Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!oliveb!oliven!mjm
From: mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: What is "Thayer's Gull" ?
Message-ID: <32654@oliveb.olivetti.com>
Date: 15 Nov 88 19:26:44 GMT
References: <1988Nov11.185810.22941@utzoo.uucp>
Sender: news@oliveb.olivetti.com
Lines: 54

In article <1988Nov11.185810.22941@utzoo.uucp>, snell@utzoo.uucp (snell) writes:
 > Recently, mjm@oliven.olivetti.com (Michael Mammoser) and
 > gpasq@picuxa.UUCP (Greg Pasquariello X1190) having been having an 
 > interesting discussion of "Thayer's Gulls", and characteristics which
 > might be used to identify these birds.  For the past four years I have 
 > been working on a PhD at utzoo which deals with hybridization and 
 > genetic differentiation between Herring, Glaucous, Iceland and 
 > "Thayers" gulls.  
 
	The controversy over Thayer's Gull has gone on for years, with the
bird being classified as a subspecies of Herring Gull, a subspecies of
Iceland Gull, a hybrid between the two, and a full species in its own right.
I would not be surprised if the status of this bird changed at any time.

 > Unfortunately, the more northern forms (especially Iceland and "Thayer's")
 > breed in colonies which are difficult to reach; not a great deal is known
 > about them.  Certainly, their systematic relationships have been hotly
 > debated, and are not yet fully resolved.  
 > 
 > So, what is a "Thayer's Gull"?  Almost certainly it is merely a
 > plumage variant of a group of northern gulls (the Iceland Gull complex)
 > which preferentially breed together.  Call it hybridization if you
 > like, but "Thayer's Gull" as well as "Kumlien's Gull" are but
 > variants of Iceland Gulls.  
 
	Are you claiming to have fully resolved the issue, or are you
just claiming your allegiance to one side of the hot debate?

 > When people see a gull which they might want to call "Thayer's Gull"
 > they compare that bird to pictures in books and to the self-perpetuating
 > descriptions of this supposed species which accompany them.  
 > The birder finds a pigeon-hole, and stuffs it.  Tick!

	Bear in mind that the pictures in books, the self-perpetuating
descriptions, and the pigeon-holes are all defined by you scientists, not
by us birders. 

	Note that the American Ornithologists Union currently ranks the
Thayer's Gull as a full species. IF, and WHEN, they demote the bird to
some lesser status, it will be duly noted on the lists of birders. However,
this will not invalidate the desire of birders to identify the bird in the
field (regardless of its status), nor does it invalidate a discussion of
the characteristics by which this identification can be accomplished. If
you want to lend your knowledge and experience to this discussion, it would
be greatly appreciated. However, if you just want to rant about the difference
of opinion that you have with your peers at the A.O.U., then I suggest that
you are "barking up the wrong tree".

 > I am not intending this to be a diatribe against tickers, nor against
 > anyone who has ticked "Thayer's Gull" on their list.  

	Who are you trying to kid, I know a diatribe when I see one.

Mike