ZS TZ (BRITISH BIRDS With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, " The Zoologist.” AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED BY NORMAN F. TICEHURST, o.b.e.. m.a. f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. AND A. W. BOYD, M.C., M.A.. F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. Volume XXXVIII JUNE, 1944 — DECEMBER, 1945. H. Fi & G. WITHERBY Ltd. 326 HIGH HOLBORN LONDON LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. PAGE Seasonal course of bird-song, 1942-43 (P. R. Cox) Sketch-map illustrating the migratory movements of Chaffinches and other birds described in the text (H. G. Hurrell) Plate 1. Little Ringed Plover: the female settling on eggs. (. Photographed by M. D. England) facing Plate 2. Little Ringed Plover : the male about to sit. ( Photographed by M. D. England) Plate 3. Little Ringed Plover : male standing, female sitting. ( Photographed by M. D. England) Plate 4. Little Ringed Plover : nest-relief. Male APPROACHING FROM THE RIGHT, FEMALE RUNNING off in same direction. ( Photographed by M. D. England) facing Plate 5. Upper— Site of Shearwater colony, Puffin Slope, Lundy. Lower— Nestling Manx Shearwater, Puffin Slope, July 3RD, 1942. (. Photographed by H. N. Southern) facing Map to show distribution of the Corn-crake in the British Islands. ( Compiled and drawn by C. A. - Norris) Graph illustrating weekly fluctuations in the numbers of Common Sandpipers observed at Llanishen Reservoirs, 1922-1944. (Geoffrey C. S. Ingram) Sketch-map of the south-west corner of Lundy, SHOWING COUNTS OF SEA-BIRDS MADE BY THE WRITERS, WITH PERRY’S FIGURES FOR APPROXI- MATELY THE SAME SPOTS SHOWN IN BRACKETS. {Drawn by B. W. Tucker) ... Graph of the indices of Heron population, 1928-44, COMPARED WITH A GRAPH ILLUSTRATING THE SEVERITY OF THE WINTER DURING THE SAME period (W. B. Alexander) 7 10 IIO in 126 143 169 189 233 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Plate 6. Upper — Hen Black Redstart, Ramsgate, 1944. ( Photographed by Lt. P. L. Wayre). Lower— Hen Black Redstart with food for • young, Lowestoft, 1944. (. Photographed by Capt. G. K. Yeates) facing Song-Thrush song ( Diagrams by Noble Rollin). Fig. 1. Total Output of Song during the Day ... Fig. 2. Portion of Day used in various Activities Fig. 3. Total Output of Song during the Day ... Fig. 4. Penetration of Dawn Fig. 5. Comparison of Dawn Penetration and Minutes of Song before Sunrise Plate 7. Black-winged Stilt. Upper — Bird in flight over breeding territory. ( Photographed by H. N. Southern Lower — General view of the breeding territory. ( Photographed by J. Staton). ...facing Plate 8. Black-winged Stilt : the undisturbed nest and eggs on June 17TH, [Photographed by J. Staton). Plate 9. Black-winged Stilt. Same nest on June 2ist, showing rapid growth of vegetation during incubation. (. Photographed by J. Staton). Young bird, found dead on July 9TH ( c . 14 days old). ( Photographed by J. Staton). Plate 10. Black-winged Stilt : field sketch of FLAPPING DISPLAY, NOTTS., JULY 1ST, 1945. [Drawn by J. Staton) ... ... ...facing Plate 11. Corn-Crake : male displaying before stuffed decoy. [Photographed by Capt. A. G. Mason) facing Plate 12. Corn-Crake. Upper— Male displaying before stuffed decoy. PAGE 248 263 265 266 268 269 322 313 350 Lower — Male offering caterpillar to decoy. [Photographed by Capt. A. G. Mason) facing 35i BRITISH BIRDS AmtiJsrpearomGAZirc DEM^TEDQUErLYTOTHEBIRDS ^oninEBRrisnusT^' JUNE 1, Vol. XXXVIII. 1944. M, No. 1. JET **■ 1> vSSBSk J&J.lt- - MONTHLY ls9d.YE ARLY20s. 326IHGH HOLBOFNENDON- HF&GWHERBYLTD A new impression with revisions is now in the Press. THE HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS By H. F. Witherby, F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U., Editor; Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain. M.A., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U. ; Norman F. Ticehurst, O.B.E., M.A., F.R.C.S., M.B.O.U.. C.F.A.O.U. ; and Bernard W. Tucker. M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. 133 Coloured and 24 Monochrome Plates figuring ail the species, 300 Text Figures and 37 Maps. Each of the 520 birds is fully treated in the following sections : — HABITAT. FIELD-CHARACTERS AND GENERAL HABITS, VOICE. DISPLAY AND POSTURING, BREEDING. FOOD. BRITISH DISTRIBUTION, MIGRATIONS. DISTRIBUTION ABROAD. DESCRIPTION (all plumages), CHARACTERS & ALLIED FORMS. Large Demy 8vo. 5 Vols. £6. SONGS OF WILD BIRDS By E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by Julian Huxley. With two double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge-Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. 30.t net. By the same authors Postage 8d. MORE SONGS OF WILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring he Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood-Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle-Thrush, Lleron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. “All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. bmieudiwb With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, "The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED BY Norman l\ Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number i, Vol. XXXVIII., June i, 1944. PAGE Editorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A Statistical Investigation into Bird-Song. Bv P. R. Cox, 3 F.I. A. . . . . Chaffinch Migration in the South-West. By H. G. Hurrell .. 10 Feeding Habits of the Black-headed Gull. By Geoffrey C. S. Ingram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Attacks on Diving Birds by Black-headed Gulls. By A. W. Boyd .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 Notes : — Some food remains left in a Black Redstart’s nest after the young had fledged (P. A. Adolph) . . . . . . . . 16 Great Spotted Woodpecker breaking open almond nuts (Rev. J. R. Hale) i7 Great Spotted Woodpecker in W. Ross-shire (Miss Averil Morley, F. Fraser Darling) ... .. .. .. .. 17 Garganey in Cumberland (H. G. Alexander) .. .. .. 17 Gannets fishing in fresh water (J. A. Anderson) . . .. .. 17 Red-breasted Snipe in Hampshire (Miss Christine H. Popham) 18 Little Stint in Devon in winter (H. G. Alexander) .. .. 18 Glaucous Gulls in Anglesey (R. C. R. Allen) . . . . . . ig Reviews : — Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of 19 Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire, 1942 London Bird Report for 1 942 .. . . % . .. .. 19 Annual Report of the Clifton College Natural History Society, 1942 ’. . 19 Annual Report of Gresham’s School Natural History Society, 1943 • • • • • ■ • • • • • • • • . . 20 Annual Report of the Oundle School Natural History Society, 1943 • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . 20 Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservation Society : Annual Reports, 1931-42 2G A EDITORIAL. At the beginning of a new volume I take the opportunity of making some announcements with regard to the conduct of this journal. It was always Mr. Witherby’s practice, and especially so since the death of the Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain, to consult ornithologists with special knowledge in particular fields whenever this seemed desirable in connexion with British Birds. I now propose to bring such kind helpers into a slightly more “ official ” relationship with the magazine by forming a panel of honorary consultants whose names will be announced from time to time. For the present this will consist of the following : — Messrs. H. G. Alexander, W. B. Alexander, Miss E. V. Baxter, the Hon. G. L. Charteris, Mr. R. Chislett, Sir Hugh Gladstone, Messrs. G. R. Humphreys, G. C. S. Ingram, N. B. Kinnear, Lt.-Col. R. F. Meiklejohn, Miss L. J. Rintoul, Mr. B. B. Riviere, Lt.