1^st Round Voting Comments

Record #: 1-B-76

White-tailed Ptarmigan

Send to 2nd Round -- 3 Accept, 4 Reject

###############

Shirley Sturts -- Accept

brief description but suported by comments from Earl Chapin.

###############

Chuck Trost -- Reject, specific identification not established

The wings were probably ptarmigans, but the description is too vague and not enough detail is provided.

###############

Dave Trochlell -- Reject, specific identification not established

At only six words, this bird description is just too short and unconvincing. In fact, we don't really know for sure where the wings he examined originated. Furthermore, we can't be swayed toward a vote of acceptance based upon a friend's testimony about the reporter's integrity.

###############

Cliff Weisse -- Reject, specific identification not established

The description of the wings is not sufficient to confirm the identity.

###############

Carlisle -- Accept

Report doesn't help much but supporting comments provide necessary details. The species occurs in neighboring states/provinces and the report comes from likely habitat and includes wings seen by a game warden.

###############

Charles Swift -- Accept

Brief description of wings but I am inclined to accept. Based on Earl Chapin's report it seems that WT Ptarmagin have been regularly sighted in the mountain ranges mentioned (and are within range according to field guides). I would think the main question of interest now is are they persisting. I am inclined to think we do not need to review additional historical records of this species if they come to light.

###############

Dumroese -- Reject, specific identification not established

Insufficient details for me. If only wings are the evidence, then more detail about them is necessary.

###############