern) favor a Slaty-backed Gull and several others do not (longish bill, gape shape, long wings, large primary panel, inner primary web pattern), and still a few other important characters cannot be addressed in the photos (tail and rump pattern, upper wing pattern, secondaries, etc.). However, I don t believe any of that is definitive either way, as I ve come to the conclusion that given current knowledge, first cycle SB Gulls cannot be safely separated from hybrid Cook Inlet Gulls (Glaucous-winged X Herring Gull hybrids) in NA. I studied a first-cycle gull at Quail Creek SP in the winter of 2008-2009 that was a very good candidate for a Slaty-back. I watched it for a couple months, took dozens of photos in flight and various postures, and consulted with many gull id experts. Several folks liked it as a Slaty-back but most suggested it might also be a hybrid. The consensus among experts is that first-cycle Slaty-backed Gulls cannot be safely separated from primarily Cook Inlet , but also Olympic / Puget Sound , etc hybrid gulls in North America (in the absence of newly molted dark mantle feathers The California records committee has accepted a couple late first-cycle Slaty-backed Gulls that show these fresh mantle feathers). There has been extensive discussion among gull experts of this identification problem over the years on ID Frontiers. However, there is certainly no consensus on definitive identification characters to date. I think Alvaro Jaramillo summed it up well when he recently replied to this question on ID Frontiers (01/08/2014) you are absolutely correct in suggesting that most Slaty-backs in first cycle will go unidentified, as we have no way of eliminating hybrid possibilities.
2nd round:	17 Apr 2014	No, ID	As stated in first-round comments, this appears to a hybrid gull. While this bird shows a few characteristics consistent with (and a few others suggestive of) a Slaty-backed Gull, there are no definitive characters in the photos or description that are diagnostic for a SB Gull. All of the suggestive SB Gull characteristics are frequently expressed on hybrid gulls. There are currently no definitive characters for distinguishing an early first-cycle Slaty-backed Gull from a more probable hybrid.
Ryan O.	17 Jan 2014	abst	[submitted the record]
2nd round:	21 Mar 2014	abst	[submitted the record]
Terry S..	3 Mar 2014	Acc	Most experts agree that a first-winter Slaty-backed Gull is difficult to identify because at this age they are variable and many resemble other immature gulls such as first-winter Glaucous-winged Gulls, Vega Gulls and Herring x Glaucous-winged hybrids. However I think there are a number of characteristics identified by the observer, seen in the submitted photos and noted in literature review that make me believe this is a first-winter Slaty-backed Gull. The greater coverts stand out with there solid brown color. Only the tips show some brown and white barring. The head is nicely rounded and lighter colored than the body. The exception to this is an area around the eye that is dark. The eye is also dark. The bill is black and straight but has a pale pinkish base most noticeable on the lower mandible. The bill does appear longer in the review bird than in most other photos of similar birds I have studied and I don't know if this is critical in species identification. The tertials are a solid dark brown with pale tips. Many photos I studied of other first-winter Slaty-backed Gulls show an even broader pale tip to the tertials. The secondary bar looks a dark brown, even darker than the greater coverts. The secondaries should not contrast too sharply with the greater coverts and I don't know if the difference in the photo is that much. The primaries are dark with small white tips in the folded wing. The observer notes that they appeared blackish but were more of a very dark brown. The photos seem to confirm this especially when the picture is zoomed in. This is important for eliminating other possible species. The trailing edge of the pale under-wing primaries show a dark edge. This characteristic is caught beautifully in photos C and D It is hard to tell about the tail from the photos and the observer states it was not seen well. There are morphological characteristics that support this bird being a Slaty-backed Gull. The bird appears long- necked (especially in photo B), the pink legs are short and the bird appears to have a potbelly. All of these characteristics are good for Slaty-backed
2nd round:	2 May 2014	No, ID	This has been a difficult record for me to review. I voted to accept this record on the first round because I believed an excellent case for an acceptable record was made for a first cycle slaty-backed Gull. After reading other reviewers comments and looking at similar reviews from Gull enthusiasts such as Alvaro Jaramillo I am convinced there is too much uncertainty with hybrid gulls that can show similar characteristics. As Rick points out early first cycle gulls of this species cannot currently be safely identified.
Dennis S.	5 Mar 2014	No, ID	I've gone back and forth on this one! At first I tended towards a SBGU but the more I studied photographs and read, the less convinced I've become. I think the reporter did an excellent job in his comparisons with other candidates and hybrid possibilities, however I do think the characters which supported SBGU were emphasized and the problem areas not dealt with adequately. Problems: 1. The dark coloration around the eye/face is usually much more prominent. Often times this dark smug takes on the appearance of a mask, sometimes with darkness well above and below the eye, with a lighter area in between. This bird does have some darking around the eye but appears much less. 2. Every guide and description lists a prominent pale edge to the primary wing tips. Neither the narrative or photos address this. 3. The variability of the overall plumage coloration, lighter/darkness of the head, neck "collar" prominence, and wing patterns. 4. The unmottled/solid bar greater covert wing pattern is the strongest character supporting a SBGU. However, several photos I've seen show this to be also found in some hybrids. 5. A better photo of the tail and rump area would have been helpful. 6. The dark wedges on the underside of the wing tips is hard for me to visualize. 7. The hybrid problem creates a nagging suspicion. When we commonly use terminology such as "most of the time," "tends to be," "darker/lighter than most," it always raises eyebrows. But such is the case with gulls, especially 1st years. Since even "gullologists" try to stay away from these 1st year and other (hybrid) problems, and since it would be our first record for SBGU, I think we better take a long hard look before we jump. I'm anxious to see what the other committee members think.
2nd round:	18 Apr 2014	No, ID	I really don't have additional comments from the first round. With all the problems with this complex of first year gulls, and the fact this would be a First-Of-State record, I still can't in good conscience accept this record.
Jack S..	20 Mar 2014	No, ID	I'm voting "no" for a variety of reasons. I look forward to a discussion and sorry for my delay in voting on this record. The observer did a good job to describe the bird (using the photographs) and to compare it against other species and hybrids. There are key photographs that would be helpful when reviewing a bird in this plumage, especially ones that show the upperside (and underside) of the spread primaries in-flight and a much clearer view of the tail, which unfortunately are lacking in this case. Likewise comparison photographs with other gulls and especially with the more common (and possibly confusing) juv/1st Cycle winter plumage of a Herring Gull are also lacking. I suspect the observer was also concerned about this, given the attempts to relocate the bird. The set of photographs submitted is small and from an unusual angle making judgement of structure difficult. There are few specifics that I will argue in this round but one, the record rules out American Herring Gull by the presence of "solidly dark-centered greater coverts." This is variable on HERG of this age class and greater coverts similar to this record can be seen in figures 25A.40 and 25A.43 in the Howell Gull book. The record indicates opinions were solicited, including these ..... Are there additional opinions from experts that were submitted? If there are I would like to read them.
2nd round:	27 Apr 2014	No, ID	I don't have additional comments for the second round vote.
Steve S.	18 Mar 2014	No, ID	First off I don't have any experience with Slatey-backed Gulls. In My opinion first winter large gulls are some of the most difficult birds to identify. The observer seems to have written a well thought out report and has a couple of expert opinions that seem to agree with his determination of Slaty-backed. Over all I agree with most of the points made with the following exceptions: #2 Mentions smudgy streak of brown on cream that forms a vague collar which I just don't see. #6 Dark centered not patterned greater wing coverts not shown on Herring, Thayer's or Glaucous-winged X Herring Gulls. Looking at many pictures on the internet and gull books, it looks like many of the pictures are very similar to this bird. I can't say that this isn't a Slaty-backed gull but then I can't say that it is either. I would like to see this record go to a second round so I can see what others are thinking.
2nd round:	12 May 2014	No, ID	The more I read and study photos of similar gulls the more convinced I am that first winter gulls in this plumage are not identifiable due to all the different hybrids involved.
David W.	19 Mar 2014	No, ID	[For the purposes of my discussion, the gull guide photos I am referencing are those found in "Gulls of the Americas" by Dunn & Howell.] This could be a Slaty-backed gull, but I do not think the possibility of a hybrid (most likely Glaucous-winged x Herring) has been eliminated. The legs do not strike me as very bright red in the photos (certainly within range of the hybrids shown in the guide). Likewise, the darkness of the greater coverts is very consistent with the hybrids shown in the guide (see photos H2.5 and H2.6), and so is the corresponding tone of the primaries.
2nd round:	29 Apr 2014	No, ID	As in first round.

2014-004 Winter Wren

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	8 Feb 2014	Acc
Bob B.	11 Feb 2014	Acc
Rick F.	17 Mar 2014	Acc
Ryan O.	20 Feb 2014	Acc
Terry S..	4 Feb 2014	Acc
Dennis S.	24 Feb 2014	Acc	It seems this split is getting as common as our old "Winter Wren." I hope someone doesn't come up with a light-throated Pacific Wren variety. The song sparrow like chirp hopefully is enough to help make the call. A good report!
Jack S..	3 Feb 2014	Acc	The plumage (palest at throat, brown washed chest and flanks, mix of white and buff primary spots, brownish upperparts, pale supercilium) lean to Winter Wren.
Steve S.	5 Feb 2014	Acc
David W.	25 Feb 2014	Acc

