Voting Comments

Voting Comments

Record #: 4-A-01

Harris's Hawk

1st Round: 3-3 ("historic" comments not available)
1st Round "contemporary": 2-5
2nd Round: 1-6
NOT ACCEPT

1^st Round (2 Accept, 5 Reject)	2^nd Round (1 Accept, 6 Reject)
07-22-2007. Sturts -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable As I understand it, the Harris's Hawk is popular among falconers. I'm thinking that the chances of this being an escaped bird is greater than the possibilty of it wondering so far from its normal range. Oregon had a rare bird report for a Harris's on 12 June 1979 in the Trout Creek Mountain area, Harney County. It did not accept this record on the grounds of its origin being questionable. I could find no records for Montana or Washington.	010-01-2007. Sturts -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable I'm staying with my 1st vote. Nothing in the comments changed my mind about the probability of this being a falconers escaped bird.
07-27-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable I don't dispute the identification of this one, but the origin is troubling. Making a case against natural occurence is the fact that Harris's Hawks are commonly kept by falconers, and in the wild the species is relatively sedentary and seldom goes far astray.	010-14-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable Once again, I'm rejecting this Harris's Hawk record on the basis of the bird's questionable origin. Despite the lack of jesses or bands, I think there's a high liklihood that it was a falconer's bird that had escaped or was released. And finally, it troubles me that there are no accepted records in our neighboring states.
7/28/07. Cliff Weisse -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable While I'm inclined to accept this record I'm not sure what to think about this being a possible escaped falconry bird. I did a little research and it seems like it is possible for this to be a true vagrant despite the sedentary reputation of this species. I would expect an escaped bird to be banded and to have been reported as missing. However I also can see the possibility of someone deciding to just release the bird and removing the band before doing so. This is a difficult record and I'd like to see it discussed before voting is finished.	10/4/2007. Cliff Weisse -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable Charles comments extend the length of time this individual remained in the area raising further suspicion that it could have been an escaped falconry bird, or a purposely released falconry bird in which case I suspect bands and jesses would have been removed(?).
6 August 2007. Hardy -- Accept The reports and photos identify an adult Harris's Hawk, and so the question is whether this bird is an escaped falconry bird. I base my decision on the lack of jesses, bands, etc., the lack of a reported missing bird at the time, and the occurrence of other apparent vagrants in the West in previous years. It does appear to be the most northerly record yet, and I would easily change my vote to reject if there were even a shred of evidence that this was a falconry bird.	4 November 2007. Hardy -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable There is no way to know if this is a wild bird or an escaped falconry bird. I have listened to the arguments of my fellow committee members, and am switching my vote to reject, based on the greater chance that this bird is an escapee rather than a wild bird far north of its range. Apparently falconers' birds are not usually marked or banded in any way, and the jesses they are required to use fall off within a few days of a bird's escape, making it likely that any escapee will quickly be indistinguishable from a wild bird. For these reasons, if there were a pattern of vagrancy to the northwest, we are not going to be able to distinguish it.
08-07-2007. chuck trost -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable I'm quite convinced that it was a Harris' Hawk, but as the reporter said, they are quite popular with falconers. The fact that it stuck around for so long makes me suspicious too.	010-06-2007. chuck trost -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable I know how popular this species is with falconers, and the lack of a band would be expected in an escaped falconer's bird. While I feel certain the ID was correct, I'm not convinced that the bird got there via natural means.
8-23-07. Carlisle -- Accept This is a tough one (natural occurrence?). However, the wild behavior (though, given our discussion about CACG, how reliable is this?) and lack of jesses at least suggests at the possibility of a wild bird. The species has a large range (I've seen them in Lima, Peru) and Dave's comments about other reports in northern states helped to sway me towards thinking it might be a wild bird.	12-12-2007. Carlisle -- Accept Though I have concerns about origin, I am still inclined to accept based on the lack of evidence (jesses, etc.) of prior captivity.
9/11/2007. Charles Swift -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable First some additional information, a Harris's Hawk, almost certainly this individual, was seen by me on the Lewiston-Clarkston CBC on 1/5/2002 extending the period of its occurrence considerably. I believe it may have been present through the spring of 2002. Based on this and other information already presented I believe it highly likely that this bird was an escaped falconers bird and there are plenty of falconers and breeders in the Palouse region. Even though none reported it is likely (as in the case of exotic waterfowl) that not all escapeds are reported. It seems highly unlikely that a bird so out of range would have stayed in the same small area for such a long period of time. Also, despite some evidence of an expanding range, there are no recent confirmed records of the species in the Pac. NW.	10/22/07. Charles Swift -- Reject, natural occurrence questionable See round 1 comments.