speaking of gulls.............

[tuchp]

Would anyone like to take a stab at these? I am pretty certain now that the flock on the water are California. After reading the descriptions on this website, I realized that they were not Herring Gulls. My Sibley's cleared things up a bit more by pointing to a yellow gape on the Herring, so I noticed a RED gape shows on these. Since it is difficult to see the two colours on the beak in my picture, I am going with the gape as a field mark - Am I correct?? The single gull, is a challenge as it has no marks on it's pinkish bill, quite a dark smudge on the face and the wingtips seem to have quite a bit of white in them. It was smaller that a glaucous-winged standing nearby. This one has me quite stumped. These are not local pictures, they were taken in Sept.
near Port Angeles, Wash. Thanks, Pat

[Deleted]

Okay, Pat, I'll take a stab.

The lone gull has the look of a Mew Gull to me.

Without doing a whole lot of checking, I'd say the flock look good for California Gulls -- two adult winter birds on the left, and I'm not at all sure but perhaps a juvenile and first winter bird (or even one going into second winter on the far right?).

But someone may prove me wrong. Gulls are always a learning experience.

Thanks for posting these photos. We all need to review gull details at this time of year and this certainly helps.

Stan Olson
Abbotsford

[Gord]

I second Stan's thanks for this. It is a great way to review!

My only thought would be the juvenile bird fourth from the left being a juvenile Ring-billed Gull. It looks slightly smaller for starts (but size is not always accurate as a small female California could approach a large Ring-bill) but the plumage is lighter with some grey coming through the back (probably because Ring-billed Gulls are '2 year gulls' meaning it takes two years to get adult feathers as opposed to California Gull's three years). The bill is shorter and a tad thicker too when California Gulls tend to have a slightly longer and thinner bill. The bill pattern of pink with black tip are similar between the two. This young Ring-billed (if that is indeed what it is) has not developed it like the one right behind him but would probably display it as well shortly.

Nice work, Pat, both on the pictures and what you learned about them.

[tuchp]

Thank-you both for the replies. These gulls are so interesting! Gord, after ready your comments on the probable young Ring-billed, I looked more closely at another picture I took of this group. There is definitely one other similar looking young gull with a more fully developed ring and also a better picture of the head of a mature California with both red and black bill markings. So, I have concluded, thanks to you, that both are represented here.

Also, due to your comments, I researched the Ring-billed gulls a little more and realized that I had mistakenly identified a gull I photographed at Blackie's Spit, Crescent Beach as being Ring-Billed. The gull in my photograph has a solid black ring on the bill but the problem is that it's legs and bill are pinkish and the tail is almost solid black. I took a picture of a beautiful Ring-billed gull in Arizona a few years ago and compared the two to confirm my mistake. I think the Blackies's Spit bird is probably a 2nd winter Western Gull - I am feeling fairly confident about this. What do you think? - Pat

[ryjay]

I agree with Gord on that 4th from the Left Gull, its definitely got a stouter bill than the other ones, and smaller shaped head, looks like a Ring-billed to me. I just purchased the Peterson's Reference Guide on Gulls of the America's last week, so far its been a great help on getting better at Identifying Gulls, especially these Juveniles

[Deleted]

Hi, everyone.

Upon more careful examination of the photo, and of some gull references, I think you guys are correct that the fourth gull from the left (third from the left of the four in line across the front) is very probably a Ring-billed Gull (RBGU) rather than a California Gull (CAGU).

I would like to comment further. Since gulls for some reason have a strange fascination for some of us, gull season is upon us again, and some of the newer birders may be following this thread, and because it's always a process of learning for me too, as I go along, I will "think (in writing) out loud" here as I work through things, and give some (maybe way too much) background for those who may be struggling with gulls for the first time. (We all struggle with gulls; only for some of us it's not the first time.)

For starters, for either RBGU or CAGU (the only likely candidates based on size comparison with the known companions in the photo) the almost completely dark bill indicates a juvenile. For gulls the term "juvenile" is limited by most guides to the few months (about 4 months) between their first feather covering attained shortly after hatching and their moult into first winter = first basic plumage. After this transition they are immatures, but not juveniles, until they reach adult plumage of course.

