Derrick Marven wrote:

"Dennis Paulson writes that the gull is a typical (Kumlien's) Iceland Gull,
please Dennis to help us all what are the identifying fields marks for a
typical Kumlien's. And without seeing the underwing pattern how can you be
so sure with this rare West coast species, or maybe did you see the
underwing?"

Yes, I did see the underwing, Derrick, on numerous occasions (the bird
flaps its wings as it runs after pieces of bread, and it's easy to see the
underwide of the droopy wing from the opposite side), but I'm not sure why
that is so important. The pattern differentiating the Greenland-breeding
subspecies of Iceland Gull Larus glaucoides glaucoides from the
Canadian-breeding Larus glaucoides kumlieni is easy to see on the upper
wing surface. I've never heard of the necessity of seeing the underwing,
and Peter Grant, although he describes the pattern from below, doesn't
imply the necessity of seeing that pattern in his book on gulls.

Interestingly, Grant does talk about Kumlien's gulls being rather constant,
and the photo and drawing in that book (and the illustration in the NGS
field guide) show a very different pattern on the outer primaries from the
bird in Tacoma. This is surprising to me, as birds I photographed in the
National Museum of Natural History from the breeding grounds showed a
rather variable pattern of gray on the outer primaries, including the
pattern shown by the Tacoma bird. This same pattern was evident on one or
more of the birds that spent the winter at Iona Island about 15 years ago,
and all agreed that those were Kumlien's Iceland Gulls.

Other than gray markings on the outer primaries, there are no differences
between the two subspecies of Iceland Gulls (not including Thayer's as one
of them).

Derrick also wrote:

"This bird is not an Iceland Gull, if anything it is a Kumliens Gull, there
is a major difference and people should not be refering to it as Iceland,
and untill the underwing pattern is seen there is no way of telling, i
don't care who the experts are they can't tell. I might also add i have
already seen pictures of this gull. Kumlien's in itself is not a
recognised species and should be treated with great caution in identifying
a bird like this. Everybody is jumping to conclusions without first
getting all the fieldmarks. It's a bad sign when so and so says it's one
so it must be?"

You're absolutely right to question the "experts," Derrick, but if you do
so you should do your homework very thoroughly. They might just be
considered experts because they know more than you do about the subject in
question. As the two are subspecies of the same species, if it's a
Kumlien's Gull it indeed is an Iceland Gull (the species common name). And
in fact no one jumped to any conclusions. "All field marks noted" is a
good description for this very thorough observation. The original
observers were very cautious about their identification, and even though
several people were quite confident about its identity, Ruth Sullivan
insisted that I - as someone who has done a lot of research on gull
identification and seen quite a few Icelands - take a look at it. I was
happy to support the original identification. I wonder what more you think
we might do.

The bird was there at 10 a.m. this morning, but it seemed slightly less
perky than it did yesterday. I fed it some whole wheat bread today, hoping
to give it a little more nourishment than the Wonder Bread we gave it
yesterday, but it probably needs other food than that to survive. It
certainly can't go out and find its own.

Dennis Paulson, Director phone 253-756-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax 253-756-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail dpaulson at ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/museum.html