1st Round Voting Comments

Record #: 5-B-86

Red-throated Loon

1st Round: 5-2
2nd Round: 5-2
ACCEPT

1st Round
(5 Accept, 2 Reject)

2nd Round
(5 Accept, 2 Reject)

Shirley Sturts -- Accept

Brief but good description - competent observer plus 3 other observers

 07-05-2007.
Sturts -- Accept

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

Chuck Trost -- Accept

Multiple observers, and Paul is well qualified. Good description.

07-14-2007.
chuck trost -- Accept

I agree that the description is minimal, but it is good enough and the season is right.

Cliff Weisse -- Accept

Description consistent with Red-throated Loon.

7/8/07.
Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established

Upon reconsideration I'm changing my vote to reject because the description does not include field marks that can be used to rule out other species.

Dave Trochlell -- Accept

I accept this record, but with some reservations because of its brevity.

07-12-2007.
Dave Trochlell -- Accept

I'll accept this record again, but with the same reservations because of the report's brevity.

Carlisle -- Accept

Critical field marks noted.

7-10-07.
Carlisle -- Accept

2 key structural details (bill & forehead) noted - plumage details would have been nice.

Dumroese -- Reject, specific identification not established

This report lacks any details about the RTLO.

8 July 2007.
Hardy -- Accept

This is an inadequate description. I accept this report only because of the multiple competent observers, two of whom I am acquainted with.

Charles Swift -- Reject, specific identification not established

I am voting to 'not accept' although I'm inclined to think a Red-throated Loon was probably seen. I would like to see further discussion how to handle reports like these. This is a rare but probably regulary occurring (probably annual) species in at least northern Idaho. Is it reasonable to accept a lower quality report for a species like this? Including these records will provide a cleared picture of timing and regularity of occurrence.

 7/29/07.
Charles Swift -- Reject, specific identification not established

See previous comments. The description is incomplete particularly with respect to pattern of face. I think there is a good case to reject this record based on how the committee has been voting on similar reports.