Red-throated Loon,  Gavia stellata

Number of accepted Red-throated Loon records for Louisiana = 3 as of June 2015




Accepted Records

One in basic plumage (1992-05) on 1 Feb. 1992, Caddo: Cross Lake, approx. 1 mi. E end of causeway; Roger J. Breedlove, Charles E. Lyon, John P. Sevenair, and Julie Zickefoose (drawing only) (AB 46(2):275; LOS 147). This represents the first record of this species accepted by the Committee. Three additional records published in Lowery (1974) have not been reviewed by the Committee.

One (2009-13) on 24-25 January 2009, Jackson: Womack, Caney Creek Reservoir; Devin Bosler (ph), Justin Bosler, Michael Musumeche, (ph),and Jay Huner. This represents the first state record with hard evidence.
 
Photo by Devin Bosler

One (2014-032) on 2-15 November 2014, Union: Lake D’Arbonne, W of boat launch spur, N of Hwy. 33 (15) bridge; Stephen L. Pagans (ph), Willie Matthews, and Mary Mehaffey. This is the third accepted state occurrence.
 
Photo by Stephen L. Pagans

Unaccepted Records

One in basic plumage (84-9) on 3 Apr. 1984, St. Tammany: Lake Pontchartrain at Fontainebleau State Park. This record was decided on its fourth circulation. After an extensive discussion, this record was rejected. The combination of a single person sight record, the limited experience of the observer with this species, the range of variation in plumage and size exhibited by Common Loons, and the lack of additional supporting documentation (photographs) resulted in this decision. Although Lowery (1974) accepted four records for Louisiana, these records have never been re-evaluated by the LBRC.

One (1998-032) on 12 March 1998, Lafourche: Pass Fourchon. Although the description was suggestive, photos ultimately confirmed that the bird was a Common Loon.

One in definitive basic plumage (98-42) on 23 Mar 1998, Gulf of Mexico: 62 mi. S of Marsh Island, South Marsh Island 66C oil platform, 28o38'48"N, 91o56'15"W. Although most members believed that this bird was possibly correctly identified, most also believed that a conservative approach was warranted and did not accept this record because of the brevity of the observation (one minute; it was a "fly-by") combined with the species’ status in the state (hypothetical- only one accepted sight record).