2014-005 Iceland Gull

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Apr 2014	No, ID	The description given does not adequately rule out a light Thayer's Gull, and the photos are too blurry to support the ID.
2nd round:	20 Jun 2014	No, ID	My vote is unchanged. I don't think a light Thayer's Gull has been adequately ruled out by the description or the photos.
3rd round:	26 Jul 2014	No, ID	My concerns are the same as in previous rounds.
Bob B.	2 Mar 2014	Acc	If we only had better photos. This is obviously an adult gull and the description most closely suggests Iceland. I am a bit concerned by the statement that the bird is a little smaller than California. The light colored primaries seem to rule out adult Thayer's, so I don't know what else this bird could be, so I am voting yes.
2nd round:	2 May 2014	Acc	My feelings are unchanged for all the reasons mentioned before. I think we have to go by the description and if we do Iceland seems to be the correct ID.
3rd round:	15 Jul 2014	Acc	I still feel this is most likely an Iceland Gull and will continue to vote yes.
Rick F.	17 Mar 2014	No, ID	I wish the photos were more clear and would like to have seen more discussion on differentiation from Thayer's and small Glaucous gulls.
2nd round:	27 Jun 2014	No, ID	Unfortunately the description does not adequately describe a Kumlien's Gull and a Thayer's Gull cannot be eliminated by the photos.
3rd round:	7 Aug 2014	No, ID	I don't believe a Thayer's Gull can be eliminated based on the photos or description
Ryan O.	27 Feb 2014	Acc	As a committee we frequently struggle with the Iceland/Thayer's complex, and rightly so, because it's a tough species pair to sort out and there are intergrades. I'd be surprised if this record didn't meet some resistance, but despite the poor quality of the photos, I agree with the submitter that the primaries are noticeably paler than expected for Thayer's Gull. The record relies heavily on relative size, which can be problematic. Howell & Dunn give total lengths of California Gull as 18-23 in., Iceland Gull as 19-24.5 in., and Thayer's Gull as 19.7-25 in. Therefore, any given Iceland Gull could be larger or smaller than either California or Thayer's, and size is not very helpful in telling Iceland from Thayer's. Even at extreme ends of the size spectrum, a half inch is not usually meaningful in field observations. I think the main question to consider here is whether Thayer's Gulls, or any other gull, could have pale eyes plus wingtips barely darker than the mantle. I can't think of any combination likely to produce that arrangement, especially in the size range described.
2nd round:	30 Apr 2014	Acc	The wingtips as they are described, and even as visible in the poor photos, are way too dark for an adult Glaucous Gull of any size. The wingtips could perhaps match some Glaucous-winged Gulls in tone, but the structure, size, and eye color are all wrong for any Glaucous-winged Gull and most if not all hybrids. The main issue remaining for me is whether a light Thayer's Gull can be eliminated. As an adult, even the lightest Thayer's Gulls have wingtips that approach black (maybe "charcoal" or "dark slate"). Iceland Gull wingtips range from the same slaty blackish color to almost pure white. So regarding wingtip color, can we be certain these are lighter than "dark slate"? From the photos, probably not. But the written description is probably more reliable, and describes the wingtips as "nearly the same color as the mantle", which is not the case for even the lightest Thayer's Gull adults. Eye color on its own is not diagnostic, given that about 10% of Thayer's Gull adults have a clear yellow iris (per Sibley), but lends weak support for Iceland. As discussed before, size is not diagnostic, with a wide range of overlap between California, Thayer's, and Iceland gulls. Therefore, in eliminating Thayer's Gull, eye color is not diagnostic, and size is not diagnostic, so we are essentially left with the written description of the color of the primaries and as much as we can deduce from the photos. This doesn't feel like much to go on, but I still feel it is sufficient given that we have narrowed discussion down to Thayer's or Iceland. The primaries are simply too pale for any adult Thayer's. I could be convinced to vote no if I could come up with a hybrid combination that would give a body size in this range and a wingtip this color, but the only combinations I could come up with are really out there, perhaps never documented.
3rd round:	8 Aug 2014	Acc	As I said in the last round, the written description describes the wingtips as "nearly the same color as the mantle", which is never the case for even the lightest of adult Thayer's Gulls.
Terry S..	27 Mar 2014	Acc	The quality of the photos limited but coupled with the written description I believe this an acceptable record.
2nd round:	9 May 2014	No, ID	While I voted to accept this record in the first round I now have doubts if a pale Thayer's has adequately been considered. The photos are just not clear enough and description of the observed bird just not definitive enough to make a convincing case for Iceland Gull. We all know how difficult it can be with poor lighting to make good Identification.
3rd round:	23 Jul 2014	No, ID	I am still concerned with the lighting conditions when this bird was observed and photographed.
Dennis S.	5 Mar 2014	No, ID	I have concerns with both the report and for sure the photos. It may in fact be an adult Iceland Gull but from the few details mentioned in the narrative and the blurry photos I am not convinced. If relative size and plumage paleness is the main criteria used to separate other possibilities then too much overlap occurs.
2nd round:	9 May 2014	No, ID	We still need either an adequate photo or at least a fairly detailed report to reach even a minimum standard. I'm still reluctant to accept this record with what we have to work with.
3rd round:	2 Jul 2014	No, ID	My vote still remains the same
Jack S..	27 Apr 2014	No, ID	The photographs are blurry enough and description brief enough for me to vote a tentative "no". This could be a Kumlien's but I'm not convinced the observer has ruled out a Thayer's Gull nor did they convincingly describe a Kumlien's. The photographs are not sufficient for an unambiguous identification.
2nd round:	17 May 2014	No, ID	The photographs show primary tips darker than the mantle and the observer describes the wingtips as being "one shade darker than the mantle". Unfortunately, the subtleties of this comment cannot be appreciated with the photographs provided nor with the written description. I don't believe we can say with certainty that the primaries are too pale for a Thayer's Gull especially given the sun conditions that produced photographs with significant glare; I suspect the observer's view of the gull was affected in the same way.
3rd round:	7 Jul 2014	No, ID	Same comments as above!
Steve S.	22 Apr 2014	Acc
2nd round:	12 May 2014	Acc	From the description of the primaries the same color as the mantle, and from what I can tell in the photos I don't see any black in the wingtips. I can't find any photos of Thayer's Gull with out black wingtips.
3rd round:	2 Jul 2014	Acc	No change from first two rounds
David W.	19 Mar 2014	Acc	I am a bit reluctant to accept this record because of the description of the wing tips and the size, but I cannot think of what else this might be.
2nd round:	4 Jun 2014	Acc
3rd round:	28 Jul 2014	Acc	[sigh] I am tempted to propose a motion to amend our bylaws to only allow review of gulls with an included DNA sample...

2014-006 Western Gull

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Apr 2014	Acc
2nd round:	20 Jun 2014	Acc	Speculation about hybrids does not convince me that this is not a Western Gull.
Bob B.	4 Apr 2014	Acc	This bird does not look quite right to me, but I am not sure why. The Bill certainly looks like a Western. The back looks too dark for a Western/Glaucous-winged hybrid. I will be interested to see what others say, but will vote yes.
2nd round:	17 Jun 2014	Acc	Photos can obviously be deceiving, but the size of this bird is impressive. I have read all of the notes by Ryan and those that have had input, but I have a hard time believing a bird this size could be a LBBG. The bill also to me looks more like a Western. Can I be certain that this is not some sort of hybrid? No, but I also feel fairly comfortable labeling this a Western.
Rick F.	17 Mar 2014	Acc	Good record
2nd round:	27 Jun 2014	Acc	I don't have any problem with the eye color, as I've observed several apparent Western Gulls with similar eyes (similar to the 2nd cycle gull in the Cornell link provided by David). I also don't think the bill is 'too slight' for a Western Gull; however, I also don't think it's out of range for a LBBG. There have been many large (and large billed) dark mantled gulls observed in the west in recent years labeled by experts as Lesser Black-backed Gulls (although usually with some doubts). With that said, I still think more characters point to this being a Western Gull.
Ryan O.	16 Mar 2014	No, ID	I feel a bit bad about this record. This was flagged for review in my queue as the eBird reviewer for the region, and before I even looked at it, I encouraged Mike to submit it to the UBRC for review. Then, after I actually looked at the pictures, I realized it's not a Western Gull. As I told Mike, the first thing to give me pause is that the eyes look really pale. Western Gull eyes aren't always super dark, but this is paler than I'd expect on most WEGU. The bird and its head and bill look large, which would fit WEGU, but I don't get an impression of an especially thick bill that would indicate WEGU. Finally, although it's always better to judge in life than in photos, I feel like the mantle might be a bit too light for WEGU. It's not so far off that I'd rule out WEGU on mantle color alone, but in combination with bill shape and eye color, I'm just not seeing a strong case for WEGU. I think this is most likely either a Lesser Black-backed Gull or perhaps a Lesser Black-backed Gull hybrid. On the Facebook North American Gulls page, several well-known gull experts supported the identification as a Lesser Black-backed Gull, including Steve Hampton and Amar Ayyash, although others suggested various hybrid combinations. None suggested the original identification as Western Gull was correct.
2nd round:	30 Apr 2014	No, ID	The bright pale eye and "black eye" look (concentration of dark feathering around the eye) still have me leaning strongly to Lesser Black-backed Gull or LBBG hybrid. I also see a low sloping head, rather than the peaked, rounded head of Western Gull. In response to Dennis's question about the reference to the "Salt Lake County review species list," I'm pretty sure the observer is referring to the records that are flagged for further review in eBird (filters in Utah are set at the county level). I think the discussion of this bird from the North American Gulls Facebook group that I referenced in the first round is quite helpful in considering this record, and several of those participants are much better than I am at gull identification. For the committee's reference, here is that conversation about Mike's photos. It is worth noting that no one here suggests Western Gull: Steve Hampton: Lesser Black-backed Gull? Got more pics? Amar Ayyash: I'd agree with 2nd cycle LBBG. (Mike Hearell posts a few more photos) Andrew Baksh: Agree with votes for 2nd cycle LBBG. Chris Hill: I saw it, I thought "whomping big Lesser Black-back." I would love to be corrected and find that some mid-Asian stray looks like this, but so many things that look weird in that particular way turn out to be LBBGs in the end. Paul Budde: That bill does look quite large and swollen for LBBG, even accounting for the fact that darker colors (like the gonydeal angle) look larger than there are. Noah Arthur: YES, there IS a mid-Asian stray that looks like this! The bill on this bird is huge. The size being "larger than the Herring Gull" seems WAY too big for LBBG. My vote is for Heuglin's Gull. [RPO note: currently considered a subspecies of Lesser Black-backed Gull] Mike Hearell: My concern with this being called a LBBG is the fact that it has PINK LEGS (much more visible through scope than camera) and was MUCH LARGER than the surrounding HEGU [RPO note: HERG] and CAGU. Most LBBG I've seen have been slightly larger than CAGU and a hair smaller than HEGU [HERG]. I know the younger gulls plumage makes them appear larger than they are but the size difference in this gull was quite noticeable. Steve Hampton: Can we rule out Herring x GBB[G], which would seemingly explain both size and leg color? Martin Reid: Chris I'd say that "so many things that look weird" are ASSUMED to be LBBGs - I'll bet that there is not a single one where a band/ring or genetic data has proved the identity. There has always been the danger of circular reasoning in this issue, and I caution us to remember than almost all IDs are conclusions - they are not proven. Noah Arthur: Looks very long-winged for HerringXGBBG. Follow him until he sings, and get a recording of the song! The song of Heuglin's is noticeably lower than LBBG, according to Olsen and Larsson's book (I did this with a bird in San Leandro last winter, which turned out to be LBBG). Noah Arthur: Yes, I certainly think that many birds are ASSUMED to be LBBGs with no real proof -- there have been some really big-billed individuals here in CA that really might be something else... Noah Arthur: The only other thing I can think of might be LBBGXGBBG. Are there any records of that? Martin Reid: While we are speculating, what about Kelp hybrids? I gather that after a Katrina-induced hiatus, Kelps (or residual Kelp hybrids?) are breeding with American HERGs some where east of Louisiana... Offshore islands in Alabama, maybe? Amar Ayyash: I want to make a couple of points without sounding too stubborn about this being a LBBG. I wouldn't worry about pinkish legs on a 2nd cycle Lesser. 3rd and even 4th cycle types are regularly recorded with sub-adult pinkish legs. As for size, I (on rare occasion ) find Lessers that tower over surrounding Herrings. Giants? Not uncommon is to see one that's more or less the same size as Herrings, presumably males. LBBG is not very rare in Utah, and there shouldn't be an expectation that they're all going to be slim-bodied and smaller than Herrings. With that said, I'd like to see more photos of this gull before I place my bet. Mike Hearell: [posts another photo of the same gull] Amar Ayyash: Consider this individual, Mike: http://www.gull-research.org/lbbg3cya/w0nj.htm Maarten van Kleinwee: It amazes me how quickly the hybrid option is raised in this FB group each time a gull doesn't fit a box perfectly. Mike Hearell: It's true that LBBG are becoming more and more regular in Utah and it was just recently removed from the review list. My comments about leg color and overall size were more of a question about variables within the species than a statement that it is not said species. Amar Ayyash: Sorry for the quality of this video, but here's a similar looking LBBG that I recorded in Chicago a couple of years ago. It was a beast, matching and even exceeding the size of some of the surrounding Herrings. It dominated the beach for the couple of hours it was there. http://youtu.be/ysIyVlYjvwI Aaron Brees: Martin, there was a big debate several years ago over the ID of a dark mantled gull in Missouri with a lot of the discussion leaning toward Kelp or Kelp hybrid as many felt it was too large and robust to be LBBG. It was very controversially collected and proved to be a LBBG by DNA if recall correctly. So, that's one anyway. Mike Hearell: [posts one more photo, the last post in the thread.]
Terry S..	27 Mar 2014	Acc	Convincing photos
2nd round:	23 Jun 2014	No, ID	There is surely many differing opinions on this gull. I believe the size would rule out a LBBG. There have been enough valid questions raised over the the mantle color, bill shape, head shape and eye color that I am not so sure it is Western Gull any more. I am certainly ok in letting this one go unidentified for now.
Dennis S.	18 Apr 2014	Acc	Good detailed report and photo leaves little doubt. I wonder about the comment "this species recently removed from Salt Lake County review species list". What is this?
2nd round:	9 May 2014	Acc	No additional thoughts from first round.
Jack S..	27 Apr 2014	Acc
2nd round:	26 Jun 2014	Acc	I've read the commentary on this bird but I still feel it best fits a Western Gull. Among other features, the size and structure are convincing, the large bill, the leg color, and the mantle darkness all fit well with western. Some note the eye as being too pale for a western of this age but this field mark is variable but still within the expected range for this species and age.
Steve S.	22 Apr 2014	Acc
2nd round:	27 Jun 2014	Acc	Still looks like a Western Gull to me.I suppose a hybrid is possible,but if so not recently.
David W.	19 Mar 2014	Acc
2nd round:	20 May 2014	Acc	You know, I fully sympathize with the argument that any gull could be a hybrid, but in this case the size is just so impressive. And I am troubled by the shape of the bird, which does very much remind me of a LBBG. On the other hand, to address some of Ryan's concerns, the color of the face and eyes look very much like the 2nd cycle bird in the Cornell site, All About Birds: http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/western_gull/id In fact, that bird is nearly a dead ringer for this one except for the thickness of the white band at the end of the tertials. The thickness of the bill, especially the gonydeal angle, so unlike the LBBG, is what I find most convincing in the end.

