1st Round

2nd Round

4/14/09
Weisse – Accept

6/3/09
Cliff Weisse--Accept

Although the description is minimal I feel Iceland and "Nelson's" (Herring x Glaucous) Gulls are eliminated. Iceland by combination of size, white wing tips and buffy barring on upparparts (Iceland appears similarly pale dorsally but that impression is created by extensive white with limited brown markings, not by pale or buff coloration of dark barring of upperparts); Nelson's by the white primaries. Obviously a more thorough report is desirable but I feel this is adequate to confirm the identification.

04-17-2009
Dave Trochlell--Reject, specific identification not established

Although this was most likely a first or second-cycle Glaucous Gull, the description doesn't assure me that it couldn't have been an Iceland Gull or one of the various Glaucous Gull hybrids.

06-08-2009
Dave Trochlell--Accept

I finally decided to accept this record, though I'm still bothered by the fact that the observer identified this flyby gull (of about one minute duration) mostly on the basis of its bill pattern. The observer also identified it as a GLGU because it was large; in fact, he said that it was "larger than a Herring Gull". But that would be an unsupportable observation in my opinion without another gull next to it for size comparison.

04-18-2009
Sturts --Accept

It bothers me some that the bird was only seen for a minute or so in flight but the description fits that of a first winter Glaucous Gull.

07-02-2009
Sturts--Accept

I'm staying with my first round vote for the same reason.

26 April 2009
Hardy--Accept

White primaries and bill pattern are diagnostic.

5 July 2009
Hardy--Accept

Same comments as first round.

04-28-2009
chuck trost--Accept

The stated size, coloration, and bicolored bill all sound good to me, although there is no direct comparison with HEGU size.

06-27-2009
chuck trost--Reject, specific identification not established

I'm switching because I don't think he had an adequate time of observation nor description of other possibilities was good enough.

4/28/2009
Darren Clark--Accept

The written description, though brief, eliminates other species and supports the identification of this bird as a Glaucous Gull.

07/09/2009
Darren Clark--Accept

Even though the sighting was brief. I'm comfortable with the description of the bird.

05-29-2009
Doug Ward--Accept

While the report is limited in detail, general comparative discussion, distinctive plumage and bill coloration descriptions sufficient to accept.

07-06-2009
Doug Ward--Accept

While sketchy, enough detail is provided to substantiate identification. I’m reiterating my 1st round vote.