• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Question Regarding Yellow-legged Gull and Caspian Gull. (1 Viewer)

Dimitris

Birdwatcher in Oz
Quick question regrading the juvneniles of these 2 species:

Does young (1-2nd year) Caspian Gull always have a pale underwing?

Or does Yellow-legged show the same feature as well?


What's the best feature to separate the 2 species at this age? I'm asking 'cause I found a few pale underwinged birds in my photos. If interested I can post them.

Cheers and Thanx for your time and answers.

Dimitris
 
hi dimi.

well, if it was that easy... my perception often got blurred when watching both of them. remember those "well marked" caspian 1st winters, the one i posted from the danube delta and jan's link from netfugl of a really dark young caspian?
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=45977&highlight=gheorghe and
http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures/birds_uploaded/8552_lar-cac-1k-stubben-18112005.jpg
now: i haven't seen a really pale, fresh michahellis yet. they use to have more consistent and even dark underwing than the dark extremes of cachinnans. cachis usually show 1 or two stronger and contrasting dark bars formed by lesser and median coverts giving a striped appearance. but some michas are similar. always look at the whole structure, not only at colours. slight differences in bill, wing and leg length (caspian in all tendentially longer). pale axilliaries indicate caspian, but i've seen caspians with darker axies.. now let's see jan's comments and links - and go ahead posting your brown aegean gulls! ;)
cheers
 
Last edited:
Hi Dimitris!

'Always' is a forbidden word when dealing with gulls ;) Well, there are some variation, but the classic 'cachinnans pale underwing pattern' is usually a good difference between the two, michahellis in 1st winter/summer usually darker patterned, especially axillaries, lesser coverts and greater covert tips, variable though. I´ve seen a few 1st winter (January) with rather unmarked axillaries, and paler covert region, so that the contrast between dark underwing (axillaries) and pale under body, usually seen in michahellis (concolorous in cachinnans) was reduced. Eastern Juv/1st winter cachinnans are said to be darker pattered on the underwing
You do see the occasionalyy cachinnans with a more petterned axillaries and lesser coverts, but the overall impression doesn´t usually compare to the darker michahellis, apart from the variation mentioned above. When michahellis grows older the underwing of course gets paler, and some second winters are rather pale, while some are darker.
This cachinnans probably with maximum dark underwing, but then again, who could mistake this for another gull than cachinnans, with it´s distinct profile, with the bulging breast and longish head and bill.

http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=showpicture&picture_id=8552

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/cac2kvsiivet.htm

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/kaketaraukraina.htm

Strong contrast axilliaries/body:

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/ammass.htm

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/cace050917.htm

So, the underwing pattern is not a conclusive difference, as you would know Dimitris, but an otherwise good looking juv/1st winter michahellis with a more than usual pale underwing, should normally not present any problems, but would of course be worth a closer look, just to notice the unusually pale looking underwing, depending how unpatterned it is of course.

JanJ
 
Thanx for the replies guys! Yes Janj u can never be certain with Gulls and some u just leave undentified just to keep your sanity.

The birds I have are probaly just michas. However they do show a pale underwing. I'll post the photos when I go home. (I'm at Uni now so I don't have them now with me.)

They do show pale underwings that are relative unmarked but I don't like the headshape.(or maybe it's just me?)


Cheers,

Dimitris
 
OK here is the first bird,lets call it bird A, I have put this one as second year female(?) Yellow-legged. Photos taken on the 30-10-2005. It looks like a fairly typical Y.L. to me if you exclude the underwing colour

Hope these photos are better then my usual blurry ones. A few more shos are available if requested.
 

Attachments

  • Gull 2 for forum.JPG
    Gull 2 for forum.JPG
    76.2 KB · Views: 230
  • Gull 3for forum.JPG
    Gull 3for forum.JPG
    78.1 KB · Views: 232
  • Gull for forum.JPG
    Gull for forum.JPG
    81.7 KB · Views: 245
Hi Dimitris,
This seems to be a 1st-winter (2nd calendar year) Yellow-legged Gull, not a second-winter.
Harry
 
Ok and here's bird B. A second winter bird. This one looks closer to Caspian in Shape. But it has a short bill. I've put this down as a male (?) Y.L.G photo: 10-11-2005.


