Table

 

Glossy Ibis – Accepted

1. 27 May 2000

ATY

vic. Calipatria IMP

2000-109B

31

ph.

2. 01–15 Jul 2000

ATY

vic. Calipatria IMP

2000-096

26

Fig. 206, ph., Patten & Lasley (2000)

3. 01–02 Jul 2000

ATY

vic. Calipatria IMP

2000-109A

27,29

ph., Patten & Lasley (2000)

4. 14–15 May 2001

ATY

Alviso SCL

2001-079

27

Fig. 207, ph., NAB 55:381

and 20-21 May 2001

 

Hayward Regional Shoreline ALA

2001-104

27

 

5. 13–19 Sep 2002

ASY

Prado Basin RIV

2002-222

28

 

6. 09 Jul 2003

ATY

vic. Calipatria IMP

2003-086

29

ph., San Miguel & McGrath (2005)

 

Glossy Ibis – Not accepted, identification not established

29–31 Aug 1999

 

Twentynine Palms SBE

1999-143

27

ph., Patten & Lasley (2000)

01–15 Jul 2000

 

vic. Calipatria IMP

2000-110

28

ph., Patten & Lasley (2000)

08 Jul 2000

 

vic. Calipatria IMP

2003-205

31

 

19 Jul–31 Aug 2003

 

Pt. Mugu VEN

2003-115

29

ph.

 

 

 

 

 

Figures

Image3131.TIF

Figure 206. The Glossy Ibis’s expansion across the continent was first detected in California around the turn of the twenty-first century. This adult in full alternate plumage was photographed on 1 July 2000 near Calipatria, Imperial County (2000-096; Kenneth Z. Kurland).

 

Image3131.TIF

Figure 207. This pioneering adult Glossy Ibis, present from 14 to 21 May 2001 on south San Francisco Bay, was northern California’s first. This photo was taken on 15 May 2001 at Alviso, Santa Clara County (2001-079; Les Chibana).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Glossy Ibis

GLOSSY IBIS Plegadis falcinellus (Linnaeus, 1766)

Accepted: 6 (60%)

Treated in Appendix H: yes

Not accepted: 4

CBRC review: all records

Not submitted/reviewed: 0

Large color images:see Figures

This wader has a vast and discontinuous Old World distribution, breeding from southern Europe to southern Asia and wintering mainly in Africa, southern Asia, Indonesia, and Australia. The species apparently colonized the New World during the 1800s, with breeding first reported in the Southeast during the 1880s (Palmer 1962, Davis and Kricher 2000). Subsequent expansion has included a strong push south and west since the mid 1980s (Patten and Lasley 2000), although the northeastern component of its range contracted slightly during the same period. By the mid 1990s the species had reached western Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, and Colima, and was established in the southwestern Yucatan Peninsula (Howell and de Montes 1989). First records from Arizona (NAB 55:333; 60:417), Utah (Utah Bird Records Committee data), Wyoming (Patten and Lasley 2000), Idaho (NAB 59:626; 60:409), and Washington (NAB 59:484, 529) have followed. By the mid 2000s this species was regarded as a rare, regular visitor to many states in the Great Plains. Presumably reflecting identification difficulties, and perhaps the timing of White-faced Ibis migration, records of the Glossy Ibis from Colorado and adjacent states are concentrated between mid April and mid May (Faulkner 2004), and almost invariably pertain to adults in alternate plumage with their bare parts in full breeding condition. Although the range does seem to be expanding westward, some portion of this species’ change in status may reflect increased awareness and vigilance among western observers.

California’s first records of the Glossy Ibis were furnished by an adult photographed on 27 May 2000 near Calipatria, Imperial County, followed by two more adults photographed in the same area in early July of the same year (see Figure 206). Within the next three years, three more adults were found in the central and southern parts of the state, all between 14 May and 16 September; see also Appendix H.

Plegadis ibises in nonbreeding condition can be challenging to identify, and juveniles may be impossible (Kaufman 1990, Patten and Lasley 2000). Of particular concern, birds in Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, and Arizona have shown characters consistent with Glossy × White-faced Ibis hybrids (Wood and Semo 2002; Arterburn and Gryzbowski 2003; Faulkner 2004; NAB 58:579; 60:409), and hybrid pairings have been recorded in Wyoming (Faulkner 2005). Thus any acceptable record must explicitly rule out a hybrid.