LOUISIANA
REPORT FORM
|
1. English and Scientific names: Glaucous Gull (Larus hyperboreus) |
|
2. Number of individuals, sexes, ages, general plumage
(e.g., 2 in alternate plumage): |
|
|
|
3. Locality: Parish: Plaquemines |
|
Specific Locality:
end of |
|
4. Date(s) when observed: 12 April 2014 |
|
|
|
5. Time(s) of day when observed: 2:40 PM |
|
|
|
6. Reporting observer and address: Cameron Rutt, Baton
Rouge, LA, 70806 |
|
|
|
7. Other observers accompanying reporter who also identified
the bird(s): None |
|
|
|
8. Other observers who independently identified the
bird(s): None |
|
|
|
9. Light conditions (position of bird in relation to shade
and to direction and amount of light): The bird was in good afternoon light,
as it was observed resting and flying to the east of my vantage point. Although,
since it was in the mid-afternoon, the light was rather flat and harsh,
especially for a bird that was gleaming white; when the sun was not hidden
beneath the clouds, the bird basically glowed in the bright sunshine. |
|
|
|
10. Optical equipment (type, power, condition): Swarovski
EL 8.5x42 binoculars, a Swarovski ST-80 scope with a 20-60x zoom eyepiece,
and a Canon 60D with a 400mm f/5.6L |
|
|
|
11. Distance to bird(s): 250-300 feet at the closest
distance. |
|
|
|
12. Duration of observation: I was present at the location
for approximately 30 minutes, during which time the bird was often in view. |
|
|
|
13. Habitat: Adjacent to the landfill, this area is mostly
marred by human infrastructure in the immediate vicinity, the bulk of which I
presume is connected to the oil industry. Circling farther away from the
landfill, though, this is but a small footprint in a large coastal marsh
ecosystem within the |
|
|
|
14. Behavior of bird / circumstances of observation
(flying, feeding, resting; include and stress habits used in identification;
relate events surrounding observation): Initially observed standing among a
large group of roosting Herring Gulls, the bird took flight shortly
thereafter, allowing examination of the bird’s flight feathers. It flew off
towards the landfill, but apparently doubled back as I spotted it farther to
the northeast a few minutes later, roosting with another group of larids. |
|
|
|
15. Description (include only what was actually seen, not
what "should" have been seen; include if possible: total
length/relative size compared to other familiar species, body bulk, shape,
proportions, bill, eye, leg, and plumage characteristics. Stress features
that separate it from similar species): A large and strikingly white gull,
larger than the adjacent Herring Gulls. It was obvious among the many drab
and mottled immature Herring Gulls for its plumage, worn and bleached, was
cleanly snow-white, without any visible marks whatsoever. The legs and most
(two-thirds) of the bill were pale pink, but from the gonydeal angle to the
tip of the bill was contrastingly black. The bill shape was rather long and
parallel-edged, without much indication of swelling at the gonys. Overall,
the bird looked heavy-set, without noticeably long wings. Head shape appeared
rather flat and the iris was pale. In flight, it showcased all-white remiges
and rectrices with substantial wear visible among the outermost primaries and
a ratty tail. |
|
|
|
16. Voice: Not heard vocalizing. |
|
|
|
17. Similar species (include how they were eliminated by
your observation): A worn and bleached young Iceland Gull would be the most
likely source for confusion. However, this species can be eliminated by its
smaller size (distinctly smaller than a Herring Gull), less sharply bicolored
bill with more black by age, as well as its different bill, head, and overall
body structure. Iceland Gulls tend towards looking cute and petite, with a
smaller bill, rounded head, and longer primary projection. |
|
|
|
18. Photographs or tape recordings obtained? (by whom?
attached?): Yes. My own, which are attached. |
|
|
|
19. Previous experience with this species: Yes. I’ve spent
a substantial amount of time looking at and for white-winged gulls in the upper
|
|
|
|
20. Identification aids: (list books, illustrations, other
birders, etc. used in identification): |
|
|
|
a. at time of observation: None. |
|
|
|
b. after observation: Sibley |
|
|
|
21. This description is written from: _____ notes made
during the observation (_____notes attached?);_____notes made after the
observation (date:_____); __x__memory (and
primarily from photos). |
|
22. Are you positive of your identification if not,
explain: Yes |
|
|
|
23. Date: 3 May 2014
Time: 2:30 PM |
|
|
1
first-cycle