-Col. B. H. Ryves, Mr. H. N. Southern, and Dr. A. Landsborough Thomson. Though it will be understood that this arrangement is only giving a rather more formal status to what has in fact long been done, I am sure that our readers will welcome the more definite association of these well-known workers with the magazine. Ornithologists directly engaged on war service have been intentionally omitted for the time being, but it is hoped to add other names after the conclusion of the war with Germany. The arrangement by which the present volume will run until December, 1945, so that subsequent volumes may coincide with the calendar year, has ahead}' been announced. Apart from the intrinsic advantages of the change, the present time is an opportune one for making it, as owing to the necessary war-time reduction in the size of the parts the inclusion of nineteen in the current volume, instead of the normal twelve, will not make it unduly bulky. Finally, a word is perhaps necessary in explanation of the some- what increased space devoted recently to Reviews. Owing to the late Mr. Witherby’s ill-health the reviewing of local reports, an important function of a magazine like British Birds, was somewhat seriously behindhand and it was necessary to occupy some extra space in order to adjust this. I mention this in case any reader has been inclined to think the space devoted to these notices excessive in view of the war-time reduction of the magazine. B.W.T. (3) A STATISTICAL INVESTIGATION INTO BIRD-SONG BY P. R. COX, F.I.A. Bird-song may be heard at almost any daylight hour of the year, but its quantity varies considerably. In order to sample such variations, observations were made of the numbers of certain species heard singing during walks along specified routes at fixed times of day. In every ten-day period (i.e. three periods per month), a dozen counts were made of the numbers in song, six on each of two routes, of which three were in the morning (8 a.m.) and three in the evening (6 p.m.) ; these counts lasted for some 25 minutes each, and from one to fifty birds would be recorded, according to the season . The area of observation was one of Surrey downland, some now cultivated, broken by coppices and fringed with the gardens of houses. One route was about 2,000 yards long, and an alternative was chosen making a detour of 500 yards through a wood. Attention was fixed on the numbers of each species heard singing. This is a unit of observation which is easily and distinctly counted, thus reducing the possibility of errors to a minimum. Relative changes in the volume of song are not necessarily reflected accurately in the data collected ; to measure them would seem to require more elaborate methods. It is not possible to define accurately the area from which observations were taken ; for one thing, audibility varies with the strength and direction of the wind. Again, the notes of some species carry much further than those of others ; there is thus little value in comparing one species with another in the data, and attention is confined to song-variations of each separate species in certain conditions, except where a common trend is illustrated in the combined results. Comparison of Song in the Morning and Evening. It is possible to subdivide the twelve observations made in each ten-day period into those of the morning and evening, and it is of interest to see how the two compare. As data for individual species are generally too small for reliable conclusions to be drawn, birds of a family have been grouped together, the only exceptions being the Robin, Blackbird and Song-Thrush. A few observations in respect of pipits have been added to those relating to larks. The group “ others ” is a miscellany consisting mainly of the Wren, Hedge-Sparrow and Cuckoo. B 4 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. In the following table, broad periods of two months are shown, and the results are a combination of the observations of 1942 and 1943 : — March & May & July & September April. June. August. & October Morning 364 424 1 1 2 Finches . . = 2.2 — = 1.8 = 2.2 Evening J65 241 52 Morning 288 330 no Larks & Pipits . = 2.0 = 1.5 = 1 . 5 Evening 143 221 89 Morning 339 179 64 Tits = 1.6 = 2.7 = 12.8 Evening 215 68 5 Morning 151 445 . 49 Warblers . . = 1.7 = 1.6 — = 24.5 Evening 88 270 0 Morning 336 240 42 Song-Thrush = 2.1 = T-4 — = 1.9 Evening l6l 170 22 Morning 191 271 O Blackbird . . — = 0.7 — =. 0.7 — = nil Evening 288 412 12 Morning 359 202 108 500 Robin — = 0.9 = 1.2 = 4-3 = 2.1* Evening 404 172 25 238 Morning 361 356 191 Others — = 3.1 = 3-4 = 7-3 livening 117 106 26 Total Morning 2389 2447 675 = 1.5 = i-5 = 2.9 Evening 1581 1660 233 •This is the only comparison worth making in this period. Morning songsters are clearly more numerous than those of the evening in almost every species examined. The only consistent exception is the Blackbird. During July and August, when there is much less song, the preponderance of the morning over the evening generally becomes greater. Variations in the ratios for the Robin are interesting. Evening song is superior in the spring, slightly less in May and June, about half in the autumn, and almost negligible in July and August. It must be remembered that the times of counting, while fixed by the clock, are at a continually varying distance from the start and finish of daylight. In fact, from about the end of October to the middle of February, under present conditions, it is dark at one or both of these times, and no appreciable song can be recorded. The following table shows the relationship between sunrise, sunset and the time of counting at the middle of each month of observation : the dates in italics fall within the period of Double Summer Time : — vol. xxxviil] BIRD-SONG INVESTIGATION. 5 Sunrise Sunset Time (Greenwich Mean) Difference from 8 a.m. hrs. mins. Time (Greenwich Mean) Difference from 6 p.m. hrs. mins. Feb. 14th ... 7.17 a.m. - O 17 5.12 p.m. — O 12 Mar. 15th ... 6.16 + O 44 6- 3 — I Apr. 15th ... 5- 6 + 0 54 6.56 - 2 56 M ay 9 9 • • • 4- 9 + 1 5i 7-45 - 3 45 June 9 9 ... 3-42 + 2 18 8.18 — 4 18 July 9 9 • • • 3-59 + 2 I 8. 11 - 4 1 1 Aug. 9 9 • • • 4-44 + 2 16 7.24 - 2 24 Sept. 9 9 • • • 5-34 + 1 26 6.16 - I 16 Oct. 9 9 • • • 6.22 + 0 38 5- 8 - O 8 Thus, in March to October, morning counts were taken from half- an-hour to two hours after sunrise, while evening counts were taken at times varying from four hours before sunset in June and July to sunset itself in October. Now the volume of song varies through the day, but the extent of the variations is not fully known,* apart from the facts of a surge of song between dawn and sunrise at certain seasons, and &a corresponding, though smaller, peak of song round about sunset The new observations show that there is a significant difference between morning and evening song at times while the sun is up, and that this difference itself varies from season to season. In order to draw the diurnal curve of song with any degree of accuracy, it would be necessary to make observations at frequent intervals throughout each day of the year, a task which might need a team of observers. For the present the results obtained can only be considered in relation to the limitations about times of observa- tion. It is fairly plain, however, that the substantial variations in the relationship between morning and evening song can only be affected to a very limited extent by the small changes in time shown in the above table. Seasonal Course of Song.J To represent changes in the numbers singing through the seasons is not a straightforward matter, because of the diurnal variations and also because the lengths of the days are continually altering Either some representative hour or hours of the day must be chosen or else perhaps the average daily song should be computed and used as a measure. Charts have been constructed in respect of certain species from the data of the present