March 2, 2008
Dr Strange-gull
or How I learned to stop worrying and love being wrong
I have run a webpage (off and on) called the Ugly Gull Page for six or eight years now. The title is intended to be metaphorical--- gull ID can be ugly even for the best looking of gulls. The other day I posted photographs of this on the Ugly Gull Page:
When I photographed it, I was thinking "funny, pale-eyed, Western (complex) Gull". But when I got home and started looking at it on the monitor, I found myself wondering, "How do I know that's what it is?" Someone who hadn't spent a great deal of time sifting through the Western complex could easily see the pale eye, turn to the page in their Sibley's and start ticking off other characters more closely in line with a Slaty-backed Gull, which would be a much more interesting bird to find. Those of us who have experience often forget what it was like back when we didn't know everything.
This is not a Slaty-backed Gull. Comparing it, side by side, with a fairly straight forward 3rd-cycle Western Gull, one would be hard pressed to come up with a compelling argument for Slaty-backed that would pass muster with a records committee. I've built up a pattern recognition set over the years that spans the range of variation for Western-complex Gulls. I know that it's a Western-ish gull on the right side of my brain, but it can be difficult to communicate this to folks who have not spent as much time with gulls.
My not being able to communicate why I know this is not a Slaty-backed with others is MY PROBLEM, not theirs. Simply saying "this looks like a funky Western Gull, I see these all the time." doesn't help anyone, nor does prattling on about relative bill thickness or "chestiness" or blocky-headedness. These all pretty much assume that a pattern recognition set is already in place and folks know what I'm talking about, that they have the pictures in their heads to compare.
Running the Ugly Gull Page often puts me in the position of straight-man. I say my lines and pretend like I don't know what's coming. I regularly post photos I take, but many of the gull photos I post were taken by somebody else. I may have an opinion, but I try to stay neutral, at least during the first couple rounds. The opinion of a single participant, stated with righteous authority, can shut down the whole discussion, especially if stated in the "I see these all the time, bill's too thick, barrel chested" format that those of us with the big pattern recognition libraries in our heads often write in. I don't run the Ugly Gull Page to demonstrate my superior skills at pattern recognition. I run it so I can build up my skills and hopefully do the same for others. Nevertheless, I also regularly get the "why did you post this? Don't you know a Western Gull when you see it" notes as well.
Gull identification is, however, the great equalizer. My making a claim with righteous authority does not make me right and the righteous tone doesn't help my reputation any when I turn out to be wrong. I've seen a lot of Western Gulls. I haven't seen very many unequivocal Slaty-backs. My pattern recognitions skills are very biased. There are plenty of folks out there who would probably jump at the chance to relate stories about my initial responses to Black-tailed and Greater Black-backed Gull reports. And the whole Thayer's-Kumlein-Iceland thing, well don't get me started.
The main point here is that I don't know everything and I'm still struggling with how I can communicate what I do know without sounding like I have the last word. Part of the trick is learning how stand back and remember how things were for me 20 years ago and part of the trick is knowing when to shut up and let folks make at least a few of the mistakes I got to make.
If nothing else, I'm not afraid to be wrong and perhaps that's the only useful lesson I can share about Ugly Gulls.
Posted by mbalame at March 2, 2008 9:59 AM