160

BOOK REVIEWS

Gulls of the with sections on , field identi - Americas . 2007. fication, individual variation, geographi - Steve N .G. Howell and cal var ia tion, hybridization, topography, Jon Dunn . Houghton molts and , age terminology, Mifflin. Boston and . Hardcover, molt strategies and behaviour. The final 17 x 2 6 cm, 1,160 200 plus pages are Accounts in colour photographs, ascending order of body size. There is a 516 pages. $45.95 section on Hybrid that discusses CAN. ISBN 13:978-0- 618-72641-7. regular hybrids occurring on both coasts, almost exclusively involving large gulls. Gulls of the Americas (hereafter H & D) is The book concludes with a Glossary, the latest in the Houghton Mifflin extensive Bibliography and a section on nature guide series. It is more precisely Geographic Terms. Medium-sized pho - termed one of the Peterson Reference tographs begin species account group - Guides. Indeed, the book’s large size and ings. A range map is found on the first weight preclude it as a field guide. Steve page of each Species Account. Included Howell and Jon Dunn have produced an are an identification summary, discus - exhaustive reference work for the 36 sions on taxonomy, status and distribu - species of gulls recorded in the Americas. tion, field identification vis-à-vis similar This includes 22 species that have bred species, detailed descriptions and molt. in , 10 that breed in Hybrids involving other species are listed South America, and 4 that strayed from and references for further information Europe and . With a great volume of conclude each species account. An published identification material, H & D astounding 1,160 colour photographs are field identification experts. are contained in this book. Most are The book begins with the chapter found in the plate section (pages 47 to How To Use This Book. A lengthy but 298) sandwiched between the introduc - informative introduction follows, which tion and the species accounts. Most of is essential reading for the student. It my comments are directed at the impres - starts by defining gulls, and continues sive number of photographs.

ONTARIO DECEMBER 2007 161

My review compares this book to its the American ( argen - main competitor Gulls of North America, tatus smithsonianus ), European Herring Europe and Asia by Olsen and Larsson Gull ( L. a. argentatus/ arg en t eus ) and Vega (2003), hereafter O & L. See the review Herring Gull ( L. a. vegae ) are best regard - of O & L by Pittaway (2005) in Ontario ed as separate species, but the American Birds . Both books were influenced by the Ornithologists’ Union (AOU) has not seminal work of Jonathan Dwight split them. Conveniently, H & D give (1925), and in the past quarter century these three groups separate by two editions of the splendid Gulls by accounts. O & L treat all three “Her ring the late Peter J. Grant (1982, 1986). H Gulls” as distinct species following Euro - & D’s 516 pages and O & L’s 608 make pean taxonomic decisions. The other both large, weighty tomes. Both are mar - conten tious group is the Ice land Gull velously produced and visually appeal - (Larus glaucoides ) complex. H &D give ing. I have not read all species accounts separate accounts for the North Ameri - in either book, but those exam ined are can breeding subspecies ( L. g. kumlieni ) free of typographical errors. The books and the Greenland nominate subspecies differ in price. My copy of O & L was L. g. glaucoides . They treat Thayer’s Gull $80.00 Canadian in 2004. H & D is a (Lar us thayeri) as a full species. See the relative bargain at $45.95 in 2007. O & Complex on page 462 for a L is currently out of print in North discussion of this vexing issue. O & L Amer ica. handle both subspecies of Iceland Gull These books diverge in formatting separately in one section and Thayer’s and use of illustrations. O & L treats each Gull gets full species treatment. species as a separate entity with the text Which book should I buy? There are interspersed with illustrations (generally 36 species in H & D and 32 of them are excellent) followed by photographs. H & in O & L. I will make some comparisons D place a nearly all-encom passing block and let you decide. Field guides and of photographs in the first 300 or so hand books derive their success or failure pages. Species accounts follow in a sepa - from the quality of photographs and rate grouping. H & D is nearly devoid of illus trations. Gull study is heavily visual illu s trations save for the paintings of and detailed, and both H & D and O & Ross’s Gull on pages 71 and 73, Red-leg - L score highly in this regard. ged on pages 79 and 81, and a I heard comments about the small chart showing varying adult wing tip pat - images in H & D. The small photos in terns in Kumlien’s Gull on page 252. O&L are actually smaller than similarly These were done by Martin T. Elliott. sized photos in H & D. Though smaller, Another difference between the books is these images in O & L are consistently taxonomy, centred on two complex taxo - brighter and sharper than the slightly nomic groups. H & D ack nowl edge that larger ones in H & D. O & L has many

