White-winged gulls, NE Scotland (1 Viewer)

[Capercaillie71]

I spent a couple of hours today catching up with the white-winged gull influx, but found it quite a challenge to identify the species in flight as they were reluctant to land.

Bird 1 (I'm fairly sure these are all the same individual): I'm thinking this might be a 1W Glaucous Gull?

 

[Capercaillie71]

Bird 2 (Not 100% sure these are all the same bird) I'm thinking 2W Iceland Gull?

 

[OlaB]

All these pictures look like Iceland to me.

 

[BirdBoyBen]

I would say good for the both. We often get Glaucous gulls near where I live in England and this does look right for a 1st Winter. The Iceland looks pretty definite to me.

 

[BirdBoyBen]

The 1st bird has a noticeably pinker beak, which is very rare for an Iceland. The heavy streaking is also more common in Glaucous gulls (judging from personal experience, so I may be wrong!)

 

[Capercaillie71]

Thanks both - Glad to see a difference of opinions - it reassures me that it wasn't a stupid question to ask. I know it shouldn't influence opinions, but another observer reported 3x Glaucous, 1xIceland and 1xKumliens from the same site earlier today. I haven't seen any reports of multiple Icelands from this site in the last couple of weeks.

Here are the only birds that landed. I'm fairly certain the bird on the roof is an Iceland, but less sure about the one on the ground.

 

[Joseph N]

All Iceland for me; believe the second one Paul has in his first set of pics is the same bird I photographed on Saturday; a darkish second winter Iceland Gull. The first and last pictures on the first lot of pics show a different Iceland in my opinionl. Bill certainly not chunky or long enough for Glaucous on any of these birds, and size is all wrong for this species, much daintier looking gulls than any Glaucous.

Both birds from the most recent set are 2w Iceland.

Joseph

 

[Morg]

All Icelands for me, and I would say that the third shot of Bird 2 is actually the same individual as shown in Bird 1.

Geoff

 

[Simon Wates]

I agree that all the gulls in the photos show Icelands - nice!

 

[knotsbirder]

All Icelands for me too! :t:

 

[Capercaillie71]

I would say that the third shot of Bird 2 is actually the same individual as shown in Bird 1.

Could well be - I was fairly trigger happy with the camera and the birds were circling widely among hundreds of other gulls so it was easy to lose track.

A consensus seems to be emerging - Bird 1 was my only real potential Glaucous so somehow I managed to avoid that species altogether!

Finally, here is a pair of Icelands from Peterhead - any significance to the darker markings on the primaries of the upper bird?

Thanks everyone for your help

 

[OlaB]

As far as I can see the markings on the upper bird look good for kumlieni. Darker tips extending up on the outer webs.

 

[Capercaillie71]

I see that today someone has reported a 1W Glaucous and 2W Iceland at the same location that I saw birds 1 and 2. Of course there is plenty of scope for turnover of birds in the area.

 

[Simon Wates]

Capercaillie, after all these Icleands - I'm sure you will know when you get a Glaucous! Good luck

 

[Capercaillie71]

Capercaillie, after all these Icleands - I'm sure you will know when you get a Glaucous!

Thanks, but I think you have too much faith in my ID skills . I've seen quite a few Glaucous (admittedly not for a few years) and I still can't ID them!

 

[Caledonian]

Lovely pictures of lovely birds! nice shots!

 

[Capercaillie71]

Finally, here is a pair of Icelands from Peterhead - any significance to the darker markings on the primaries of the upper bird?

As a postscript, I have had some correspondence with a leading gull expert about this photo. He had seen two very similar birds in exactly the same location last weekend which he concluded could not be firmly identified as Kumlien's due to inconsistencies in the primary pattern. However, due to the potential effect of lighting/angle etc. it is not possible to be certain that my photo shows the same birds, so in the absence of further photos I think it will have to be left unidentified.