investigation, combining the observations made at 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., and these are appended. The horizontal lines indicate the numbers singing in each ten-day period, on the *See British Birds, Vol. xxviii, p. 364, Vol. xxxiii, p. 4 and Vol. xxxvi • IT I4t). * f See British Birds, Vol. xxix, p. 190 and Vol. xxxvi, pp. 65, 86 and 102. fi BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. basis of four standard counts : that is, one-third of the total number obtained from twelve counts, representing the aggregate of one count along each route at each time. By joining these horizontal levels with vertical lines a histogram is produced showing seasonal variations : the average of the years 1942-43 is shown and thus no less than twenty-four observations contribute to each level. It is of course important to consider how far representative the chosen hours are of the average daily song. Where these times coincide, as they do in February and October, with dawn or sunset, then the data are almost certainly inflated above the average for those months. In other months the counts have been made at varying times relatively to dawn and dusk, that is, at different points along the curve of hourly changes within the day. The seasonal course of song shown here cannot, therefore, be considered as fully representative, because it may be somewhat altered in shape by the varied time of observation. There seems good reason to believe, however, that the degree of distortion is small. Direct observation reveals that a change of an hour or two in the morning or evening, while the sun is up, does not substantially affect the data. Various tests made among the mass of statistics (there were in all about six hundred counts) confirm this opinion. Where the size of the results warranted, separate histograms were constructed in respect of the morning and the evening. These exhibited, in the species examined, a general similarity of shape, although based upon times standing in very different relation to the two ends of the day. Considering only the period February to July, the charts fall into two broad types : those with a single rise and fall, that could be graduated by bell-shaped curves (somewhat skew) and those with more than one peak. The first class consists principally of the Blackbird and warblers, but the Great Tit, Sky-Lark and Chaffinch are also appropriately placed there. On the other hand clear instances of a double hump are afforded by the Song-Thrush, Blue- Tit and Hedge-Sparrow, with the Wren as a probable case. The song of the Robin shows a more or less steady decline throughout, but there is evidence of a small revival at the end of May. Now these diagrams are not just the experience of a single year ; they are based on the average of 1942 and 1943, and whereas 1942 commenced with a hard winter, the start of 1943 was very mild and the spring and summer were early. In spite of these wide differences however, there is a close similarity of shape (and size) between the curves for the separate years, although the start, peak and end of the 1943 experience often occurred a week or two earlier than in 1942. The only exception worth mentioning is the Chaffinch ; the shape shown is the average of two rather dissimilar curves, one I with a late peak (in May, 1942) and the other exhibiting a more or less consistent level of song from March to June, in 1943. 7 VOL. XXXVIII.] BIRD-SONG INVESTIGATION. C/3 cc s| El O o < D oo LU O O OO . ^ /V i Q cc o ^ U 00 ro 'T i (N O Q CC CQ o w o w o w CO CM CM >- r- 1 1 1 l 1 1 l 1 i I 1 « 1 1 i ' r 1 1 » ■ — • I * Feb Mar. Apr May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. s BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. The double humps are in evidence each year ; the effect of combining the two years is generally to broaden the base and diminish the height of a peak, because of differences in the dates of its occurrence. Since some species rear but one brood in a year, while others have two or more, it is of interest to examine whether these habits can be correlated with variations in the level of song. That the comparison is far from being close may be seen from the following table : — Normal Number Number of peaks Species of broods Chaffinch Sky-Lark Blue Tit ... Great Tit Willow-Warbler. Other Warblers.. Song-Thrush Blackbird Robin Wren Hedge-Sparrow . 2 . I 2 I I 2 I I I I 1 I 2 or 3 2 2 or 3 i 2 or 3 ?2 2 2 2 2 Of eleven cases observed, there are four at least in which the number of broods and peaks do not correspond. In the case of the Chaffinch and Sky-Lark it is true that the maximum level of song is maintained over a long period, but the sharp single peak of the Blackbird is clearly out of accord ; in the case of the Blue-Tit the evidence of a double-hump is strongly supported by observations, giving more copious results, upon its call-notes. It has been often remarked that the song of an individual male bird follows a different course according to whether it is mated or not. Possibly, therefore, the seasonal histograms are compounds in varying proportions of two basically different types of curve, one flat and steady in respect of unmated cocks, the other having surges of song and periods of silence. On the other hand, the evidence is somewhat discouraging to this theory. Influence of Weather on Song. A note of the condition of the sky and of the atmosphere was made at each count. In view of the seasonal change in the level of song, however, it is only possible to measure the effect of weather on the data over short periods, calendar months being chosen for the purpose. Further, it is only in months of varied conditions that any useful comparisons can be made. Distinction between fine and fair, dull and dry, wet and snowy weather was made, with the following results : no subdivision into species or families has been made : — vol. xxxviil] BIRD -SONG INVESTIGATION. 9 Average Numbers Heard in Four Standard Counts.* Weather March 1942 April 1943 Fine ... f ( 134 Fair 1 135 Dull, dry 82 1 Wet (often 131 windy) 96 1 Snowy 32 — May 1942 125 144 113 J une 1942 97 82 ) 84 July 1943 29 31 32 Considering these figures as a whole, it is clear that only one type of weather, snow, was associated with an appreciable change in the numbers singing. More evidence will, however, need to be collected before it can be fully established that song is independent of changes in sky and atmosphere in the spring and summer. Song along the two Routes. The ratio of the lengths of the two routes used is 0.8. The corresponding ratio of the numbers heard was consistently around this figure, taking all species together. Among individual families, larks and pipits and finches showed higher ratios, indicating a preference for the shorter route, while tits and the Robin had lower ratios. This is as might be expected, since the longer route, passing through a wood, contained a higher proportion of trees and shrubs and less open country. Otherwise there was too close a similarity between the two ways for any remarkable differences to be expected. In conclusion, it is suggested that methods similar to those described might form the basis for a more searching enquiry over a wider range of country which could be the means of acquiring new information about the incidence of bird-song. ♦Based on a total of 36 counts in each month, or 180 counts in all, cover- ing about 5,000 birds heard. In each entry in the table, the separate experiences of the morning and evening and of the two routes are combined. (10) CHAFFINCH MIGRATION IN THE SOUTH-WEST BY I H. G. HURRELL. The interesting point about Ur. Bannerman’s notes on the above sub- ject (antea, vol. xxxvii, p. 177) is the regularity of the south-westerly migration reported by him at Vention. Bird-watchers who live in Devon and Cornwall have had