FIRST ROUND VOTING:
There isn't enough detail in the description to eliminate other possibilities.
Description is convincing
I'm convinced these were Dunlins.
I went back and forth on this one, but brownish back and chest, and a bill that drooped at the tip barely eliminated the less-likely Western Sandpiper.
I'd probably vote to accept this record on a second round, but the description is very brief, without mention of size, and apparently written from memory 5 days after the sighting. However, what details are provided are good, bill structure is distinctive, the observers have experience with Dunlin and other shorebirds, and this is probably only marginally-rare (as noted).
While this report is deficient in some key details, combination of coloration, bill structure, and timing lead me to “accept”, though this is a weak vote in favor.
SECOND ROUND VOTING:
I totally agree with my fellow IBRC colleagues that this report is weak, but I thought - and still think - that it has enough substance to convince me that the two birds were Dunlins.
I'm still voting to accept. I understand the hesitancy of others to accept, but I still think the combination of features described and the time of year are enough to support the ID as Dunlin
Timing, general (ie; bill shape and structure, general coloration), though almost insufficient description, remains enough for me to “accept” again in this round.
no change from round 1 (but I agree that some mention of relative size would be helpful)
I am still convinced
No change. While likely correct and only marginally rate, this submission doesn't include enough details and only discusses one other species.