38-B-2016 Chestnut-collared Longspur
FIRST ROUND VOTING:
Description and brevity of observation aren't quite enough for me to feel comfortable endorsing this record.
good description eliminating similar species
I decided to accept this record with some reservations. I can't think of any other bird species that would have the described black triangle tail pattern, but the description doesn't go beyond the tail; most of the bird was not described. Should we or shouldn't we accept a record of a truly rare bird species solely on the basis of a brief observation and only a very basic description of its tail?
Tail pattern well described
Although the sighting was brief. The distinctive field marks of Chestnut-collared Longspur was described well.
While the observer is correct in noting this species has a distinctive tail pattern, and they noted specifically this mark, I’m not comfortable in this first round accepting on such a fleeting, unaided observation. I would like to read other committee member comments, particularly any related to observer experience, before reconsidering.
It would have been nice to have a longer observation and of more than just a dorsal view but this certainly sounds like a longspur and the tail pattern is pretty diagnostic so I'm voting to accept.
SECOND ROUND VOTING:
I am going to stick with my original “reject” vote. This observation was just too fleeting and unaided at that; we can all see initial flashes of pattern or color that turn out to be wrong on further inspection.
I still have the same reservations about accepting this record.
I'm still convinced, but with some reservations.
no change from round 1 vote
I read the report again and I am still convinced because of the description of the distinctive tail pattern.
See previous comments
Same comments as round 1.