VOLUME 25 NUMBER 3 162 more bright and larger sized photos than photographs. O & L combine these two H & D, and mixes large and small facets exceptionally well. through out the book. This creates a There are many pluses among the more attractive layout than in H & D, photographs in H & D such as the whose photos on most pages are small instructive use of photos in topographi - and similarly sized. cal diagrams on pages 18 to 22; the pho - Regarding complaints of dark and tos on pages 75 to 78 showing the subtle fuzzy images in H & D, I found very few differences between eastern and western that are a real concern. Some examples of Black-legged Kittiwake subspecies; the too dark photos are: Gray-hooded Gull eight photos of Ivory Gulls on pages 88 (p. 56, 3.4), Red-legged Kittiwake (p. and 89; a seldom seen side by side com - 80, 9.9), (p. 99, 15.9), Heer - parison of adult Franklin’s and Laughing mann’s Gull (p. 105, 16.15), Gray Gull Gulls on page 90; page 264 has three (p. 108, 17.8) and Glaucous-wing ed photos demonstrating that juvenile Gull (p. 238, 33.19, 33.20). Thayer’s Gulls can vary in appearance as In assessing the “too small” com - much as any large gull; and the 101 pho - plaint, I think that the small size of the tos on pages 274 to 298, of presumed photos in H & D exacerbates a problem hybrid large gulls, are a major resource in where the birds in the image are already the literature. This is the first major pub - small, particularly where two or more lication to have photos of these hybrids birds are compared. A pertinent example in a single group. Most hybrid gull pho - is on page 69 (6.6), with a tos are from the West Coast, where Bon a parte’s Gull. Another case is a photo hybrids are frequent. showing a group of Sabine’s Gulls (p. 84, It is heartening to se e photo s of 10.6). uncom mon species in Ontario so well Hans Larsson’s fine illustrations in O represented such as 41 images of Califor - & L add lustre to that book, both for nia Gull ( L. californicus ) and 37 of Lesser their aesthetics and accuracy. Should H Black-backed Gull ( L. fuscus) . For species & D have used artist Martin Elliott more of regular occurrence in Ontario, I com - or perhaps the talents of Thomas pared captions and photos, checking that Schultz? The latter’s gull illustrations, they matched in terms of identification virtually unaltered through five editions and . I found very few points of of the National Geographic Field Guide concern. Some examples are the bill on (2006) are eye pleasing and technically the Kumlien’s Gull in photo 35A.9 on correct. The already large size of H & D page 253. The is in its first calendar likely did not allow for extra pages of year, but the bill is markedly two-toned. illustrations considering the massive Juvenile Kumlien’s seen in autumn in number of photos. My preference is hav - southern Ontario are essentially black- ing superb illustrations and excellent billed, with the bill becoming obviously

ONTARIO BIRDS DECEMBER 2007 163 pale basally only after New Year. Also, I shown using 34 photos of birds in all had difficulty determining the feather plumages from juvenile to adult. generation of the scapulars on this bird. I caution readers the plumage and The authors term it first cycle indicating molt terminology is heavy going and that they do not know its exact plum - should be read several times to fully age. Although it is often difficult to sep - understand it. Its basis is the Humphrey arate juvenal from first basic scapulars, and Parkes (1959) system of molts and my sense is that many Ont ario Kum - plumages. This under rated and under lien’s retain full juvenal plum age until utilized method is actually simple and New Year or later. Note the second cycle easy to use once learned. Ron Pittaway Kumlien’s Gull number 35A.39 on page introduced me to Humphrey and Parkes 259. The two outer primaries (P9 and (H & P) about 15 years ago and I now 10) on the right wing seem much too employ it religiously. The authors have narrow and pointed for a second cycle determined that both the H & P and (second basic primaries) age designa - the British system, favoured by Peter tion. It looks like a first basic bird to me. Grant, do not adequately address the See first cycle Thay er’s Gulls on page many anomalies to understanding molts 266 (36.17). Not noted in the caption, and plumages in gulls. They employ a the right most bird appears to be a sec - customized H & P system. An example ond basic Western or Glaucous-winged is found in , which goes from x Western hybrid. On page 270, the juvenal plumage to definitive basic in its photo 36.34 of the adult nonbreeding second calendar year. This species, Thayer’s Gull has a production error accor d ing to the book, has no definitive involving the tips of P9 and 10 on the prealternate molt, and does not change right wing, referred to in the caption, its appearance seasonally. Contrast this which is cut off at the margin. to the treatment in Grant’s (1986) A key component of the photo cap - guide. I still struggle with the concept tions is the terminology for age and that very few large white-headed gulls plumage designations. Rather than have a first prealternate molt in the attempt to provide any clarification spring of their second calendar year. H myself, I refer readers to the following: & D contend that most transition from the Species Accounts themselves; “Des- first basic to second basic plumage is by crip tion and Molt” on page 6; pages 30 a protracted complete molt from spring to 44, beginning with “Molts and Plum- to fall. ages” , and concluding with “Molt Howell and Corben (2000) started Strategies of American Gulls”. Central the confusion and controversy by devi - to this section is “Molt and Changing ating from the terminologies used by Appearance” starting on page 33. The Grant and H & P. Grant taught us that maturation stages in a are first basic (first winter) large gulls have a