difficulty in finding any coastal points at which early morning autumn migration can be seen with regularity. The Devon Bird-Watching and Preservation Society carried out many simultaneous watches with the object of tracing migratory movements, especially coastwise ones. On pre-arranged days strategic coastal points were watched from daybreak and all bird movements recorded and subsequently compared ; the results Sketch-map, illustratiug tbs migratory movements of Chaffinches and other birds described in the text. The arrows indicate the directions of the movements referred to. succeed in tracing the same movement past two or more observers- There is no regular movement at Bucks Mills, which is situated a few miles further along the coast in the direction in which Dr. Bannerman’s migrants were heading. This fact has been ascertained from%Irs. Bergg, who lives at Bucks Mills. Evidently the migrants either turn inland, probably at the mouth of the Taw andTorridge, or else make straight across the sea to a point nearer Hartland. Alternatively they may stop soon after passing Vention. Simultaneous watches have produced interesting observations on the migration of Chaffinches (Fringilla ccelebs) on certain occasions. On November 4th, 1934, Chaffinches totalling 200 vol. xxxviii] CHAFFINCH MIGRATION. 11 arrived at Hartland Point in parties which came in over the sea from the north. Incidentally on this occasion vast flocks of Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) flew in the opposite direction out to sea. A year later, November 3rd, 1935, a gale was blowing from the south-east, and with the following two exceptions all our watchers drew blank. In one case thirteen flocks of Chaffinches totalling 80 birds crossed the Exe estuary flying south-west. The other exception was at Bucks Mills, where no less than 3,000 small birds, mostly Chaffinches, coasted westwards towards Hartland Point during the morning. Near Hartland they were seen resting in fields for awhile. Then in the afternoon they flew back again along the coast, but this time they turned inland at Bucks Mills and disappeared south- eastwards. On two occasions flocks of Chaffinches have been noted in autumn coasting westwards near Plymouth, but this is not a regular move- ment. A regular movement of Meadow-Pipits ( Anthus pratensis ) has passed my house on the south-east border of Dartmoor every year on favourable evenings in late September and October. At about 7 p.m. (B.S.T.) they may be seen in considerable numbers flying north-west towards the centre of the moor. Several times House-Martins ( Delichon urbica ) and Chaffinches have been seen migrating in the same direction at the same time. It is to be hoped that this and Dr. Bannerman's movements will be followed up in future seasons. One outstanding thing learnt by the above observations, is, I think, that it is dangerous to assume, in Devon and Cornwall at any rate, that migrants will keep a straight course or continue along a given coast line for a long distance. FEEDING HABITS OF THE BLACK-HEADED GULL BY GEOFFREY C. S. INGRAM. The regular habit of Black-headed Gulls ( Lams r. ridibundus), amongst other species, of hawking flying ants when these insects take their nuptial flights in summer, is well known, but I do not remember having seen any reference to the height to which they rise during the pursuit. Over myv garden in Cardiff on the evening of July 3rd, 1933, after an exceptionally dry and hot day, a big flight of ants took place, the earliest date I have recorded. They immediately attracted a big collection of birds, mostly Swifts ( Apus a. apus)— some two hundred, I calculated — flying in a cone formation with the base and the largest number of birds nearest the ground, thinning to an apex which was very nearly out of sight to the naked eye. I fetched my field-glass (plus 8) and was then able to see that well above the highest Swifts, and quite invisible. to the unaided sight, were five or six Black-headed Gulls which by their erratic movements were evidently also ant catching. Certain diving species appear to have a curious attraction for this species, and after careful watching I have come to the conclusion that food is the real explanation and not mere curiosity. On December 16th, 1934, a female Goldeneye ( Encephala c. clangula) and an immature male Long-tailed Duck ( Clangula hyemalis ) were diving together in close company on Lisvane Reservoir, near Cardiff. Every time they went under a solitary Black-headed Gull also present, would either swim or fly to the spot where they had disappeared and examine the place carefully as though looking for them. Watching it, I was pretty certain that actually it was picking up food which rose to the surface of the water as a result of the activities of the ducks below. This observation has been confirmed several times more recently, at the same place. On October 24th, 1943, three Little Grebes (Podiceps r. ruficollis ) were the centre of attraction for a flight of 15-18 Black-headed Gulls, which constantly hovered and wheeled over the spot where the grebes were diving. Every now and then one or two of the gulls would alight momentarily on the water, and appear to pick up something, while others dabbed at the surface while still in flight. The grebes did not appreciate these attentions and kept under as much as possible, occasionally pushing a beak or head above water, going under again with a vigorous splash. On the rare occasions when they emerged fully, they crash-dived in the midst of a fountain of water whenever a gull passed over. Later in November and December, 1943. the gulls’ attentions were once again directed to Goldeneyes, twcT immature birds diving together, which they worried considerably as they swooped down to snatch some trifle of food from the water. In all the above cases there was no attempt made at snatching food from the ducks VOL. XXXVIII.] BLACK -HEADED GULL. 13 themselves. All the Goldeneyes and Long-tailed Ducks I have watched diving, with the exception of a female Long-tailed Duck which once brought up a beak full of weed, have risen to the surface with empty beaks, anything they have found below being swallowed there presumably. The only other species of diving ducks I have seen bring food to the surface have been Smews ( Mergus albellus) and Red-breasted Mergansers ( Mergus senator) with fish. The Little Grebes may have brought up their catch occasionally, but they themselves were not the centre of interest to the gulls, neither did I see anything in their bills at any time. The late Dr. J. M. Dewar, who I suppose had made more close observations on the diving habits of birds in recent years than any other contemporary ornithologist, states in his book, The Bird as a Diver, that, with the exception of the Coot ( Fnlica a. atra ) “ all the other diving birds have bottom time during which they search for food and on finding it swallow it at or near the bottom unless the food-objects are too large or too hard to be prepared quickly into a form suitable for ingestion.” My own observations confirm this statement, for the fish I have seen brought to the surface by saw-bills, grebes and divers have been of considerable size, and have given their captors a lot of trouble before they were killed and finally swallowed. The statement in The Handbook that on lakes and reservoirs the Black-headed Gull frequently snatches food from diving ducks, grebes and coots, appears to me to be too general.