2014-007 American Black Duck

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Apr 2014	No, ID	This does not appear to be a pure American Black Duck. I would expect the sides to be darker, making for less of a contrast with the wings, on an American Black Duck. Also, there seems to be some white in the tail which would eliminate this species.
2nd round:	21 Jun 2014	No, ID	Vote unchanged. This does not appear to be a pure American Black Duck.
Bob B.	27 Mar 2014	No, ID	This may well be an American Black Duck, but I am not totally convinced that Mottled Duck has been eliminated. The bill color appears to me to be more yellow than dull yellow-green, and the head color seems more consistent with Mottled. Mexican Mallard I feel also should be considered, although if there really was no white at all bordering the speculum that seems less likely. The back certainly is very dark, most consistent with American Black Duck. I would like to see what others say on the first round, so will vote no for now. And then there is the problem with hybrids.
2nd round:	6 May 2014	No, ID	My feelings are unchanged. Whatever it is it does not appear to be a "pure" Black Duck.
Rick F.	17 Apr 2014	No, ID	This appears to be a Mexican Mallard intergrade (based on extent of pale feather edging, pale tail, and side and flank color).
2nd round:	27 Jun 2014	No, ID	Obviously a Mexican Mallard intergrade. However, this is still a rather significant record and one of the furthest north Mexican Ducks recorded to date.
Ryan O.	21 Mar 2014	No, ID	No attempt was made to eliminate other dark Mallard relatives, including Mottled Duck and "Mexican" Mallard. The absence of any white bars on the wing should rule out Mexican Mallard, assuming a thin white edge would be seen if it had been present, but many Mottled Ducks have essentially no white on the leading (proximal) edge of the speculum, and only a very thin white trailing (distal) edge would be easily lost against a light background. The comments that, "The bill color was a dark yellow color and not orange like the hen Mallard" and "It was not a drake Mallard based on lack of green head" also indicate that Mexican Mallard may not have been considered, since hen Mallards of the Mexican subspecies don't have an orange bill and drake Mallards of the Mexican subspecies don't have a green head. I don't feel that Mexican Mallard or especially Mottled Duck were sufficiently excluded in the written details, and I think that range isn't sufficient to rule either! of these out since there have been several records of Mexican Mallards or intergrades in Utah in recent years and there are Mottled Duck records from Colorado and Wyoming. (25 Mar 2014) The photos are a very helpful addition and at least rule out Mottled Duck (given the lack of a black spot at the base of the bill). However, given the relatively warm buffy tone to the head and the warm buffy flank streaks, not cold grayish in each part, plus the amount of white visible in the tail feathers, I still feel this bird is not consistent with (pure) American Black Duck. My best guess is mostly "Mexican Duck" (Anas [platyrhynchos] diazi), with a bit of "Northern" Mallard introgression making the tail whiter than it would be otherwise, but I'm not confident ruling out all American Black Duck x (Northern) Mallard hybrids either.
2nd round:	7 Jun 2014	No, ID	It seems the only first-round concerns of others have been addressed.
Terry S..	23 Apr 2014	No, ID	The paler flanks which are lighter than the rest of the bird indicate this is probably not a pure American Black Duck. The white or pale color seen in the tail also raises doubts.
2nd round:	9 May 2014	No, ID	As indicated by other reviewers this seems to be an intergrade of a Mallard x Mexican type duck
Dennis S.	18 Apr 2014	No, ID	I've had concerns about this record since it was first submitted. It just didn't appear to fit close enough to a slam-dunk Black Duck. It appears to be more of a "Mexican Duck" mallard type. The lightness of sides and under tail areas are problematic. I was glad to see comments of concern recently come out on the State's list serves.
2nd round:	9 May 2014	No, ID	This bird was never a Black Duck!
Jack S..	4 May 2014	Acc	The overall size and bill and plumage coloration seem most consistent with this species (compared with both Mallard and Mottled Duck), as was the description of speculum borders. I was surprised that the extent of contrast between body and underwing linings was not mentioned; this is very obvious on American Black Ducks, especially males.
2nd round:	17 May 2014	No, ID	I agree with your many comments against this identification.
Steve S.	22 Apr 2014	No, ID	This bird doesn't look dark enough to be pure Black Duck. Also photos posted later on Utah Birds seem to show light edging on the tail with the start of curled feathers as in a Mallard. The author also agreed this is not a pure Black Duck in a post dated 16 March
2nd round:	12 May 2014	No, ID	same comments as first round.
David W.	15 Apr 2014	No, ID	I went out to the same spot where this record was reported and am 99% sure I saw the same ducks (pair) referred to in these reports. I therefore, perhaps, may have a bit of a bias. Let me just say that this would be a Utah Lifer for me, though I have seen the species back East. I do not think this is an American black duck for three main reasons: 1) These photos strike me as unnaturally dark & saturated, especially when you compare the tones & darkness of the flanks to the head on the male (the face should be much paler compared to the flanks on a black duck). The ducks I saw were paler in real life, and this insufficient contrast was what broke my lister heart in the field. 2) The pattern of the flank feathers isn't right for a black duck. The duck in those photos has far too much pale edging to the feathers, and the edging is dull tan rather than rufous. 3) There seems to be an awful lot of paleness to the upper tail for an American black duck. I noticed all these field marks in the field, but they are visible in the photos as well. I am not sure what this is, possibly some Black duck x Mallard hybrid or perhaps something with diazi ("Mexican duck") genes. The Mallard superspecies is not well differentiated to begin with, anyway. I hope y'all can talk me out of my vote, as I sure wouldn't mind another Utah lifer, but right now I just don't see this as a pure American black duck.
2nd round:	7 May 2014	No, ID	I believe the observer has subsequently retracted his confidence in the ID in an on-line forum on April 18th.

