Voting Comments-5-B-91

1^st Round Voting Comments

Record #: 5-B-91

Snowy Plover

1st Round: 2-5
2nd Round: 2-5
NOT ACCEPT

1^st Round (2 Accept, 5 Reject)	2^nd Round (2 Accept, 5 Reject)
12-10-2006. Shirley Sturts -- Reject, specific identification not established Earl is an excellent birder and the bird was likely a Snowy Plover. However, his documentation was lacking in detail. I was a bit confused by his comment that the bird was in breeding plumage, when the field guides indicate nonbreeding plumage from September to February.	07-21-2007. Sturts -- Reject, specific identification not established Earl is an excellent birder and is familiar with the species but his documentation still does not convince me that this was a Snowy Plover. I wish he had gone into more detail. The Sanderling, for example, has black bill and legs, and it is often seen in the Sandpoint area during fall migration.
12-11-06. Carlisle -- Accept Pretty minimal description but likely correct. Date seems strange but what else could it be?	7-29-07. Carlisle -- Accept See first vote comments .... and .... while I fully agree that the description is minimal at best and I see Cliff's point about Sanderling being much more likely at such a late date, I doubt Earl would make that kind of error. Also, while the date is later than other records in the NW, crazier things have happened.
12/11/2006 Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established This report may be of a Snowy Plover but I'm not convinced. The description is minimal and gives a length of 5.5 inches. However it doesn't explain how that size was estimated. The rest of the description, "white with dark markings (Breeding Plumage) all black bill and legs", doesn't give any details about the pattern of the markings. In addition, Snowy Plover should not be in breeding plumage in late October. Another concern is the date of the sighting, October 28. The latest record I could find for Snowy Plover in Idaho is on September 4, and Paulson (Shorebirds of the Pacific Northwest, 1993) lists the latest record for the interior northwest as September 9. Given the fact that this is well outside the known range for Snowy Plover, the date is much later than any other known record for the region, and the details in the description are sketchy I feel this report is not convincing. I also feel that the description of white with dark markings, black legs, and black bill combined with the extremely late date is at least suggestive of Sanderling.	7/28/07. Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established This description does not rule out the more expected Sanderling.
12-11-2006. chuck trost -- Accept Multiple observers and adequate (barely) write-up. the date is a bit late, but I believe Earl.	08-07-2007. chuck trost -- Reject, specific identification not established I'm switching my vote because of the late date and the very minimal description. I know Earl is a careful observer, but he has to be more specific about his discriptions.
12-15-2006. Dave Trochlell -- Reject, specific identification not established This is a regretable case where weak documentation can sink a record. The description of this record candidate is altogether too brief and skeletal, and not convincing enough for Snowy Plover. That's too bad, because I know the observer to be a talented birder who is familiar with this species.	07-27-2007. Dave Trochlell -- Reject, specific identification not established I'm going to stick with my original vote on this one, because the description was altogether too brief.
01-02-2007. dumroese -- Reject, specific identification not established Knowing the observer, this was a SNPL. But, this report is too scant on description. If the observer would have taken a moment to describe "breeding plumage" more fully, I would have been moved to accept. But only having black legs and black bill doesn't rule out juvy Mongolian Plover.	6 August 2007. Hardy -- Accept Here I am voting on the sighting and not the quality of documentation, which is deficient. I have no doubt that Chapin saw a Snowy Plover; I fully trust that he is capable of distinguishing a plover from a Sanderling. As for Chapin's note that this bird was in "breeding plumage", I found that Paulson 1993 says that "Birds may be in this plumage from January to November." This record is, however, extremely late and well outside the envelope for the latest interior date of Sept. 9 quoted by Paulson. I don't find the late date as much of a stretch when I consider that SNPL are not complete migrants; they routinely winter on the coast of Oregon which is not that far distant. Plus they are a very small population, which means there are fewer vagrant individuals to wander around establishing records. BTW, the 8 Least Sandpipers is quite the unusual record for late October in the interior.
1/2/07. Charles Swift -- Reject, specific identification not established Earl is a very competent birder but I suspect this bird was mis-identified. The description does not eliminate Sanderling which seems a much more likely candidate, especially at this date. I wish there were pictures!	7/29/07. Charles Swift -- Reject, specific identification not established See previous comments. I concur with the general feeling that the description is incomplete and does not eiliminate Sanderling as a possibility.