• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

White Gull. North Yorkshire (1 Viewer)


Active member
South of Staithes harbour, this afternoon. Similar size to Herring gulls that it was associating with. ?leucistic. Thanks Michael


  • 29E83B96-91D0-4776-BEC2-9C67E8AA1A2A.jpeg
    1.8 MB · Views: 94


Well-known member
Probably leucistic for me. Structure wrong for iceland, glaucous I think. But the colours are not balanced—you can see looks a bit like a 1970s over-saturated print in the back of camera shot

Alexander Stöhr

Well-known member
Hello Micky,

yes I agree with you and The Fern its a leucistic bird.
And thanks for the new, better=much easier to ID picture. It makes assesement much easier= more confident imo:
I think its not one of the "white-winged gulls", but either a Herring or maybe better a Lesser Black backed Gull (smallish, rounded head and no massive bill, giving it a Common Gull impression).
Yes, its easy to read the question wrong and knowing that the observer who has seen the bird in the field can often give a better description than a picture (an a back of the camera shot like here), the original pictures might possibly change features.

The primaries seems quite uniformally patterned with dark pigments implicating a dark/even blackish wingtip (a 1cy=1st cycle bird?) And a dark bill with fleshy base would fit a 1 cy HG or LBBG quite good.

But I agree with The Fern and Butty: better wait for the original pictures. No offence you know.
I just don't understand why people continue to upload images taken via the back of a camera???

Forgive me if I'm wrong..... but people ask for a definite ID yet upload a photo where the colours WILL be affected by the glare of the screen, the colour balance of not only the original image but then the displayed image and then the mobile phone image taking the photo of the camera screen too! Crazy!

These days it is so easy to Bluetooth the original image to a phone for upload (if the camera can't already do that itself) and cameras aslo have editing tools to reduce file sizes and render jpgs (from original RAW images) so file size is not an issue. Or even put the card in the phone - or vice versa using an adaptor. Or send it by carrier pigeon, or a taxi, or print it off then put it in an envelope and mail it - at least it'll be a better image!

Or - wait until you get home and upload it from your device!

Sorry about the rant - I'll go and have a sit down now.


Well-known member
Presumably aberrant common gull. I guess head and chest were actually white? - in which case there's still a significant colour cast which you might try and remove in order to aid assessment...

Users who are viewing this thread