Subject: Fwd: Renton GBBG comment, ID-F response
Date: Feb 3 09:21:39 2004
From: Kathy Andrich - chukarbird at yahoo.com


Hi Gene,

I am not expert at all with gulls and realize they are
very difficult to identify. I enjoy their behavior
more than anything, they have a very high capacity for
"goofing off" like the crows do which I find most fun
to observe.

I am sorry if I offended you or anyone else. I only
recieved one complaint of being out of line with my
post. Ah well, I should stick to what I know. Phil
did have a point that the email list has a delete
button. I read all the posts because I want to know
if anyting new has been added to the information
already gathered, but it doesn't seem so.

Kathy

Kathy Andrich
Roosting in Kent
chukarbird at yahoo.com

--- Eugene and Nancy Hunn <enhunn at comcast.net> wrote:
> Kathy,
>
> We are all gull experts.
>
> Gene.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kathy Andrich" <chukarbird at yahoo.com>
> To: <philliplc at harborside.com>;
> <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 4:53 PM
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Renton GBBG comment, ID-F response
>
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > This may be a redundant question but have any of
> the
> > people who commented on this gull been nationaly
> or
> > internationally known gull experts? What would
> they
> > think or would they have time to peruse the
> photo's
> > and comment?
> >
> > I may in left field asking this, as I am not sure
> who
> > is expert, but have read many comments about this
> > gull's possible parentage and wonder, is all the
> > measuring of photo's, etc. necessary?
> >
> > Then again I noticed shortly after begining
> birding
> > how people like to "discuss" the fine points of
> birds
> > they are looking at.
> >
> > By the way I did go once to look for the gull but
> it
> > was out to lunch, probably at the landfill.
> >
> > Kathy
> >
> > Kathy Andrich
> > Roosting in Kent
> > chukarbird at yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > --- Phillip Pickering <philliplc at harborside.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Structurally it's prefect, and I see
> > > > nothing to suggest it's any type of hybrid.
> > >
> > >
> > > My opinion aside, if that were true why would
> some
> > > of those
> > > who are intimately familiar with GBBG have
> expressed
> > > such a low
> > > comfort level with the structure? (both on the
> list
> > > and in personal
> > > comm.) If it were structurally perfect that
> wouldn't
> > > happen, at
> > > least not to anywhere near the extent it has.
> The
> > > series of photos is
> > > excellent, and there's no reason to suspect that
> > > they are misleading
> > > anyone.
> > >
> > > I bring this up (again, sorry) to amplify the
> point
> > > that there are
> > > both multiple positive and negative opinions out
> > > there about
> > > this bird - and it seems that, at least for some
> in
> > > Washington, the
> > > tendency might be to give more weight to the
> > > positive and be less
> > > attentive of the negative, when in the case of a
> > > potential first state
> > > record such as this the exact opposite should be
> > > true. Even if you
> > > don't agree with them, the fact that others who
> are
> > > familiar with
> > > GBBG are questioning it at all should be
> > > disconcerting for such an
> > > extralimital bird, particularly if you take
> > > seriously Tony Leukering's
> > > argument about intergrades potentially being
> more
> > > prone to
> > > wander out of range than pure birds.
> > >
> > > As for myself, in extensive photo study (pushing
> 300
> > > photos of well
> > > over 200 birds) I have not been able to find a
> GBBG
> > > that shows a
> > > structure similar to the Washington bird.
> Compared
> > > to their body bulk
> > > GBBG seem to invariably have proportionately
> larger
> > > heads, eyes, and
> > > bills, seem to almost invariably be more
> attenuated
> > > in the rear and have
> > > much flatter bellies, and seem to almost
> invariably
> > > have a steeper, less
> > > gradual culmen downcurve. If 200+ birds can be
> > > considered an
> > > adequate sample, at the fine level necessary to
> > > confirm it IMO as
> > > a whole the bird does not appear to be within
> the
> > > normal structural
> > > range of variation of pure GBBG *at all*. The
> > > structure is that odd.
> > > As Alvaro said, it doesn't really fit anything,
> > > which for me sounds a
> > > fire alarm that, even though the patterning is
> close
> > > to GBBG, there
> > > is still a very high probability of it being an
> > > intergrade.
> > >
> > > Respectfully,
> > >
> > > Phil Pickering
> > > Lincoln City, Oregon
> > > philliplc at harborside.com
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool.
> Try it!
> > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/