So a gull is a juvenile for very roughly four months, maybe June through September, from hatching until its first fall when it moults into first basic (also called first winter) plumage. In the following spring it moults into first alternate or first summer plumage, which it retains until the next fall. By then it is well over a year old and has completed its first year or first cycle, in terms of plumage. Second winter (=second basic), then second summer (=second alternate) plumage take it through its second year or second cycle. And so forth. Two moults per year, back and forth between basic and alternate plumage. The moult into basic is a complete moult, and the moult into alternate affects only the head and body feathers. In general their heads are clean white in alternate and smudgy in basic (varies significantly among species and among individuals within species). The wings get new feathers only in basic moult in the fall, so can become quite worn and faded by the summer.

Unfortunately the timing of moults varies greatly among individuals of any species, so you can see a lot of different stages represented in a flock in the fall and spring.

Some gull species (="two year gulls") reach adult plumage with their second cycle (small gulls such as Bonaparte's), some (="three year gulls") with their third cycle (medium gulls such as Mew and Ring-billed), and some (="four year gulls") reach adult plumage with their fourth cycle (large gulls such as California, Glaucous-winged, etc.). Count these years from the fall after they hatch, say October to September, not calendar years. All this information is more or less assumed by most field guides.

They all start out as sort of brownish/grayish and mottled juveniles, and end up as gray and white adults, most species having black wingtips with white spots. The year (again, think fall to summer) before they attain adult plumage (I will call this "pre-adult cycle") they resemble adults but with some smudging on tail and often on bill, incompletely marked wingtips, etc. For three-year gulls there is only one cycle in between juvenile and "pre-adult" cycle. This is first year or first cycle. They are still brownish/grayish and mottled, somewhat like juveniles, but their mantle turns gray like an adult's back. For four year gulls, there are two cycles between juvenile and "pre-adult." The first cycle they remain brownish/grayish and mottled, somewhat like juveniles. The second cycle they are similar to first cycle but their mantle is gray like an adult's back. There are also subtle changes in bill colour and pattern, leg colour, sometimes eye colour, etc., all through the cycles.

So, in summary, for four year gulls you get two years of brownish/grayish mottled bird, showing a bit of adult (gray mantle) in the second year. Then two years of gray and white (and black) but with a bit of pre-adult (brownish smudging, etc) in the third year and finally a full adult in the fourth year. For three year gulls, basically the first year of the four year cycle is skipped. This is way over simplified, but it might be helpful as a shortcut.

I would caution about perceptions of RBGUs having thicker or stouter bills than CAGUs. I don't think this is helpful. The measurements given in Olsen and Larsson's Gulls of North America, Europe and Asia (pages 111-112 and 124) show that RBGU averages significantly thinner bill than CAGU, measured both at base and at gonys (the angle near the tip), for both male and female, for both adult and first-year, and for both californicus and albertaensis subspecies of CAGU. (I have the first edition, and I assume it is unchanged in the corrected edition.)

Perhaps because RBGU bills are noticeably shorter than CAGU bills we may tend to perceive them as stouter, but this just goes to show that perceptions can sometimes be misleading.

Another point I learned from other birders long ago is that for gulls, at least, the colours of bare parts (bill, eye, gape, legs) are often the most variable factors, so again, caution is in order, and as many characteristics as possible should be called on -- the more characteristics that contribute to the ID, the better.

Looking at photos of juvenile RBGU and CAGU, I think the plumages are similar enough to cause plenty of confusion. This is a bit of a challenging ID.

To my eye, the bird in question has a noticeably shorter (but not thicker) bill than the other three gulls in the line across the front of the photo (carefully noting that the heads appear to be at the same angle so there is no distortion from that source), and on that basis, as well as the size difference, subtle difference in head shape, and the apparently slightly longer primaries, I would lean toward Ring-billed on cumulative evidence.

But it's certainly not a no-brainer for me.

Those are my thoughts. I would welcome further exchange. I've made some rather sweeping statements, all generalizations and simplifications which could (and probably should) be challenged, I'm sure. As gull fanatics know, there are unfortunately exceptions to almost everything I've said above. Figuring them out is where it gets really interesting.

These gulls are always fascinating, often maddening.

Stan

[tuchp]

Oh boy, do I ever have a lot to learn!! It seems that even experienced birders sometimes find gulls very challenging. Thank-you, Pat

[Gord]

Stan, always enjoy looking at things though others' perspective, and yours is always great. Took a lot away from your post! Thanks!