(Yes Harry,you are correct about bird's A age.I'll use the 'winter' way. As the 'callendar' way confuses me)

Cheers,

Dimi
 

Attachments

  • Gull 2.JPG
    Gull 2.JPG
    288.6 KB · Views: 236
  • Gull 2 1.JPG
    Gull 2 1.JPG
    218 KB · Views: 218
  • Gull 2 2.JPG
    Gull 2 2.JPG
    312.9 KB · Views: 194
Hi Dimitris,

Why do you think that the michahellis in #5 is a 2cy bird and 1st winter? It´s from 30 October, which means that it has completed it´s first primary moult, and shoud thus be 2cy, 2nd winter. I think it´s a 1cy, 1st winter, because the primaries looks like 1st generation, due to pointed tips, although those whitish tips to secondaries and inner primaries should have worn of by now. It seems to have moulted all it´s upperparts, many tertials and some inner greater, median and lesser coverts. It looks to worn and bleached to be a fresh newly moulted gull. The complete moult to 2nd winter is variable in time, some finish in early August, some later in Sept. Oct. If this one has finished early, it would be rather worn late in October. So age is uncertain here, from these images. Just to show variation in moult,
check these 2cy from Romania in August:

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/mica2kv.htm

And these 1cy Romania in October:

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/michahellis1cy.htm

And these from Spain in late Nov. (It´s said that eastern michahellis moult less coverts in 1cy)

http://www.xs4all.nl/~daarruud/micha/micha1a.html

http://www.xs4all.nl/~daarruud/micha/micha1b.html

I also notice the unmarked axillaries. It´s def. a michahellis, as you mentioned yourself.

The seckond gull is also a michahellis, bill shape like michahellis, probably a 2cy type. I can see your Caspian point here looking at image 1, and maybe you are thinking of the white head and underparts, and maybe structure of it, but michahellis can look like this as well this time of year - again:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~daarruud/micha/micha2.html

JanJ
 
JANJ said:
Hi Dimitris,

Why do you think that the michahellis in #5 is a 2cy bird and 1st winter? It´s from 30 October, which means that it has completed it´s first primary moult, and shoud thus be 2cy, 2nd winter. I think it´s a 1cy, 1st winter, because the primaries looks like 1st generation, due to pointed tips, although those whitish tips to secondaries and inner primaries should have worn of by now. It seems to have moulted all it´s upperparts, many tertials and some inner greater, median and lesser coverts. It looks to worn and bleached to be a fresh newly moulted gull. The complete moult to 2nd winter is variable in time, some finish in early August, some later in Sept. Oct. If this one has finished early, it would be rather worn late in October. So age is uncertain here, from these images. Just to show variation in moult,
check these 2cy from Romania in August:

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/mica2kv.htm

And these 1cy Romania in October:

http://www.elisanet.fi/antero.lindholm/public_html/lokki/michahellis1cy.htm

And these from Spain in late Nov. (It´s said that eastern michahellis moult less coverts in 1cy)

http://www.xs4all.nl/~daarruud/micha/micha1a.html

http://www.xs4all.nl/~daarruud/micha/micha1b.html

I also notice the unmarked axillaries. It´s def. a michahellis, as you mentioned yourself.

The seckond gull is also a michahellis, bill shape like michahellis, probably a 2cy type. I can see your Caspian point here looking at image 1, and maybe you are thinking of the white head and underparts, and maybe structure of it, but michahellis can look like this as well this time of year - again:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~daarruud/micha/micha2.html

JanJ


Janj.

First of all thanks for your detailed reply.

First of all. Let me say that when I saw these birds in the field I didn't think that they were nothing more then michas. I just got curious when I noticed that some of 'my' birds had pale underwings while examining my photos and since I read that pale underwing is a cachi sighn. I just thought I'll make sure. thanx for confirming me :t: (there may be hope for me after all...)

Now as for the age of bird A (#5). After scrolling through my files and photos I found (and remembered) out that there were 2 similar young Y.L.s of the same age sitting side by side playing/arguing and too make the tale short I got mixed up on who was who and so can't trust my notes. Agree with what you say though after examining the photos: a mixed up bird. I shouldn't have posted the age I had on the photo file. I'm sorry.

Thanx again,

Dimi
 
Don´t worry Dimitris, I know that you know they are michahellis, and it´s not easy with these sometimes. A sharp photo is essential at times to be able to see certain detailes for correct ageing, such as primary shape, pointed or rounded at the tip, and pattern of scapulars or/and coverts. Structure, jizz is of course sometimes far the best clue.

JanJ

JanJ
 
Warning! This thread is more than 18 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top