* In the course of nearly forty years of observation I have never witnessed such an incident, and it would be interesting to know under what conditions the observations which form the basis of this statement were made. I can imagine that in such places as St. James’ Park, or Regent’s Park, where some of the visiting ducks become tame enough almost to take food from your hand, and Black-headed Gulls grow equally fearless and constantly compete for favours, such food snatching is likely to occur, but under such artificial conditions it can hardly be recognised as a natural habit. The Handbook refers to the diving of Black-headed Gulls as being “ recorded occasionally.” On November 14th, 1943, and again on the 21st and 28th, I watched at least six, diving repeatedly for nearly half an hour at Lisvane Reservoir. On November the 14th, one of the most expert was an immature bird with mottled wings and banded tail. Facing into a high wind it hovered over the water at a height of about twenty feet, and then, partly closing its wings, it took a vertical header almost exactly like that of a Gannet (Sula bass ana); in fact its whole appearance was that of a miniature Gannet, disappearing completely under water, wing-tips and all, sometimes for a full second. Other adult birds were almost as expert. The attraction on each occasion was a shoal of small fry swimming about twenty feet off shore. *See p. 14. — Eds. (14) ATTACKS ON DIVING BIRDS BY BLACK-IIEADED GULLS BY A. W. BOYD. [In connexion with Mr. Ingram’s observations ( antea , pp. 12-13) I have asked Major Boyd, who has given particular attention to the subject, to record his experiences. It is clear that, at any rate on some waters, actual robbing of food brought up by diving birds, especially grebes, is not uncommon. Attention may also be drawn to a note by Mr. H. J. Massingham (antea, Vol. xiv, p. 260) recording how Tufted Ducks, which are described as, in this case, bringing food, thought to be molluscs, to the surface, were obliged to drop the food, which the gulls secured. Though The Handbook statement criticized by Mr. Ingram is perhaps rather too sweeping and the word " snatch- ing,” if taken in the most literal sense, might be better replaced by some more general term, such as “ robbing,” it is nevertheless evident that the essential fact of such robbery, usually by harrying the divers and obliging them to drop what they have brought up, is well established. — B.W.T.]. I have made many notes during the last fifteen years on the attacks by Black-headed Gulls ( Lams r. ridibundus) on grebes and diving duck on the Cheshire meres and Staffs, reservoirs and have noted that they often attach themselves to a bird or birds, swimming beside them on the water and rising to hover over them when they dive. Undoubtedly in many cases they are in search of food, but some attacks are apparently the outcome of mere combativeness. Great Crested Grebes ( Podiceps c. cristatus) are the birds most consistently attacked and very active attacks are made when the grebes are feeding young. A gull attached itself to a juvenile (September 27th, 1930) and made the adult drop the fish it was carrying to the young one. Grebes with young sometimes counter- attack and assume the offensive attitude with ear tufts and facial frill expanded and wide open bill (August 27th, 1932) ; on May 17th, 1926, a pair, one of them an adult with a juvenile on its back, was attacked and the other adult dropped the fish it was carrying, leapt in the air with bill pointed upwards and frill expanded and practically left the water — I saw its feet — almost hit the gull, andl drove it off. Attacks on adults are frequent. On November 5th, 1941, eight or nine grebes were attended by a dozen gulls (in this case both Black-headed Gulls and Common Gulls ( Lams c. camis) were present), which attacked them after each dive ; one grebe came up with a fish, which a gull apparently secured. The Dabchick (. Podiceps r. ruficollis) is less often attacked. On August 7th, 1932, a Black-headed Gull dashed at an adult which was feeding a juvenile, made it drop and at once secured the food it was carrying. An adult carrying a small fish (February 21st, 1936) managed to retain its fish when attacked. I have seen a Tufted Duck (Aythya fuligula) (October nth, 193b) and Goldeneye (Encephala c. clangula) (November 17th, 1942), strike at and drive off gulls which persistently attacked ; the Goldeneye appeared actually to strike a gull. On February 14th, vol. xxxviii. 1 ATTACKS ON DIVING BIRDS. 15 1938, over a flock of some forty Goosanders ( Mergus m. merganser) , which were diving simultaneously, a number of gulls hovered and persistently attacked them when they reappeared and I have seen a gull in attendance on a drake Smew (M. a. albellus) (January 27th, *935) • Both grebes and diving duck when attacked frequently dive instantly and in a far more hurried way than normally to escape the gulls. That these gulls do at times snatch food from the birds attacked is shown from what I have seen, and the fact that they hover while the grebes are under water and always attack them immediately they reappear seems to show that their primary object is to rob them rather than wait for food stirred up by the birds in their dive. I cannot think that the grebes and duck would ’ resent the gulls’ attention so greatly, if the gulls were seeking nothing more than what they had disturbed. But Black-headed Gulls are evidently naturally pugnacious. On November nth, 1943, I watched an attack from the air on six Mallard ( Anas p. platyrhyncha) , which were badly flustered and flew off in alarm. Even Cormorants ( Phalacrocorax c. carbo ) are attacked on the water (October 18th, 1928), and in the air (October 30th, 1943) ; I have seen attacks made on Herons (Ardea c. cinerea) on several occasions, one of which was chased for 650 yards, on a Kestrel ( Falco t. tinnunculus ) and on a Barn-Owl ( Tyto a. alba) flying in the sunshine. Black-headed Gulls do not often dive in fresh water in my experience : on November 21st, 1926 four or five continually dived head first from a height of two to three feet in rather shallow water, but never entirely closed their wings ; again on October 6th, 1938 I saw one dive headlong and become entirely submerged. (10) • NOTES. SOME FOOD REMAINS LEFT IN A BLACK REDSTART'S NEST AFTER THE YOUNG HAD FLEDGED. Approximately two weeks after the second brood of Black Red- starts ( Phcenicurus ochrurus gibr altar iensis), which bred at the Temple, had fledged, Mr. R. L. E. Ford, F.R.E.S. and myself obtained the nest for examination purposes. The following food remains were identified by Mr. Ford : — Diptera. Heads and eyes of five individuals of the Common House-Fly ( Musca domestica). Heads and eyes of three individuals of the Blue- Bottle Fly ( Calliphora vomitoria). Heads and eyes of seven individuals of other species, unidentifiable, but one probably a Syrphid (Hover-Fly). Dermaptera. The forceps of eight Common Earwigs ( Forficula auricularia) . Hymenoptera. Odd tergites and ventrites of three individuals of the Hive Bee ( Apis mellifica). The body of a Rose Sawfly ( Hylotoma roses), the wings being missing Coleoptera. One head of a Water-Beetle ( Acilius sulcatus). Odd elytra of three species of very small beetles, not identified. One elytron (right) of the Two-spot Ladybird (Coccinella bipunctata). Lepidoptera. Numerous scales of unidentified moths, and heads of three noctua larvae, all of the same species. Myriapoda. One adult “ Thirty-Legs ” (Lithobius forficatus) and one small immature specimen of the same species. Both were intact with the exception of a few pairs of missing legs. The siftings from the nest also contained a certain amount of indeterminable material, probably the remains of insects or myria- pods. The whole task was made very difficult by the quantity of quill sheathings shed by the nestlings. The lepidopterous larvae which were seen taken to the nest by the male Black Redstart, being bright green in colour, were most probably fully grown larvae of the Cabbage Moth (Mamestra brassiecs) . Mr. Ford also informs me that the Rose Sawfly has a bright yellow body with black markings, which is thought by