2014-008 Rose-throated Becard

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Apr 2014	No, ID	Although the simple description of this bird indicates a Rose-throated Becard as the likely identification, this would be a first state record, and there is no physical evidence to support this sighting.
Bob B.	27 Mar 2014	No, ID	Anything supposedly can turn up anywhere, but this would be a real shocker. The description certainly sounds reasonably good, but I can think of several other possibilities for confusion. For a first state record, we need much more convincing proof than this. Fourteen years can is a long time for memory to accurately reflect on what was seen, especially when the observer did not have bins. Oh for a photograph. In spite of all that I have said, somewhere in the back of my mind I really wonder if her identification isn't correct, but must vote no at this time for lack of definitive documentation or corroboration by additional observers.
Rick F.	17 Apr 2014	No, ID	Description and behavior suggest an Abert's Towhee (?).
Ryan O.	30 Apr 2014	No, ID	My biggest concern with this record is that the observer initially thought it was an Abert's Towhee. It is quite a stretch to think of these two as similar species. It doesn't help that the observer didn't even bother to look it up until five days later, and the notes presented here are from memory fourteen years later. Reporting the sex and age as an adult female (when first year males look almost identical) further indicates that this might be a record that over-presents its confidence. The description isn't a great fit either: I think of this species as being more robust and bulky than an American Robin, not more slender. Head is described as "darker" but the blackish cap is not mentioned. Overall, I have too many concerns about this record to accept, especially given that it would be a first state record.
Terry S..	23 Apr 2014	No, ID	A record such as this would need photographs and other observations to be accepted.
Dennis S.	18 Apr 2014	No, ID	I'm sorry, the time span since the sighting, the lack of photos and a more detailed report leave much more to be desired for this, what would be our first state record.
Jack S..	4 May 2014	No, ID	This ID could be correct but without more description of the bird I"m skeptical. I'm curious what other members think about these two records.
Steve S.	22 Apr 2014	No, ID	Fifteen years later, no idea when the notes were written and didn't even look the bird up for a week? Not enough info to accept much less for a state first.
David W.	25 Mar 2014	No, ID	I am not sure how to handle the two Rose-throated becard records (2014-008 & 9). The species just doesn't occur anywhere near Utah and is not on the Nevada, Colorado, or Idaho state lists (I can't even find it on the New Mexico list, although I may not be looking in the right place!!). In Arizona it occurs only in the very SE corner, barely spilling over from Mexico some years. And then two show up in St George at one time, yet not together? Seems highly improbable. To make things worse, the observer didn't have any experience with this species and described the female as scratching around on the ground (uncharacteristic for a becard, to say the least). The birds were not observed with binoculars or scope, no field guides in the field, no notes were taken in the field (other than mental), and the mental notes were written down much later. I think we need more than this for a state first.

2014-009 Rose-throated Becard

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Apr 2014	No, ID	Although the simple description of this bird indicates a Rose-throated Becard as the likely identification, this would be a first state record, and there is no physical evidence to support this sighting.
2nd round:	21 Jun 2014	No, ID	I cannot accept this as a first state record with the documentation provided.
Bob B.	27 Mar 2014	No, ID	This one is a little tougher than the female. There a fewer birds with which it might be readily confused. But all of my concerns mentioned in that report still pertain to this one. I still must vote no.
2nd round:	6 May 2014	No, ID	The long interval between observation and report, the extreme unlikelihood of this bird occurring in Utah, and no other objective evidence such as photograph, make it difficult for me to vote for this bird, which would be a Utah first.
Rick F.	17 Apr 2014	No, ID
2nd round:	27 Jun 2014	No, ID	I'm surprised to see this record in the second round. The description is inadequate to establish such an unprecedented record of a becard this far north of their expected range and there is no supporting evidence.
Ryan O.	30 Apr 2014	Acc	I've been trying to think of another species that could be mistaken for this one by a novice, and it really seems to me to be pretty distinct. I'm open to alternative suggestions, as this isn't a slam-dunk record with everything fitting perfectly, but I can't seem to fit any other species into this description any better.
2nd round:	7 Jun 2014	Acc	I'm still quite conflicted on this record. I can't find anything in the record that rules out Rose-throated Becard, and a male would be quite distinctive. The record of the female was far more concerning, but I think each record should be judged on its own merits. I trust the observer's memory of such a distinctive and remarkable sighting - there are a few birds I could still describe well from memory 14 years later because they made such a strong impression on me. To be completely honest, given the level of rarity, the time since the observation, and the lack of corroborating evidence such as another observer's report or photos, if I were the deciding vote, I would vote "No." But since this record has already been rejected (six "No" votes have been received), I'm voting "Yes" in part as an indication that the only real concerns with this record are the gap in time and the lack of other observers or physical documentation.
Terry S..	23 Apr 2014	No, ID	As with record 2014-008 this record would need additional observers and photographs to make this an acceptable record. Saying that it is the part of the state we would expect to see this species if it ever showed up in Utah.
2nd round:	9 May 2014	No, ID	While the description certainly sounds like a likely candidate for a Rose-throated Becard this species is extremely rare North of Mexico. It also has been a very long time since the bird sighting. The sighting of a possible female Rose-throated Becard by the same individual within a few days of this sighting is perplexing. I think it more likely that there is mistaken identity when the observer checked the field guides for reference.
Dennis S.	18 Apr 2014	No, ID	Basically for the same reasons as 2014-008 I can't accept this FOS record.
2nd round:	9 May 2014	No, ID	No additional comments.
Jack S..	4 May 2014	No, ID	This ID could be correct but without more description of the bird I"m skeptical. I'm curious what other members think about these two records.
2nd round:	17 May 2014	No, ID	Same comments as the first round.
Steve S.	22 Apr 2014	No, ID	Same thoughts as record 2014-008
2nd round:	12 May 2014	No, ID	I still can't accept this record with the information provided.
David W.	25 Mar 2014	No, ID	I think we need more than this for a state first. (see my notes under 2014-008)
2nd round:	7 May 2014	No, ID	My confidence in this sighting is undermined by the report on the female, especially her behavior. There is just too much in these sightings which doesn't add up (see first round concerns under 2014-008, some of which apply here), especially for a state first.

2014-010 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Apr 2014	Acc
2nd round:	17 Jun 2014	Acc	Granted the description could have been more extensive. However, the photo shows a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker.
Bob B.	27 Mar 2014	Acc	I wish we could see the back better, but the head of this bird appears to me to be typical for an adult male Yellow-bellied.
2nd round:	17 Jun 2014	Acc	My feelings are unchanged. I will continue to vote yes..
Rick F.	31 May 2014	Acc
Ryan O.	30 Apr 2014	No, ID	Adult female Red-naped Sapsuckers can have an all-red throat completely bordered by black, and no red on the nape. Those two traits alone are not sufficient to distinguish a male Yellow-bellied Sapsucker from a female Red-naped Sapsucker. We can't see the back pattern, and the observer made no attempt to describe it. Also there was no attempt to eliminate potential hybrids.
2nd round:	7 Jun 2014	Acc	The written description is of little help, describing only two field marks and not attempting to eliminate any other sapsucker or hybrid. Thus, we are left with only one obscured photo to judge. I don't see any red in the nape, and the throat (or as much of it as can be seen) appears completely red with a complete black border. These are good indications of Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, but they are not sufficient on their own. As pointed out in the big Sibley, adult female Red-naped Sapsuckers have the "nape usually red, sometimes white," and a "white chin; sometimes all-red (such birds very similar to male Yellow-bellied)." The completely red throat of some female Red-naped Sapsuckers is discussed at length in Leukering 2007, "Sapsucker identification: the problem of female Red-naped Sapsuckers with red throats," Colorado Birds 41:292-294. Leukering also mentions that female Red-naped Sapsuckers can have no red on the nape. However, the presence or absence of a red nape patch in Red-naped Sapsuckers is not random with respect to season. Leukering 2007 indicates that all Red-naped Sapsuckers in fresh plumage have red on the nape, and that when the red is absent, it has been lost due to wear. Similarly, Mlodinow et al. 2006 state that, "Red-naped Sapsuckers lacking red on the nape between October 1 and May 1 [when the plumage is fresh] would be exceptionally unusual, if such occur at all." Thus the lack of red in the nape on this bird in March is a more reliable indicator of identification as Yellow-bellied Sapsucker than I had realized. The facial pattern on this bird appears more white than black, which is a good (if subjective) indication of Yellow-bellied Sapsucker over Red-naped Sapsucker. Although the back is almost completely obscured, the amount of white on the tertials corresponds well with the amount of white on the back, and this bird has a very large amount of white visible on the tertials, more than I've seen in Red-naped Sapsuckers and even more than many Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers.
Terry S..	9 May 2014	No, ID	The white stripes that go through the face are as broad or broader the the black stripes and red throat seems to be completely bordered by black. These characteristics support a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker. I have concern however with what appears to be a tinge of red in the nape area which is dark. I also cannot determine the extent of white streaking in the back from the supplied photo. The narrative does not give information on these details. For the first round vote I would rather vote no and solicit input from other reviewers.
2nd round:	24 Jun 2014	Acc	Even though there is not any description of the back pattern I can agree this bird shows all the other markings of a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker.
Dennis S.	18 Apr 2014	Acc	Report with barely adequate details and photo, but still enough to remove most doubt. Record is well within the normally occurring winter range records for the state. I believe this bird was previously reported in this area earlier this winter also.
2nd round:	2 Jul 2014	Acc	My vote remains the same.
Jack S..	4 May 2014	Acc	A full description is lacking but the extent of red in throat and extent of black border is right. A written description of back barring pattern would have been nice.
2nd round:	30 Jun 2014	Acc
Steve S.	22 Apr 2014	Acc
2nd round:	6 Jul 2014	Acc	I still think the photo shows a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker
David W.	20 May 2014	Acc	I am not entirely sanguine about whether the Yellow-bellied sapsucker is a separate species from the Red-naped, but, assuming it is, this seems like a bird pretty far down the cline toward the former. Most reputable sources hedge their differentiating field marks (nape spot, throat border, back pattern, etc.) with words like "usually," to drive that point home. But this bird's markings strike me as Yellow-bellied. Irrespective of which bird it is, what a lovely individual.
2nd round:	4 Jun 2014	Acc

2014-011 Glossy Ibis

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	21 Jun 2014	Acc	Good photos for comparison with White-faced Ibis.
Bob B.	5 May 2014	Acc
Rick F.	30 May 2014	Acc	conclusive photos
Ryan O.	30 Apr 2014	abst	[submitted record]
Terry S..	12 Jun 2014	Acc	Good photo
Dennis S.	9 May 2014	Acc	Good close up photo of face leaves no question.
Jack S..	4 May 2014	Acc	Distinctive photographs and good description for this species.
Steve S.	27 Jun 2014	Acc
David W.	7 May 2014	Acc	Excellent write-up & photos cover the critical ID points.

2014-012 Glossy Ibis

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	21 Jun 2014	Acc
Bob B.	5 May 2014	Acc
Rick F.	30 May 2014	Acc	great photos
Ryan O.	30 Apr 2014	Acc	There is a very subtle hint of reddish brown color visible in the eye in the first photo, but this is not unexpected in Glossy Ibis in the best direct light. I see nothing to indicate potential hybrid origins.
Terry S..	12 Jun 2014	Acc	Good photo
Dennis S.	9 May 2014	Acc	Good photo and report remove any question.
Jack S..	4 May 2014	Acc	Distinctive photograph!
Steve S.	27 Jun 2014	Acc
David W.	7 May 2014	Acc	Write-up & photos cover the critical ID points.

