[Dougie Preston]

Being from Scotland, I'm not very experienced with the problem of YL Gull id!

This bird was photographed by myself at Cley, Norfolk, on the 26/06/2005.

A 2nd Summer bird was reported there, and I'm not sure if this is it, but it seems to fit most of the charactaristics I can find on them.

2 pics seem to show the head shape, bill size, red spot size and Back colour.

1 pic seems to show the apparently required dark tail markings.

Any gull experts out there able to help?.

[Grousemore]

Did you see the legs?

[JANJ]

Hi Dougie,
The immidiate impression is, this could be a michahellis (2nd sum) the large looking head, flat crown, full neck and deep-breast up high. However, due to a haze in images it´s difficult to see the bill tip shape properly (wish I could). Did it have yellow legs, and finally, do you have some clearer pic?
JanJ

[Edward woodwood]

it's a reasonable start but we need a fair bit more i reckon

anything to go on apart from the pics?

Tim

[Dougie Preston]

The bird definatley seemed to have yellowish legs when it walked, as the legs came out of the water quite high, but not long enough for a pic!. As for the haze, I'm afraid my camera is good, but the telescope is a budget nikon, and the distance and light were not in my favour. Sorry.

[JANJ]

Dougie,
I´m afraid it´s unwise to make a definite decision on your gull, due to the quality of the images. You need to be able to see the bill tip shape/pattern better, a possible eye/eye ring colour, leg lenght and to compare it´s grey shade with LBBG, which I reckon was nearby. As I mentioned, there was an immidiate impression of michahellis, about it´s head shape, but impression is only the beginning when dealing with gulls!
Regards JanJ

[Edward woodwood]

some notes taken at the time would help!

Tim

[Terry Smith]

Hi Dougie,

It looks pretty good to me, head shape is right, doesn't look so 'fierce' as the mean-looking b****** on the right in the first pic, and although there is a haze, the mantle colouration seems to fit the bill. Legs at the top in third pic look more a yellowish tinge than pink or grey. If I had to sway to one side of the fence, I'd say yes, you have yourself a Yellow-legged!

The Exmouth Birder

[lou salomon]

was it definately bigger (taller) then the graellsii nearby?

[Edward woodwood]

bear in mind some female michahellis can be as small as a graellsii

Tim

[lou salomon]

iris should be light/yellowish by now in michahellis, normally

[lou salomon]

Originally Posted by Tim Allwood

bear in mind some female michahellis can be as small as a graellsii

Tim

very true, i saw really dwarfy fems. but in case it'd been a male (which i could expect from that rectangular head, but not necessarily from bill size -) then a mich prob. would stand out, well sure that's not a clincher at all.

[JANJ]

Judgeing size is tricky especially in photos! As Tim points out, "some female michahellis can be as small as a graellsii". So size is often of less importance, structure is more. As Lou puts it, if it now is a michahellis, the powerfull looking head would indicate a male. All true, but there are other, more important things to consider as mentioned in #3 #6 and #11. We hope for more to come!
JanJ

[JANJ]

Dougie, have you seen these?
http://www.magikbirds.com/image.asp?...umbnails=False
http://www.magikbirds.com/image.asp?...umbnails=False
http://www.magikbirds.com/image.asp?...umbnails=False
http://www.magikbirds.com/image.asp?...umbnails=False
JanJ

[Dougie Preston]

Many thanks for all the help so far. I've enclosed a further pic to show size comparison only. I had to crop it to post. As you can see the bird in question is on the right.