entomologists to be an instance of warning colouration. It seems possible that after having carried this insect to the nest, and after also tearing its wings off, the bird was influenced by the colouring or found the insect distasteful — consequently discarding it. The above list naturally does not prove that the birds had fed on the missing parts of the material analysed, though it might be VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 17 presumed that the material found was in some cases the unpalatable part of the body consumed. Unfortunately no excrement was examined, nothing definable being in the nest. It is regretted that the above analysis was not completed in time to include in Mr. R. S. R. Fitter’s account of “ Black Redstarts in England in the Summer of 1943,” ( antea , vol. xxxvii, pp. 191-195). P. A. Adolph. GREAT SPOTTED WOODPECKER BREAKING OPEN ALMOND NUTS. I see in The Handbook of British Birds under the Food of the Great Spotted Woodpecker ( Dryobates major anglicus ) the nut of the almond tree is not mentioned, so the following details may be of interest, as in my experience most unusual. In a garden about 200 yards from Y aiding Vicarage, Maidstone, is situated an almond tree, the nuts of which had been shed and lay on the ground beneath the tree in great numbers. These nuts were picked up by this woodpecker and carried to a stake about five yards away, to which a Prunus is tied ; the top of this stake is cleft and in this the nuts are placed and split, the whole ground underneath being covered with the empty shells. It seems an amazing feat that the bird can easily open these nuts, which are almost the hardest to break that I know. Amongst the split ones I found ten which had beaten the bird. J. R. Hale. GREAT SPOTTED WOODPECKER IN W. ROSS-SHIRE. On April 22, 1943, a male Great Spotted Woodpecker ( Dryobates major anglicus) was seen at Dundonnell, Little Loch Broom, Western Ross, drumming on a 4 ft. fence stake bordering a strip of larches in which it was later heard calling. The Handbook of British Birds does not record this species so far north on the West of Scotland, but it has in fact been resident in this locality since 1934 at least. Averil Morley, F. Fraser Darling. - GARGANEY IN CUMBERLAND. The Birds of Lakeland, just published, gives very few records of the Garganey ( Anas querquedida ) from Cumberland, so it may be worth recording that a drake Garganey flew close over my head, lin company with several Wigeon, at the head of Bassenthwaite, m April 10th, 1942. Unfortunately it settled out of sight among thick rushes, and I could not get nearer to it, but the white eye- stripe and grey wing were clearly visible before it settled. H. G. Alexander. GANNETS FISHING IN FRESH WATER. There are numerous records of the occurrence of the Gannet Sula bassana) inland in various parts of Scotland, but I am not iware of its having been seen fishing in fresh water It may :herefore be of interest to mention that I have occasionally seen hem on Loch Lomond, but the only date I have actually noted 18 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. was of a pair which appeared to be adults fishing near the River Fruin on June 24th, 1924. I did not consider the matter of excep- tional interest > as I was aware that it had already been recorded in Lumsden and Brown’s Natural History of Loch Lomond as having been seen on the Loch. I am informed that Mr. Stewart, who was at one time a keeper on Buchanan Castle Estate, once watched a single bird diving near Balmaha, but did not record the date. Loch Lomond is frequented by enormous numbers of Powan (Coregonus clupeoides) commonly known as fresh-water herring, and it is possible the birds are attracted by this species of fish. The distance from the nearest point on the Clyde where the Gannet occurs to the loch is about four miles. J. A. Anderson. RED-BREASTED SNIPE IN HAMPSHIRE. While walking on the Stanpit Marshes, Christchurch, Hants, on September 5th, 1943, I had the good fortune to see a Red-breasted Snipe ( Limnodromus griseus), feeding with some Purple Sand- pipers and other waders. It attracted my attention at once as a species quite new to me and I was able to get within 20 yards of it and to examine it with a very good pair of Zeiss binoculars. I was struck by its very stocky shape, like an enlarged Knot, obvious snipe’s head, and shortish legs, which were dark-coloured, appearing blackish-green. The back was bright reddish-brown with black markings and the light eye-stripe was quite distinct. I watched it for some time feeding by quick thrusts of its bill right up to the head into the mud. Hoping to see it again in company with other observers who could support my identification, I did not flush or disturb it and therefore did not see the white rump, which is described as a striking feature in flight ; but once it stretched its tail and I could see that it and the upper tail-coverts were barred brown and white. Linfortunately I was unable to find it again on any subsequent occasion. Christine H. Popham. [We have discussed this record with Miss Popham and are satisfied that it can be accepted, though we think it a pity the bird was not put up in order to see the white rump which would have clinched the identification beyond any possibility of question. — Eds.] LITTLE STINT IN DEVON IN WINTER. On January 1st, 1944, I was walking by the Exe estuary, opposite Topsham, when I detected a Stint flying in a flock of Dunlins. A few minutes later I found it settled on the saltings. I had excellent views of it within ten or twelve yards distance. It was a Little Stint ( Calidris minuta), which appeared to be in first winter plumage. Its upper-parts were about the same colour of grey as the Dunlins with which it was associating. The centres of the feathers on the mantle were strongly marked. A patch on the wing-coverts was nearly white. The breast and under- parts were white. Only one winter record for Devon is given in The Handbook. H. G. Alexander. VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 19 GLAUCOUS GULLS IN ANGLESEY. On February 4th, 5th and 6th, 1943, I had two adult Glaucous Gulls (Lams hyperboreus) under observation in the area of Lion Rock beach, ' Rhosneigr, Anglesey, North Wales. I first noticed the birds on the afternoon of the 4th with a small flock of Great Black-backs (Lams marinus) and was immediately struck by their size and colour. As I approached, the Black-backs rose at about 60 yards, but the two white gulls stayed firm and I was able to examine them with field-glasses at about 40 yards. The back was a pearly grey, the rest of the plumage was a fairly uniform white. The neck bore traces of brown flecks in both, one having more than the other. The legs seemed of a very slightly lighter pink than those of the Great Black-backs. The beaks were bright yellow. The spot on the lower mandibles was slightly smaller than that of the average Great Black-back and a darker red. On closer approach the two gulls rose and I noticed the white primaries and very buzzard-like flight. On the 5th, I came upon the pair again, eating a dead Lapwing. I noticed that the Lapwing’s eyes were out and the brain exposed ; otherwise it appeared undamaged. On the 6th, I again came upon the pair amongst a large pack of mixed gulls, but after this elate up till the 9th, when I left the district, they were not seen again. R. C. R. Allen. REVIEWS. LOCAL REPORTS. Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire, 1942. Edited by B. W. Tucker (University Museum, Oxford). * This report, which shows how well the society maintains its activity, contains as usual many interesting records. Among them Aquatic Warbler, Water- Pipit, Rough-legged Buzzard and several waders are worth special mention, and the continued breeding of Marsh-Warbler and Hobby near Oxford is a matter for satisfaction. Three easily accessible localities have merited special attention : the classic locality of Port Meadow has attracted Whooper and Bewick’s Swans, White-fronted Geese and Smew ; at Sandford, near Oxford, and at Slough a number of uncommon waders have been seen. 