2014-013 Mississippi Kite

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	21 Jun 2014	Acc	Although this would be a first state record, the observer is "familiar with the species." Even though the time of observation was short, I believe the observer adequately identified the bird in that time frame because of his experience with this species.
2nd round:	26 Jul 2014	Acc	My vote is unchanged.
Bob B.	9 May 2014	Acc	This is an excellent description by the world's expert and I have no problem accepting this as a first state record. The report in 2008 may well have been a Mississippi Kite, and I have been made aware of other possible sightings, and I would not be surprised if this bird was more than just an accidental visitor to Utah.
2nd round:	15 Jul 2014	Acc	My feelings are unchanged and I will continue to vote yes.
Rick F.	27 Jun 2014	Acc	Good description and helpful drawing; plenty adequate to accept as a provisional first.
2nd round:	7 Aug 2014	Acc	We should have a category that is accept as provisional record.
Ryan O.	7 Jun 2014	Acc	Excellent description and sketch. A second observer was able to see the same bird roughly 20 miles further north the same day: http://ebird.org/ebird/view/checklist?subID=S18233934 It is quite interesting that this observation was within one day of the bird Craig Fosdick and I saw on 5 May six years earlier (see record 2008-08, which was not accepted). Perhaps that record will be worth re-evaluating in a few more years when (if?) a pattern of Mississippi Kite vagrancy is better established.
2nd round:	7 Aug 2014	Acc	This record has already received more than six "Accept" votes in the second round, and so has been accepted, according to section IV.C.10.b of our bylaws: "Voting on a second-round record ends as soon as 6 votes to accept or 6 votes to reject have been cast." But since it's still on the voting table, I'll add my notes anyways. Two members mentioned that the record should be accepted as "provisional" in their votes. Our bylaws IV.C.11 states, "Accepted records will be listed as either 'verified with physical evidence' or 'accepted but not verified with physical evidence.' First state record submissions that involve only a single observer, may be accepted as 'hypothetical' and added to the UOS Checklist of Birds of Utah as such. Species shall remain on the hypothetical list until a record meeting the above criteria is accepted by the committee." Like several parts of our bylaws, this is a bit ambiguous. How is it decided whether a record meets the "physical evidence" criterion? By vote? I think the sketch included in this record qualifies as physical evidence, but I could see the logic in arguing that it does not. What does it mean that a record "MAY be accepted as hypothetical" (emphasis added), and if it MAY be accepted as hypothetical, who decides that it IS hypothetical? While there is much room for interpretation, I read these bylaws as meaning that a record is only "ACCEPTED AS HYPOTHETICAL" when 1) only one observer submits a record, 2) the species is not obvious or easy to identify and can be confused with similar species, 3) the observer is not familiar with the species, 4) the observer is not known by the committee to be a careful competent observer with experience, AND 5) there is no physical evidence. I don't think we'd EVER vote to accept a record under those conditions (i.e., when the observer is unknown, the species is difficult, there is only one observer, and the observer is not familiar with the species). This makes the "hypothetical" list, if I'm understanding it correctly, a bit of a moot issue. The term "provisional" doesn't appear in our bylaws, but it does appear in our checklist. Conversely, "hypothetical" doesn't appear in our checklist, but does appear in our bylaws, so I suppose we are using these synonymously. In practice it seems that "hypothetical records" are records that had no "physical" evidence and only a single report filed (even if there were multiple observers). In conclusion, although I still think we need to tidy up our rules at some point, it seems in practice that whether this record is "provisional"/"hypothetical" depends only on whether a sketch counts as "physical evidence," and that decision is probably left to the secretary and/or webmaster. If it matters, I vote for this as a "full" acceptance, i.e., not on the provisional/hypothetical list.
Terry S..	24 Jun 2014	Acc	Very well documented and an excellent drawing of the observed bird.
2nd round:	23 Jul 2014	Acc	Again this was an excellent description and write-up of the bird by a well -known raptor expert. I also think the record of a Mississippi Kite submitted several years ago could be reevaluated.
Dennis S.	9 May 2014	No, ID	First let me make it clear that I'm 99.9% sure we have our first Mississippi Kite record for Utah. As luck would have it, the bird flew over one of the best qualified people in the State to ID it correctly. Certainly very few field birders in this State are more familiar with raptors in flight than this reporter. However, If you or I saw this bird and were convinced enough to turn in the record as a Miss. Kite, there would be a high possibility of its rejection, and probably rightfully so. Unless there was "preferably" additional substantiating physical evidence. So here we face the problem. We who know the reporter, know that he is a competent observer, very familiar with this species (and all other raptors), and thus easy for him to ID. Unluckily, no other observers were present and no physical evidence was possible. His report is certainly noteworthy. Maybe this is a record that should be recorded as provisional. I'm anxious to see the Committee comments.
2nd round:	7 Jul 2014	Acc	Ok, I thought I might be the only one who would vote against this record the first go around. I really wasn't voting to reject, but only to bring up a common problem where once again we can't help but be swayed by the one who reports the bird. It's true nobody I know would be more qualified to document an unusual bird of prey for the State than the reporter. But what about the rest of us? I vote to accept the record as a provisional species.
Jack S..	30 Jun 2014	Acc	The description is excellent and the drawing distinctive for this species. The observer is experienced and expert in N. American raptors. This species has been expanding its breeding range west and north for at least the past 60 years of so. There are breeding colonies in neighboring New Mexico, Arizona, and Colorado. There are 22 accepted records from California and 7 from Nevada.
2nd round:	2 Aug 2014	Acc	This record is at least acceptable at the provisional level; the description and drawing are distinctive for the species.
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	Acc
David W.	7 May 2014	Acc	Good write-up & drawing, showing many key fieldmarks..
2nd round:	29 Jul 2014	Acc	Provisional.

2014-014 Orchard Oriole

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	21 Jun 2014	No, ID	Not sure of the ID based on the description. The color descriptions "very orange almost crimson" and "more crimson red than orange breast" don't bring to mind the chestnut colored breast of an Orchard Oriole. This bird could have been a Baltimore Oriole, but this was not mentioned or eliminated as a similar species.
2nd round:	18 Sep 2014	No, ID	I still have the same concerns about the ID.
Bob B.	17 Jun 2014	No, ID	There are several things about this rather brief description that concern me. It is hard for me to think that an Orchard Oriole could ever be described as orange. It is really a deep chestnut. In the similar species description, the one obvious confusing bird would be a Baltimore Oriole and that is not even mentioned. I am perplexed by the description of the tail as all black, which suggests Orchard, not Baltimore. But I have enough questions that I am voting no on this round.
2nd round:	31 Jul 2014	No, ID	I still have too many reservations about this bird and will continue to vote no.
Rick F. 2nd round:	7 Aug 2014	No, ID	I agree the description does not adequately eliminate a Baltimore Oriole, and I also am baffled by the 'crimson red' description.
Ryan O.	7 Jun 2014	No, ID	The size is described as the same as an American Robin, but an Orchard Oriole is significantly smaller than that species, then later it is described as the size of a bluebird or a robin, which is a considerable range of sizes. The head is described as black "down to the nape of its neck" but this is not consistent with Orchard Oriole, which should have the black continuing not just to the nape but also down the entire back. I can't quite fit this description onto any other expected species, but it is not consistent or thorough enough in my judgement for a second state record.
2nd round:	8 Aug 2014	No, ID	I can see David's position that this is likely just an imprecise record of a real Orchard Oriole. There aren't any species that I think this record fits better than it fits Orchard Oriole. But there are enough inconsistencies or points of imprecision for me to have significant doubts overall. Those doubts might not be enough to convince me to vote against the record if this weren't the second record for the state, but given the rarity of this species, I hold the records to an accordingly higher standard.
Terry S..	6 Jul 2014	Acc	A photo would have been desirable for this record but this is a distinctive bird and enough detail given to make identification.
2nd round:	12 Aug 2014	No, ID	I agree the description given does not really rule out a Baltimore Oriole.
Dennis S.	7 Jul 2014	Acc	An adequate report with a couple of uncovered questions. First - what about Baltimore Oriole? I guess all black head and all black tail covers this. Second - it's hard for me to describe an OROR as having a crimson breast(chestnut/red, brown/red, not orange!).
2nd round:	13 Aug 2014	No, ID	It seems we all had the same questions about this bird on the first go-around (crimson? Baltimore? size?) and some considered these enough to reject and others wondered if there was still enough to accept. Some may also been swayed, either way, by "Avian Biologist." It's a close call but I concur that specific oriole ID was not completely established.
Jack S..	30 Jun 2014	No, ID	The description of this bird is not sufficient to rule out other species such as Baltimore Oriole. I'm also puzzled by the observers claim of "similar in size to AMRO", an Orchard Oriole is only about 1/4 the mass of an American Robin, 30% shorter in length, and half the wingspan.
2nd round:	2 Aug 2014	No, ID
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	No, ID	Observer didn't eliminate Baltimore Oriole.
2nd round:	6 Sep 2014	No, ID	I still can't vote for Orchard Oriole from the description given.
David W.	20 May 2014	Acc	Although the description of the bird's undersides as "crimson red" is a bit different than my (and Wikipedia's) understanding of that color, I will chalk that up to individual terminology. I cannot think of anything else with the described field marks. The observer's status as an avian biologist helps in the credibility of the report.
2nd round:	29 Jul 2014	Acc	One would think that an obvious bird like the Orchard oriole would be easy to describe, especially by an avian biologist. Odd that more care was not taken to describe the bill shape as decurved, and the extent of the head blackness is imprecise (but no better indicative for a Baltimore oriole, which also has a black back). And the underside color description is just plain unfortunate. I assumed in my 1st round vote that it couldn't have been orange-yellow of a Baltimore oriole because the observer specifically stated it was not the color of a Bullock's. To those troubled by the size comparison to the American robin, one should note that a size range was given, from bluebird to robin, so that shouldn't disqualify this sighting. And the description of the tail as solid black should eliminate the Baltimore and support the Orchard, though I suppose the orange-yellow might have been missed. All in all, this is an imperfect record. I am more on the fencepost about this one than this bird itself was reported to have been. Still, I feel this is an unfortunately vague and odd record of an Orchard oriole.

