Voting Comments
Record #: 7-B-00
Cassin's Kingbird
1st Round: 6-1
2nd Round: 6-1
ACCEPT
|
1st Round |
2nd Round |
| 07-11-2007. Sturts -- Accept Field marks provided fit that of the Cassin's. Two Western Kingbirds and one Eastern Kingbird were present for comparrison. The observer is familiar with all three species. |
11-05-2007. Sturts -- Accept I'm staying with my first vote for the same reasons. I believe the white throat vs the white malar mark to be a difference in terminology. C. Weisse, in doing some reseach found a reference in which the malar is referred to as the "throat", Identification Guide to North American Birds, Peter Pyle. |
| 07-15-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Accept The description is adequate and the observer is well-experienced with the species in question. |
12-07-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Accept Unfortunately the description mentioned that the bird had a white throat (twice!), but I can easily forgive this error as a misidentification of the bird's white malar area. Otherwise I'd consider the description as acceptable for a Cassin's Kingbird. |
| 07-16-2007. chuck trost -- Accept Seen on two occasions, and field marks well described - darker chest, white throat, no white on sides of tail, and tannish tip. |
11-11-2007. chuck trost -- Accept Again, I believe it was adequately observed and described. |
| 7/20/07. Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established Observer claims familiarity with the species but I am troubled by two points in his written description. Size is described as noticeably larger than Western Kingbird. I have never seen this species but measurements in Sibley don't seem enough to be noticeable in the field, 1/4 inch longer (8.75/9) and 6 grams heavier (40/46). More problematic is the description, in two separate places, of a white throat. Cassin's has a gray throat and white malar. Maybe the observer meant white malar but the written descriptions do not reflect this. For these reasons I'm not comfortable accepting this record. |
11/6/07. Cliff Weisse -- Accept After discussion and further research I am convinced that the documentation is conclusive. |
| 7-29-07. Carlisle -- Accept Important field marks noted - contrast with Westerns helpful. |
11-11-2007. Carlisle -- Accept no change from 1st round |
| 6 August 2007. Hardy -- Accept Report describes diagnostic fieldmarks such as light-colored terminal tail band and darker breast. |
8 January 2008. Hardy -- Accept Same comments as round 1. |
| 10/8/2007. Charles Swift -- Accept The description appears to be sufficient and the observer is familiar with the species. |
7-B-00. Charles Swift -- Reject, specific identification not established I've had second thoughts about this sighting and have decided to change my vote. Primarily I am concerned about the amount of detail the observer claims to have seen from a moving vehicle. Also in each sighting, upon stopping, the bird flew off not affording careful study. This species has only been recorded twice previously in the state so is sufficiently rare I feel to require a more solid sighting. |
More on:
accept and white
Page
powered by
Go FTP FREE
Program