Re: Re[4]: The Conowingo Gull and the Records Committee
Jlstasz@aol.com
Tue, 17 Feb 1998 19:19:42 EST
Hi Folks!
Kathy Klimkiewicz wrote:
"I agree but again feel that no one should emphatically state that
'this bird cannot be a Common Gull' when they have not even seen any
documentation from the person(s) who first saw the bird in question. "
Documentation from someone else can not replace first hand experience. There
is a running joke among a group of birders...."Did Mark & Michael see the bird
well enough that I can list it?" It does not matter what someone else saw:
what did You see and how did you reach your conclusion?
I saw and photographed The Conowingo Gull. I have read the relevant literature
and have had the pleasure...though many years ago...of examining all of the
Common Gull (Larus canus canus) specimens at the Smithsonian. It was actually
a lot of fun, but also my job. I was employed at the time on the team which
was entering specimen data into a computer database. Our job was to verify the
identification of every specimen....we discovered numerous errors which were
double-checked by the Curators. The Gull Collection still has
problems...mainly in the Larus argentatus complex.....the Ring-billed/Common
Gull specimens are correctly identified.
I have never been to Europe to see a live Common Gull.....but will gladly
visit if someone will supply the airfare.
I have seen literally hundreds of thousands of Ring-billed Gulls. There is a
range of variation in all plumages. Nothing about The Conowingo Gull is
inconsistent with being a Ring-billed Gull. The pattern of the wing coverts is
not consistent with the pattern described in literature or the specimens in
the Smithsonian for a Common Gull.
The only thing that may move me to the opinion that the bird could be a Common
Gull would be authoritative sources that indicate the wing covert spots on
Common Gull can be arrowhead-shaped, like Ring-billed Gull. ]
On a similar note, some may recall that a Selasphorus hummingbird visited my
feeder several years ago. I have been asked "Has it been conclusively
identified as a Rufous or Allen's, or is it simply a Selasphorus?" I would
ask all who saw the bird to give their opinion...and why they made the
identification. To date, only one observer has submitted documentation and
their opinion to the MD/DC Records Committe. Of you saw the bird and have
notes or simply an opinion, please send something to the Records Committee. I
have my own opinion, but until I complete some further research into an as yet
untested method of discriminating between Rufous and Allen's.....I shall
remain silent.
Good Birding!
Jim
Jim Stasz
North Beach MD
jlstasz@aol.com