2014-015 Pine Warbler

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	25 Jul 2014	No, ID	I'm troubled by the description of the "complete" eye-ring and lack of description of the wing bars regarding prominence and color. Also, if this was a female/immature, I would expect to see at least faint streaking on the sides of the breast which is not mentioned.
2nd round:	18 Sep 2014	No, ID	I'm still not able to vote to accept based on my previous concerns.
Bob B.	24 Jul 2014	Acc	I have had a great deal of trouble pulling the trigger to vote on this bird. I had decided to vote yes, then no, and now yes again. The description is good for a Pine Warbler. I am disturbed by the suggestion it could be a juvenile. What would a juvenile be doing here this time of year. If a juvenile would be considered, then one would have to consider both Bay-breasted and Blackpoll Warblers. The bottom line is that I don't believe this was a juvenile, but probably an adult female. If this were a state first rather than second, I would have voted no.
2nd round:	31 Jul 2014	Acc	After reading everyone's remarks and concerns and reviewing my own concerns, by a margin of 51 to 49 I will still vote yes.
Rick F. 2nd round:	7 Aug 2014	No, ID	There are several aspects of the description that are inconsistent with Pine Warbler (complete eye-ring, 'undertail completely white'). Also no attempt was made to eliminate the very similar immature / female Blackpoll or Bay-breasted.
Ryan O.	7 Jun 2014	Acc
2nd round:	8 Aug 2014	No, ID	This is a bit of a "heartbreaker," a very rare bird that in my (revised) opinion is very probably an authentic sighting but just doesn't quite make the cut. Although there are no convincing contenders for the identification of this bird (I find the description of a plain back without streaks to be sufficient to rule out Blackpoll and Bay-Breasted), I can see the issues others have mentioned with the description of the eye ring ("complete" versus two arcs), sides of breast ("yellowish wash from bottom of throat through mid breast and sides" versus faintly and subtly streaked), "undertail" described as completely white (this is ambiguous, although I had interpreted it to mean "undertail coverts, not including retrices"), and the mention of a possible "juvenile." As Dennis mentioned, I have added confidence in this record given the experience of the observers and the fact that multiple other observers confirmed the identification. However, much like the Orchard Oriole record we are currently considering, this one must meet a higher standard of scrutiny given its rarity in the state, and I agree with others that it doesn't quite meet the bar.
Terry S..	10 Jul 2014	No, ID	This may be a valid sighting but I am concerned the observer did not mention anything about the length of the tail, primary extension and description of the lower belly and undertail coverts. I am also concerned with the description of the back as olive-gray.
2nd round:	12 Aug 2014	No, ID	Without good photos it is difficult to accept this record given the narrative and very similar other female warblers
Dennis S.	7 Jul 2014	Acc	I had to take a long look at this record. I could go either way. Warblers, especially female (immature) are always problematic. The fairly detailed report which covered four or five of the key characters, the long look , the previous experience with the species, and the other birders who independently saw the bird were the facts that barely tipped the scales (for now). A few photos would sure have helped.
2nd round:	13 Aug 2014	Acc	I again took a hard evening's look at this record. I read and reread every ones comments, went back over the submitted report, studied warbler books and even went back and read the first record entry. I think the recorded characters narrow down the possibilities to those species mentioned. But, remember this is a spring time bird, and most likely in adult plumage. Take a look at our YOS record and the photos submitted. I think the current submitted record pretty much describes these photos. Even the "faint cream, complete eyering, appears that way in the photos. Maybe "complete" was a poor choice of words. Like me, I'm sure you think the same way as I do when you hear "complete eyering" -- a bold, prominent white circle around the eye like a Connecticut or Nashville Warbler. But a faint eyering is harder to imagine. With the described back lacking streaks, grayish auricles, white undertail(coverts?), two wing bars, thick, dagger-shaped bill, prior experience with the species and other additional independent observers, I still think it warrants acceptance.
Jack S. 2nd round:	2 Aug 2014	No, ID	This description fits a female Pine Warbler quite well with a couple of exceptions. (1) As pointed out by Kathy, the eye-ring is described as complete; this species 'eye-ring' comprises an upper and lower arc surrounding the eye. The arcs are separated by a relatively faint dark line extending from the lore to the back of the eye. This is relative easy to observe on this species, especially at close range. (2) The observer also indicated the 'Undertail was completely white'; this species undertail coverts are white as is most of the underside of the tail, however there is also a thin black border around the undertail coverts and also thin black edges near the tail tip. The first state record for Utah (2007-46) sets a high bar for this species and this record (only the second state record of Pine Warbler if accepted) is not nearly as well documented.
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	No, ID	Didn't adequately eliminate Blackpoll or Bay-breasted Warbler
2nd round:	6 Sep 2014	No, ID	Could be a Pine Warbler, but enough things in the description don't seem consistent with Pine Warbler to warrant an accept vote.
David W.	20 Jun 2014	No, ID	I am very inclined to believe this was indeed a Pine warbler, but I'd like to send this to the second round (sorry) to solicit opinions. The field marks presented fit a Pine warbler best, but I am not satisfied that other species (esp. Bay-breasted and Blackpoll warblers) have been adequately addressed. The back color & streaking come close to satisfying this concern for me, but it seems this can be a subtle distinction, and the streaking in these can be nearly non-existent.
2nd round:	12 Aug 2014	No, ID	The comments of others only reinforce my previous vote.

2014-016 Orchard Oriole

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Jul 2014	Acc
Bob B.	27 Jun 2014	Acc	Great find. Even greater yard bird.
Ryan O.	7 Jun 2014	Acc
Terry S..	6 Jul 2014	Acc	Great photo documentation.
Dennis S.	7 Jul 2014	Acc	No problem with this record except I wish I'd been there too! Great photo, adequate report (although the word crimson to describe the breast color is interesting).
Jack S..	30 Jun 2014	Acc	Distinctive photograph, "alot of pictures were taken by other birders": If other photographs are available they should be included with this record. Sufficient description.
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	Acc
David W.	4 Jun 2014	Acc	The photos prove this record, even when some of the writeup(s) have troubling aspects.

2014-017 Baltimore Oriole

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Jul 2014	Acc
Bob B.	27 Jun 2014	Acc	Description is diagnostic of Baltimore Oriole.
Ryan O.	7 Jun 2014	Acc
Terry S..	23 Jul 2014	Acc	Excellent descriptive write-up on this sighting
Dennis S.	7 Jul 2014	Acc	This report is an example of how a bird record report should be written. Even without photo documentation it leaves no stones unturned. An excellent elimination of other similar species. After working though the report then noticing the reporter, I wasn't surprised at the thoroughness.
Jack S..	30 Jun 2014	Acc	Very complete description of an adult male Baltimore Oriole.
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	Acc
David W.	29 Jul 2014	Acc	Good description.

2014-018 Least Flycatcher

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Jul 2014	Acc
Bob B.	27 Jun 2014	Acc	This is about as good documentation as we could hope for. The range expansion of the Least Flycatcher is rather impressive. We are at our cabin in northern Idaho, and we have at least 3, and probably 4 birds singing on territory within a 1/3 of a mile distance. There were no Least Flycatchers here until about 10 years ago, now they seem almost common.
Rick F.	7 Aug 2014	Acc
Ryan O.	8 Jun 2014	abst
Terry S..	23 Jul 2014	Acc	Excellent documentation
Dennis S.	7 Jul 2014	Acc	Che-bek!!!
Jack S..	7 Jul 2014	Acc	Distinctive song recordings and photographs! Is there evidence to confirm nesting yet?
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	Acc
David W.	12 Jun 2014	Acc	Good documentation.

2014-019 Mexican Whip-poor-will

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Jul 2014	Acc
2nd round:	18 Sep 2014	Acc	The record information indicates Eastern Whip-poor-will was considered and eliminated, so my vote remains unchanged.
Bob B.	27 Jun 2014	Acc
2nd round:	17 Aug 2014	Acc	I feel the description is adequate for acceptance.
Rick F.	7 Aug 2014	Acc
2nd round:	6 Sep 2014	Acc	Records with no audio describing only a call are tough to evaluate, but it appears an Eastern Whip-poor-will was considered..
Ryan O.	21 Jun 2014	Acc,NAS	I consider this to have been submitted as a record of "Mexican Whip-poor-will." Given the observer's experience and the written description of the song, I think this is marginally acceptable as an unidentified Whip-poor-will species. Common Poorwill is described as having a "two-whistled note" but I think at close range the song of the Common Poorwill is closer to three syllables, "Poor-WILLip." Eastern Whip-poor-will is only eliminated by describing this song as "more reobust" [sic], but given that "robust" can have various meanings and could be affected by volume, I don't fell this is sufficient to eliminate Eastern Whip-poor-will.
2nd round:	8 Aug 2014	Acc,NAS	The record says that the song was "compared in field with iBird Plus" but it doesn't say which songs were compared, or whether Eastern Whip-poor-will was played. The entire distinction in this record between Eastern and Mexican Whip-poor-will lies in a single word, "reobust." No further description, details, or evidence is provided to eliminate Eastern Whip-poor-will. As with two other records we are currently considering, this would be only the second state record. I just don't feel confident hanging a second state record entirely on a single word in a written description from a single observer. It's really too bad the observer didn't make a recording with the same iPhone he used to broadcast the call.
Terry S..	3 Aug 2014	Acc	While it would be great to have a recording to review I believe the record should be accepted given the effort to distinguish the call from similar calls of Eastern Whip-poor-poor-will and possibly Poor-will.
2nd round:	15 Aug 2014	Acc,NAS	I can see Ryan's point here and I agree with him. With such few records for this area I believe we should be cautious in accepting species specific records without sounds recordings to evaluate as to which Whip-poor-will was heard
Dennis S.	7 Jul 2014	Acc	All we have to go on is the song. The reporter apparently compared songs of both Whip-poor-wills. In the past have the records reflected an Eastern or Mexican Whip-poor-will, or is this a new glitch we need to address? If so, is this a new listing for the State, or were the other(s) all the same?
2nd round:	13 Aug 2014	Acc
Jack S..	2 Aug 2014	No, ID	The 2008-12 record sets a high bar for identifying this species in Utah; This record does not approach that level of documentation. I could reconsider my vote, but I feel a tape recording is necessary to convincingly separate (Eastern) Whip-poor-will from recently split Mexican Whip-poor-will. The recording in 2008-12 suggests a Mexican Whip-poor-will.
2nd round:	17 Sep 2014	Acc,NAS
Steve S.	6 Jul 2014	Acc
2nd round:	6 Sep 2014	Acc	It seems from the report that [Eastern] Whip-poor-will was considered and rejected.
David W.	12 Jun 2014	Acc
2nd round:	22 Aug 2014	Acc	The observer states he compared the song with iBird Plus while in the field. He then specifically addresses the Eastern species possibility in the similar species portion. To me, it sounds like he considered that possibility.