VOLUME 25 NUMBER 3 164

Figure 1. Definitive basic Iceland Gull, Markham, Ontario, 6 January 2006. Photo: Brandon Holden. head-body molt beginning in late Janu - great deal of work has been undertaken ary and lasting until late April, resulting over the past 25 years, furthering our in first alternate (first summer) plumage. understanding of the complex issue of The complete second prebasic molt then molt in gulls. I think an open mind is the commences in June and lasts until Nov- best tool to employ here. ember on average, according to Grant. The majority of the 1,160 photo - However, we can clearly see that the sec - graphs in the book are from California, ond prebasic molt starts in late April and with a heavy reliance on photos taken in early May, when the innermost primaries that state by the first author. The remain- are shed, well shown in second calendar der are from other American states, for - year Herring Gulls in Ontario. So where eign countries on six continents and does a first alternate plumage fit in? Com - Canada. Most Canadian photos are from pounding this is the difficulty in deter - Newfoundland by Bruce Mactavish. Not mining how much of the extremely vari - one photo is from Ontario. The closest is able appearance of large second year gulls a photo taken by Willie D’Anna of a is due to the effects of wear and fading, presumed hybrid Glaucous x American as well as molt. Adding to this conun - Herring on page 285 (H3.1). This pho - drum are gulls returning north from tograph is one of only two in the book southern coastal areas with extreme taken in the Great Lakes region. Ontario bleaching effects of sun and sand abra - is one of the largest jurisdictions in sion. Perhaps through all of this confu - North America. Gulls abound here as sion, it is best to keep in mind that a breed ers, migrants, and in winter.

ONTARIO BIRDS DECEMBER 2007 165

Ontario has one of the largest gull lists of Acknowledgements any state or province and has many tal - I thank Willie D’Anna, Jean Iron and Ron ented photographers such as 20-year-old Pittaway for helpful comments and suggestions Brandon Holden who specializes in gull on the first draft. I also want to thank Brandon photography (see Fig. 1). Many of Bran - Holden for permitting the use of one of his photographs to illustrate this review. don’s images of gulls in flight are unri - valled. The Niagara River, with most of Literature Cited the best vantage points on the Ontario Dunn, J.L. and J. Alderfer editors, 2006. side is one of the prime gull watching National Geographic Field Guide to the Birds areas in the world. The Point Pelee area of North America., National Geographic has a high number of gull species in all Society, Washington, D.C. four seasons. Were the authors handi - Dwight, J. 1925. The Gulls ( ) of the capped by a lack of familiarity with World: Their Plumages, Molts, Variations, Relationships, and Distribution. Bulletin of Ontario’s gulls and birders? How many the American Museum of Natural History gull experts west of Canada’s youngest 52: 63-402. province were consulted about identifi - Grant, P.J. 1982. Gulls: A Guide to Identifica - cation matters, variation in Herring tion. Buteo Books. Vemilion, South Dakota. Gulls, and the status and distribution of Grant, P.J. 1986. Gulls: A Guide to Identifica - gulls across the country? Past issues of tion, Second Edition. Academic Press, Ontario Birds should have been more San Diego. thoroughly examined for relevant arti - Howell, S.N.G. , and C. Corben , 2000. cles. I found only four listed in the A commentary on molt and plumage termi - lengthy Bibliography. The considerable nology: implications from the Western Gull. Western Birds. 31: 50-56. specimen resources of the Canadian Mus eum of Nature and Royal Ontario Humphrey, P.S. and K.C. Parkes, 1959. An approach to the study of molts and Mus eum were not used. The above illus - plumages. Auk 76: 1 – 31. trate the strong “American West Coast Olsen, K.M. and H. Larsson . 2003. Gulls of bias” that pervades the birding literature North America, Europe and Asia. Princeton over the past few decades. University Press, Princeton. For the birder with only a general Pittaway, R. 2005. Book Review: Gulls of interest in gull identification, I recom - North America, Europe and Asia. Ontario mend the National Geographic Guide Birds 23: 42-44. (2006) or Sibley (2000) to identify most Sibley, D.A. 2000. The Sibley Guide to Birds. gulls. However, serious gull students Alfred A. Knopf, New York. should acquire Howell and Dunn’s book and give it a place on the bookshelf next Kevin McLaughlin , 30 Bingham Road, to Olsen and Larsson’s guide. Having Hamilton, Ontario L8H 1N4 both books will serve you well as key ref - erences for years to come.

VOLUME 25 NUMBER 3