'Bird-marking and organized work, which in the past have been a valuable part of this society’s activities, have necessarily suffered. AAV.B. London Bird Report for 1942. (Edited by R. S. R. Fitter and E. R. Parrinder). Supplement to The London Naturalist, is. 6d. Apart from the usual annotated list the report contains articles by Mr. Fitter on " Black Redstarts in London and Middlesex in the Summer of 1942 ” and " Iceland and Glaucous Gulls in the London Area in the Winter of 1941- 42.” There are also shorter articles on “ Pied Wagtails attacking other Birds ” and " A Bigamous Mute Swan,” by H. J. Burkill and on “ Probable Drumming by Green Woodpeckers,” by W. A. Wright. Annual Report of The Clifton College Natural History Society, 1942. The majority of the notes in the Ornithological Section relate to birds observed n the neighbourhood of Bude, North Cornwall. There are brief sections also dealing with observations in Devon and in the vicinity of Bristol. 20 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Annual Report of Gresham’s School Natural History Society, 1943- In the Ornithological Section the notes deal entirely with observations made at Newquay, Cornwall, from May, 1942 to March, 1943- I hey conclude with a list of 48 species reliably recorded as having bred within a ten-mile radius. The Report also includes a Paper on the Natural History of Bishop Loch (near Glasgow) by R. J. Cruickshank which is mainly an account of the birds seen on or near the loch. Annual Report of the Oundle School Natural History Society, 1943. This contains a brief section on birds observed between April, 1942 and March, 1943. Perhaps due to the mild season the numbers of ducks and geese seen along the river was much below the average, a pair of Scaup on February 7th being the most unusual visitors. A flock of about 100 Long-tailed Tits was seen in Lilford Park on December 19th. A list of 103 species of birds seen by Major I. R. English in the Middle East (Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Palestine and Cyprus) is printed at the end of the Report. W.B.A. Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservation Society : Annual Reports, 1931-42. Edited by Lt.-Col. B. H. Ryves and others. We have received from the Society a complete set of these Reports, which contain much valuable information on Cornish birds. As might be expected in a publication for which Col. Ryves is largely responsible much attention is given to detailed observations on breeding, and there are also special articles on the breeding of Wood-Lark (1938), Cirl Bunting (1941) and Tree- Creeper (1942), containing valuable original data. From 1936 on the systematic notes are divided into two sections under the headings status and habits. This arrangement has much to commend it, but a tendency to multiply separate short sections of miscellaneous notes by individual observers might, we think, be curtailed with advantage. A large proportion of such notes might well be included in the main systematic section, and their treat- ment as separate items tends to make the Reports unnecessarily complicated for reference. The history of the more notable breeding species, such as Chough, Raven, Peregrine and Buzzard, is very carefully recorded from year to year. During the period covered the number of definitely known breeding pairs of Choughs in any given year has not exceeded four, though there may have been five in 1941. In 1942 three sites were known to be occupied, but one was unfortunately wrecked by a landslide. Some of the most notable of the rare visitors mentioned, such as Spotted Sandpiper (1924), American Bittern (1928), Yellowshank (1936), Red-breasted Snipe (1937), Yellow-billed Cuckoo (1938), Black Kite (1938 and 1942) and Greater Yellowshank (1939), have already been recorded in British Birds, and the breeding of Pintail in W. Cornwall in 1938 has been mentioned in The Handbook. Under the present severe limitations on our space it is impossible to review the other records and observations at all fully, but mention may be made of the records of : Little Bittern (1922), cliff nests of Heron (1931-1933), Dotterel (1931 and 1938), Rough-legged Buzzard (1932, 1934 anr* 1941), Marsh-Harrier and Night-Heron (1932), White-winged Black Tern (1933), probable Red-footed Falcon (1935), Rose-coloured Starling (1937), Snore-Lark (1938), Whooper Swans (1938 and 1939), Little Bustard and Crane (1939), Red-necked Phalarope and Common Tern in winter (1940), large number of wintering Chiffchaffs (1941), Ruddy Sheld-Duck and a number of Little Auks (1942). Spoonbills have been reported every year since 1938 and a few Grey Lag-Geese have been recorded with some regularity in recent winters. A record of a flock of about fifteen Kentish Plovers on Lelant Beach on August 31st, 1926, is so surprising that it should perhaps be accepted with a certain reserve, although on the characters given (noted at the time) the identification appears to have been correct. On the other hand a record of a Dartford Warbler in 1940 does not seem to us sufficiently authenticated and more details seem desirable about a Honey-Buzzard recorded in 1939. PURCHASED BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- Net. DREAM ISLAND DAYS An Idyll of the Days of Peace BY R. M. LOCK LEY. with many sketches by Mrs. Lockley and plates from photographs The author writes straight from the heart and from the vivid island scene. The book breathes his deep understanding of nature, and shows how two happy mortals found a life of true peace away from the struggle of the crowd. Lists of the birds and plants of the island are included. Fully Illustrated. Demy 8vo. 10 6 net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7/6 net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. New Impression nearly ready INLAND FARM BY R. M. LOCKLEY. Straight from twelve years of the simple life on the lonely sea-girt island of Skokholm (of which he gives such a vivid account in the book Dream Island Days) to a derelict farm on the mainland of Pembrokeshire, came R. M. Lockley and his wife, moving with them the beginnings of the farm they had started on their island. With little money, but with a fresh clear out- look on life that showed an appreciation of true values, the author cut through red tape and demanded the fulfilment of the Government’s war-time pledges of assistance to the farmer. Having obtained the practical assistance of the Pembrokeshire War Agri- cultural Executive Committee, he threw his energies into reclaiming Inland Farm and its lovely old Welsh manor house. Like Skokholm had been, Inland Farm was without a tenant, neglected, needing a pioneer. In this book R. M. Lockley tells of a year’s striving on the land, and the winning of a great harvest. The book ends on a promising note : he finds a second farm and decides to operate both with fellow workers on a co- operative basis. Illustrated. 10/- Net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. BRrriSM BIRDS /NiEiJ3rF«rrowv5AZirc DiyiTTBCHIErLYTOTHEBIRDS ^C’NTllDBKnSn UST^ HF&GWITHERBYLTD- A new impression with revisions is now in the Press. THE HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS By H. F. Witherby, M.B.E., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U., Editor; Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain. M.A., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U. ; Norman F. Ticehurst, O.B.E., M.A., F.R.C.S., M.B.O.U., C.F.A.O.U. ; and Bernard W. Tucker, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. 