2014-020 Little Blue Heron

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	26 Jul 2014	Acc
Bob B.	31 Jul 2014	Acc
Rick F.	7 Aug 2014	Acc	Limited description but convincing photos
Ryan O.	8 Aug 2014	Acc	Description doesn't address all the similar species, but the photos are convincing.
Terry S..	15 Aug 2014	Acc
Dennis S.	13 Aug 2014	Acc	Every birder in the State saw and photographed this bird (except my son Bryan and I)! We were there the first day it wasn't seen and never was again.
Jack S..	2 Aug 2014	Acc	Distinctive photographs and description.
Steve S.	6 Sep 2014	Acc
David W.	29 Jul 2014	Acc	Seen by many up close.

2014-021 Yellow-bellied Flycatcher

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	13 Oct 2014	No, ID	The main reasons I don't believe this is a Yellow-bellied Flycatcher are: 1) The eyering appears white with narrowing at the top and some of the photos show a widening behind the eye. This seems more consistent with a Western Flycatcher than a Yellow-bellied. 2) The primary tips show a wide gap between p4 and p5 (of the visible tips) which would indicate a Western. 3) The head shape appears slightly squared off at the back. Although it is not really peaked like a Western, it is also nor really rounded like a Yellow-bellied. 4) The coloration of the wings and back appear dull and less contrasting than a typical Yellow-bellied. The back color seems to have an olive brown tinge, and the wings appear dark brown rather than black which supports a Western as opposed to a Yellow-bellied.
2nd round:	12 Dec 2014	No, ID	For the same reasons I mentioned in the first round, I think this is a Western Flycatcher.
Bob B.	11 Sep 2014	No, ID	I am having difficulty with this bird. I cannot be sure if the photos from the three individuals are all of the same bird. I feel fairly strongly that the photos by Matt Pendleton are of a "western Flycatcher". If this is the same bird that all three photographed I don't believe it is a Yellow-bellied. The other photos are a bit more problematic. I believe if one looks carefully at the eye ring, it is not a distinct complete eye ring in most of the photos, and it is accentuated, at least in most of the photos, behind the eye. This would suggest Western. I have spent the summer at our cabin in northern Idaho on Priest Lake. We have "Western Flycatchers" nesting in our yard. This particular bird this year usually called with the Pacific-slope call note. I have spent extensive time observing the parents and the young. To be honest, the photos of Matt look pretty much Identical to the birds in our yard. At least on the first round I am going to vote no. I do feel that all the other empids can pretty much be eliminated.
2nd round:	12 Nov 2014	No, ID	After again reviewing the photos and the remarks of others, I am even more convinced that this is a "Western Flycatcher".
Rick F.	4 Nov 2014	No, ID	I believe this is a Western Flycatcher based on the primary spacing; there is a much larger gap between P5 and P6 than between P6 and P7 visible in full resolution images of photos. In addition the eye-ring appears thicker behind the eye and reduced above the eye in several photos and the wings appears browner (less dark and contrasting) with limited less contrasting tertial edging.
2nd round:	18 Dec 2014	No, ID	Primary spacing is the best mark for differentiating YB and Western Flycatchers and is consistent with a Western Flycatcher in the photos.
Ryan O.	16 Oct 2014	No, ID	I believe the photos show an almond-shaped eye ring that is incomplete or nearly incomplete on the top. The head also looks peaked and the bill long. Each of these traits is consistent with a "Western" Flycatcher.
2nd round:	4 Dec 2014	No, ID	For the same reasons as the first round. It s fascinating to me how much we can look at the same photos and come to different conclusions. I still perceive this bird as having an almond-shaped eye ring that is nearly incomplete at the top, a peaked head, and a long bill.
Terry S..	1 Oct 2014	No, ID	So many photos to review with some very goods looks at the primary wingtip spacing. I think the photos clearly show p5-p7 spacing of one large gap bracketed by two smaller gaps which would indicate a western flycatcher and not a yellow-bellied.
2nd round:	3 Dec 2014	No, ID	I still believe the primary spacing is not right for this to be a Yellow-bellied Flycatcher
Dennis S.	1 Nov 2014	Acc	I spent a morning on this record. At first I thought here we go again, another borderline Empidonax flycatcher. After once again reviewing all the guides, including a very good section on Empidonax flycatcher identification in Advanced Birding by Ken Kaufman, photos, and past records, I believe this record justifies acceptance. I can find no real conflicting characteristic from the photos or report. Granted the real problem is separation from the closely similar, and much more common, Cordilleran Flycatcher. The nearly complete, teardrop lacking eye ring, crestless, more rounded head, medium length primary projection, slightly darker wings, more yellowish throat, and bright orange lower mandible, all are consistent with a YBFL. Each of these characters are portrayed in the sets of photos submitted. The shared characters with COFL can include the yellowishness of the breast and belly and makes this character less valuable in fall migrants and juveniles. This would be our first accepted record, which makes for additional scrutiny.
2nd round:	20 Nov 2014	No, ID	I know this is a close call, and still believe it may be a Yellow-bellied Flycatcher, but I do generally agree with the committee that since it would be a FOS there needs to be a consensus.
Jack S..	6 Nov 2014	Acc	This is a difficult individual (and species) to separate from the more common Cordilleran Flycather. I'm voting a tentative yes however given the quality of the photographs provided with the record. The head is rounded without sign of a crest in any of the photographs provided. The wings bars and tertials are less contrasting with black than I would expect on an YBFL but this bird appears hatch year. The eye-ring is complete and has only a small rear extension in some photos. The bill is consistent with YBFL.
2nd round:	16 Dec 2014	No, ID	I'm reversing my vote to 'No,ID' on this record. After reading committee comments, and rereading my round one comments, I cannot confidently support this ID.
Steve S.	6 Nov 2014	Acc	There are a lot of things about this bird I like for Yellow-bellied Flycatcher, rounded head, yellowish round eye ring,and blackish wings.I wish the photos were clearer for showing primary spacing, but for first round I will vote to accept.
2nd round:	9 Dec 2014	No, ID	After reviewing the full sized photos I am changing my vote to no. If as I have read that the primary spacing is the critical deciding factor between Yellow-bellied and Western then this bird is a Western Flycatcher.
David W.	21 Oct 2014	No, ID	I think the gap pattern on the primaries and the shape of the eyering are enough for me to vote NO for now.
2nd round:	13 Nov 2014	No, ID	For the reasons stated in the first round, I still believe this to be a bright "Western" flycatcher.

2014-022 Blue-headed Vireo

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	13 Oct 2014	Acc
2nd round:	12 Dec 2014	Acc	After reviewing the remarks made by others, I still think this is a Blue-headed Vireo. The contrast between the head and the back, and the definite line between the throat and the blue-gray head indicate Blue-headed more than Cassin's to me.
3rd round:	10 Jan 2015	Acc	I still think Blue-headed, so no change to my vote.
Bob B.	11 Sep 2014	Acc	I believe it can be difficult to separate a "colorful" Cassin's from a Blue-headed Vireo. One point against this being a Blue-headed is the date as the Blue-headed, as I understand it, migrates later than this as a rule. However I agree that the description and the photos strongly suggest Blue-headed. In addition to what is stated, the wing bars are definitely yellowish and they should be white in a Cassin's. I believe this is a Blue-headed Vireo.
2nd round:	12 Nov 2014	Acc	I still feel the field marks favor Blue-headed so will continue to vote yes.
3rd round:	23 Dec 2014	Acc	I still feel this is most likely a Blue-headed Vireo and will continue to vote yes.
Rick F.	4 Nov 2014	No, ID	I don't believe the contrast / demarcation between the auriculars and throat or the head/ nape and mantle are great enough to rule out a bright Cassin's Vireo. Also the mantle color and tertial edging appear better for Cassin's Vireo. Both species of vireos molt on the breeding grounds so both are at their brightest during fall migration.
2nd round:	18 Dec 2014	No, ID	I think this is a bright Cassin's Vireo and lacks necessary diagnostic field marks for a Blue-headed Vireo (contrast between back and nape, contrast between auriculars and throat, tertials, etc.). At the reported time of year a Blue-headed Vireo should be in fresh (and brightest) plumage.
3rd round:	31 Jan 2015	No, ID	I'm really quite surprised so many members have voted to accept this record. I think this is a rather straight forward Cassin's Vireo and does not show any definitive field marks for a fresh fall Blue-headed Vireo.
Ryan O.	16 Oct 2014	Acc	Seems like there is a quite distinct demarcation between the white throat and blue-gray cheeks. Green back seems to contrast rather distinctly with the gray head (especially visible in photo C). This isn't the most clear-cut of examples, but I agree with the observer that this bird seems more consistent with Blue-headed than Cassin's.
2nd round:	4 Dec 2014	Acc	After considering other s remarks, I still see a bird with a blue-gray head contrasting with a greenish back (especially photo C), relatively distinct demarcation between the white throat and the blue-gray hood (photo D), and lores that do not stand out obviously in contrast to the hood color (photo C), all fitting Blue-headed Vireo and not Cassin s Vireo.
Terry S..	27 Sep 2014	No, ID	Bright fall Cassin's Vireos can be very difficult to distinguish from Blue-headed Vireos. I don't see the very sharp contrasting line between blue head with pale thoat in the malar area of the photographed bird. I would also expect the the dark bluish gray head to be noticeably darker than the back but can't see this in the photos.
2nd round:	26 Nov 2014	No, ID	I have looked at numerous photos of Solitary Vireo species for review of this record. I still don't see the very sharp contrasting line between the auricular area of the blue hood with the pale throat in the malar area of the photographed bird. the dark bluish gray head does not seem noticeably darker than the back.
3rd round:	30 Dec 2014	No, ID	I still believe this is a freshly molted Cassin's Vireo
Dennis S.	10 Oct 2014	Acc	The distinct contrast between gray-blue head and more olive colored back, and the yellowish wing bar is the deciding factors.
2nd round:	20 Nov 2014	Acc	I realize the main point of discussion is the brightness and extent of demarcation of the head coloration. To me if I were to describe the head color it wouldn't be a light gray with little contrast to its surrounding neck and upper parts. It would be a darker bluish/gray coloration and a much more line of demarcation. The darker loral line of Cassin's is extremely variable and is commonly found on Blue-headed. I would refer to the many photos of the two vireos on the net.
3rd round:	5 Jan 2015	Acc	I still lean towards a Blue-headed Vireo, for the same prior reasons.
Jack S..	4 Nov 2014	Acc
2nd round:	21 Dec 2014	No, ID	This was a difficult record to judge and I'm also changing my vote to a more conservative, 'No'. After reading the committee's comments and more study of this record I believe the contrast between the gray auricular and the white throat is not sharp enough for a freshly molted BH vireo; this bird is more likely, and safely identified as, a bright Cassin's Vireo.
3rd round:	30 Jan 2015	No, ID	Overall, this bird is more consistent with a Cassin's Vireo in fresh fall plumage and I will continue to vote no.
Steve S.	6 Nov 2014	Acc	I'm not sure where to draw the line between Blue-headed and Cassin's, but I will vote to accept based on the fairly clear line between the throat and the face and see what others have to say.
2nd round:	8 Dec 2014	Acc	I still think the contrast between the head and the back and the separation between face and throat indicate Blue-headed Vireo, though probably a female on the duller end of the spectrum.
3rd round:	21 Jan 2015	Acc	No change from former rounds.
Larry T. 3rd round:	16 Jan 2015	Acc	This is certainly a difficult one. There is overlap in a female B H and a Bright Cassin's. To ID a B H out of it's normal range I like to be able to see some contrast from the nape and the green back. The rest of the field marks can go either way on a difficult bird like this one. The photo C1 does to me seem to show enough contrast that I would call this a B H
David W.	29 Oct 2014	No, ID	I genuinely believe there is no distinct cutoff between field marks of the 3 varieties of Solitary vireo. One form flows into another in an unbroken cline. I assume the genetics must be clearer for the AOU to have accepted this split, but we are not, unfortunately, presented with a genetic sample. This individual is certainly bright, and initially I was going to vote for it despite it not being as bright as others I have seen (female?). I came across a purported field mark that differentiates a bright Cassins from a BH, and it is found in the article below (note comment on lores): http://www.sandiegobirding.com/?p=1125 I assume and hope someone will bump this into the second round.
2nd round:	16 Dec 2014	No, ID	Clearly this is a borderline individual. I still believe it could be a bright fall Cassin's.
3rd round:	22 Dec 2014	No, ID	This might be a female Blue-headed, but I remain of the opinion that this looks more like a bright Cassin's vireo. Like Terry, I have looked at many photos, and I am not convinced that a Cassin's can be eliminated. I am reassured of my opinion by Rick's comment regarding molt.

2014-023 Red Phalarope

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	13 Oct 2014	No, ID	This appears to be a Red-necked Phalarope. Note the color of the back (streaked/mottled gray) and the length and shape of the bill. This is clearly not the same bird Tim Avery took photos of earlier that same day.
2nd round:	12 Dec 2014	No, ID	I still believe this is a Red-necked Phalarope. As others have said, the description does not match the photos. So, based on the photos, the darker markings and streaking on the back and the length and shape of the bill indicate a non-breeding Red-necked Phalarope to me. Page 218 in The Shorebird Guide by O'Brien, Crossley, and Karlson has a Red-necked Phalarope photo which is almost identical to the photos provided for this record.
Bob B.	11 Sep 2014	Acc	I believe this is a Red Phalarope, but I don't believe it is an adult, but rather a molting juvenile. The bill is most compatable with a Red Phalarope, and the apparent direct comparison with several Red-necked Phalarope was apparently helpful.
2nd round:	12 Nov 2014	No, ID	I am going to back track on this bird. The more I look at the bill the more it looks like a Red-necked Phalarope. And the back certainly does look streaky. I am changing my vote from yes to no. The description about the birds size is not enough to convince me in view of the photos.
Rick F.	4 Nov 2014	No, ID	Description includes some key marks for Red Phalarope, however the photo is of a Red-necked Phalarope.
2nd round:	18 Dec 2014	No, ID	Despite the written text, the bird in the photo is a Red-necked Phalarope.
Ryan O.	16 Oct 2014	Acc
2nd round:	4 Dec 2014	Acc	The written description is pretty convincing on its own, and it seems we d (ironically) probably not be debating the identification if there were no photos attached to the record. So why do the photos seem so contradictory? I believe most of this comes down to a misidentification of the age of this bird, by both the original finder and the submitters of the report: it was reported as an adult, but I believe it is actually a first-winter bird. This explains both the relatively streaked back (not as streaked as Red-necked Phalarope, but significantly more streaked than most illustrations of non-breeding Red Phalaropes, where adults are usually illustrated), and the black-based bill. As with the back, most field guides illustrate adults in winter (neither my western Nat Geo nor my Sibley show a first-winter bird), and adults have pale-based bills, but first-winter birds can have solidly black bills, especially this early in the season. My only hesitation with th! is record is how thin the bill appears in photo B, but in both photos A and C it appears typical of Red Phalarope and too thick for Red-necked. Even in photo B, I d describe it as intermediate, or in the range of overlap, for the two species. This change of apparent shape between photos is in itself a good field mark for Red Phalarope: In addition to a usually THICKER bill, the bill of a Red Phalarope is also much FLATTER than that of Red-necked. I believe the bill s apparent thickness differs in these photos precisely because of its flat shape, where more top and front views like in photo A make the bill appear wider, and more strictly lateral views like in B make it look thinner. In comparing photos B and C, note how much of the top of the head we can see: the head is tilted ear-down towards us in photo C, again emphasizing the broader flat shape of the top of the bill, where it is tilted up in a more level view in B, showing the relatively narrow side view. I am sti! ll convinced this is a (first-winter, not adult) Red Phalarope.
Terry S..	22 Oct 2014	Acc
2nd round:	26 Nov 2014	No, ID	While I still believe this may be a Red Phalarope, the photos raise some questions. I don't think see a good look at the back and the bill may be in the range of a Red-necked Phalarope. However comparing the size of the photographed phalarope to nearby Franklin gulls makes me believe it is a large phalarope. Until there is more conclusive photos I vote not accept the record.
Dennis S.	10 Oct 2014	Acc	Short, stout bill and thick, black, eye stripe is conclusive.
2nd round:	20 Nov 2014	Acc	After again examining the record text and photos, I still think the points made concerning comparison with associated Red-necked Phalaropes, size difference, bill length, grayish mantle with little streaking, and additional timely observations, all confirm a Red Phalarope. The photos may raise questions, but with or without them the report is sufficient for acceptance.
Jack S..	2 Nov 2014	Acc
2nd round:	16 Dec 2014	No, ID	I'm also reversing my vote to 'No, ID' in the second round. And I agree with many others that there is a real disconnect between the text and the photographs.
Steve S.	1 Oct 2014	No, ID	Nice photos of a Red-necked Phalarope
2nd round:	8 Dec 2014	No, ID	Description is consistent with Red Phalarope, but photos to me show Red-necked. In Dennis Paulson guide Shorebirds of North America there is a photo of an immature [not juvenile] Red Phalarope on page 348 which does not match this bird at all.
David W.	21 Oct 2014	No, ID	(10 Sep 2014 - Acc) The photo is more ambiguous than the description might suggest. In the photos, it almost looks like there might be white stripes on the back/mantle. And the bills on some of the Red phalaropes I've seen have been thicker than the one in the photo appears to be. But, since it is hard to be sure from this photo, I'll have to go with the written description. (21 Oct 2014 - No, ID) Boy, this bird is very intermediate in its field marks. I find the photos and write-up to be a bit incongruous. It's bill is well within Red-necked range, and certainly not as thick as most of the Red phalaropes I have seen, nor what I would describe as "very thick." The head pattern (extent of white on forecrown and shape/extent of black eyepatch) is a bit better for a RN than Red, but could be either. The back mottling/flank streaking is intermediate too. However, the description of this bird as bigger than the other Red-necks around it is a good field mark, and I may rely on that in the end. For now, I am going to vote NO to bump it into the second round.
2nd round:	13 Nov 2014	No, ID	I still believe the photos don't match the description. I have been told by others that there WAS a Red phalarope there earlier in the day, but I do not believe, if that is the case, that the bird in these photos is it.

2014-024 Ovenbird

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	13 Oct 2014	Acc
Bob B.	20 Sep 2014	Acc	Great photos
Rick F.	20 Oct 2014	Acc
Ryan O.	16 Oct 2014	Acc	I do believe the three Ovenbird records we are voting on right now (2014-029, 2014-028, and 2014-024) each represent a different individual.
Terry S..	1 Oct 2014	Acc	Great photos!
Dennis S.	10 Oct 2014	Acc	Nice photo.
Jack S..	13 Oct 2014	Acc
Steve S.	1 Oct 2014	Acc	Not much for description, but photos show an Ovenbird
David W.	21 Oct 2014	Acc	Nice photos.

2014-025 Pacific Golden-Plover

Evaluator	Date	Vote	Comment
Kathy B.	13 Oct 2014	No, ID	Description of "slender, streamlined" and the field marks and identifying characteristics could refer to an American Golden-plover. Overall, American Golden-plover hasn't been adequately eliminated as a similar species.
Bob B.	14 Oct 2014	No, ID	I am uncomfortable voting yes on a bird that I feel is likely a Pacific Golden-Plover, but I am just not sure. The photo is of very poor quality, likely in part due to the angle of the sun, but it is really of no help. What little I can make of the photo to me looks more like a Black-bellied Plover. I would like to see this go to the second round for comments.
Rick F.	4 Nov 2014	No, ID	Description is too sparse and photo is marginal to differentiate a PGPl from AGPl.
Ryan O.	13 Oct 2014	No, ID	Description is not sufficient to rule out American or European Golden-Plovers, or even some Black-bellied Plovers. I think we need more quantitative or objective field marks than relative terms like "longer" (compared to what?) and "slightly" in describing critical traits like primary extension. How many primary tips, for example? Can we be certain the bird wasn't missing an outer primary feather? (A juvenile wouldn't be expected to be in flight feather molt, but a feather can always be damaged.) Even if we take the observer's word that the primary projection was short, what about this record eliminates (admittedly even less likely) European Golden-Plover?
Terry S..	1 Oct 2014	No, ID	Better photos and more detail is needed to separate this possible Pacific Golden-Plover from an American Golden-Plover.
Dennis S.	1 Nov 2014	No, ID	The poor photograph adds nothing to the identification and the report doesn't adequately separate the likelihood of it being a juvenile AMGP. The prominence of the supercilium is variable in both species. PAGP oftentimes has a well formed and light colored eye stripe and the bright juvenile coloration in both can be variable in goldenness.
Jack S..	23 Nov 2014	No, ID
Steve S.	6 Nov 2014	No, ID	I can't tell anything from the photo and if this is what the observer was seeing I don't know how they could separate an American from a Pacific.
David W.	29 Oct 2014	No, ID	Boy, that light looks pretty dicey. Perhaps that's just a product of digiscoping? I don't feel I have enough to eliminate other Pluvialis species.