133 Coloured and 24 Monochrome Plates figuring all the species, 300 Text Figures and 37 Maps. Each of the 520 birds is fully treated in the following sections : — HABITAT, FIELD-CHARACTERS AND GENERAL HABITS. VOICE, DISPLAY AND POSTURING, BREEDING, FOOD, BRITISH DISTRIBUTION, MIGRATIONS, DISTRIBUTION ABROAD, DESCRIPTION (all plumages), CHARACTERS & ALLIED FORMS. Large Demy 8vo. 5 Vols. £6. SONGS OF WILD BIRDS By E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by Julian Huxley. With two double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge-Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, W'ood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. 30s. net. By the same authors Postage 8d. MORE SONGS OF WILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood- Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle-Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. “All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. BRmSflfllRDS With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, “The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED by Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 2, Vol. XXXVIII, July 1, 1944. PAGE A Study of the inland Food Habits of the Common Curlew. By A. Hibbert-Ware and Robert F. Ruttledge . . . . . . 22 Recovery of Marked Birds. Communicated by E. P. Leach . . 28 Notes : — Ornithological Notes from Galway and Mayo (Major Robert F. Ruttledge) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Waxwings in Great Britain . . . . . . . . . . 34 Song-Thrush’s display at nest (Major G. E. Took) . . . . 36 Display of Blackbird (H. E. Littledale, W. L. Colyer) . . . . 36 Hoopoe in Caithness (Miss Eleanor O. Armstrong) .. .. 37 Whooper Swans grazing (J. A. Anderson) .. .. .. 37 Bill-coloration of the immature White-fronted Goose (H. H. Davis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Gadwall diving (William E. Glegg) . . . . . . . . 38 Wood-Pigeons’ nests with three eggs and young (I. J. Ferguson Lees) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Southern Cormorant in Hampshire (Christine H. Popham) 39 % Herring-Gulls feeding independent young (Bertram Lloyd) . . 39 Short Note : — Glaucous Gull in Inner London . . . . . . ... 40 c / A STUDY OF THE INLAND FOOD HABITS OF THE COMMON CURLEW BY A. HIBBERT-WARE* and ROBERT F. RUTTLEDGE. This investigation of the food habits of the Common Curlew (Numenius a. arquata ) during the flocking period was prompted by the results obtained in the Redshank Inquiry ( antea , Yol. xxxvi, PP- 29-33)- In August, 1942, Miss Hibbert-Ware agreed to a request by Major Ruttledge to co-operate in an investigation. She undertook to examine all material submitted, while Major Ruttledge carried out the field work. Our investigation covered the periods August, 1942, to February, 1943, and July, 1943, to March, 1944 (i.e. the time of year during which large flocks of Curlew occur in the vicinity of Lough Carra, Co. Mayo.) Opportunity for study did not occur at other seasons. Feeding Habitats. These vary considerably with the season and with weather conditions in so far as the latter affect water-levels. They are considered only in respect of birds frequenting Lough Carra, about 15 miles from the nearest sea, to which, however, the birds in question do not resort. From July to October cattle-fields, providing dung-beetles, are especially favoured, and to a lesser extent shores of the lake, adjacent bogs, marshland and the edges of flood-waters. In November cattle-fields are almost deserted, stubbles being frequented chiefly. In December fields and stubbles are almost entirely deserted in favour of areas around floods in fields and marshy places. From January to March the feeding-grounds vary, but are chiefly fields with close-cropped grass, borders of the lake and edges of flooded areas ; occasionally newly laid-down land. N.B. — Both winters during the investigation were very mild, but judging by previous experience, exceptional winters apart, the habitats show little variation from those given. Roosts and Resting Places. In order to understand the problem of pellets, with their proof of food taken, and the problems in connexion with them, it seems essential to give some account of the roosting habits of the Curlew. The roosts and resting places (whence the pellets were collected) are quite distinct, being on rocks, sheet-rock, grassy slopes and *It had been intended that Miss Hibbert-Ware should write this joint paper. Most regrettably her death occurred before our investigations were as complete as we had desired. The Rev. G. Hibbert-Ware assisted by Mr. K. Humphries kindly copied out all Miss Hibbert-Ware ’s notes, which the former placed at my disposal. I have done my best to piece them together and to give the results as far as our investigation went. I cannot express sufficiently my indebtedness to the keeness, skill and enthusiasm which my collaborator showed throughout the investigation. R.F.R. vol. xxxviii ] FOOD HABITS OF COMMON CURLEW. 23 grass-topped islets. Two large roosts and two smaller ones were kept under special observation. The former had a varying popula- tion: max. c.400, min. c. 80, average c.180 birds. The smaller had 80-50 birds. Besides these night roosts, from about October 15th, the Curlew habitually gather by day, after feeding, on various sites in order to preen and digest. The birds come to these day-roosts at irregular intervals early in the winter, but from December far more regularly. They arrive some 15 minutes after sunrise, rest for about ij hours, then move into adjacent fields, where they feed for about 2 hours, after which they return to the day-roost, where, with perhaps one or two short excursions to feed, they remain until they fly off to their night- roost. During February the flocks become extraordinarily restless, keeping no regular times, feed perhaps for only a few minutes at a time, then fly round and pitch elsewhere to feed again for another few minutes. During July, August and September the night-roosts are at their greatest strength. Parties usually start arriving at the roost as early as c.3 hours before sunset, reach a peak between one and two hours before sunset, after which numbers subside gradually, some still straggling in after sunset. Birds leave the roost about sunrise and seem to remain away during the day. Later in the autumn, however, and during winter, the numbers at large roosts greatly diminish, smaller roosts are formed, and the birds generally go to their roosts about 45 minutes after sunset. No doubt change in feeding habitat may have something to do with this change in habit, as both occur about the same period. There is no reason to suppose that the birds’ feeding habits are in any way affected by tides in this locality. Method of obtaining Food. When dung-beetles are the main food flocks will move over the fields probing deeply in fairly dry cow-dung, the bill being inserted right up to the base. Sometimes the bill is worked vigorouslv from side to side. On stubbles birds walk quickly, often running and picking up food with no probing. This is the method used through- out the winter when food is obtained mostly from the surface. On the edge of floods birds stand about and probe to various depths. The findings of our investigation are dealt with in two sections : — - (a) The nature of the food material. ( b ) The evacuation of the gizzard-lining. Nature of Food Material. This was determined chiefly by analysis of regurgitated food- pellets. Some account of these pellets is given. Pellets. — These were collected and sent for examination during each month under review ; a number of them were critically examined (The series was not, however, completely analysed.) D 24 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. In appearance the pellets are very like those of the Little Owl (. Athene noctua vidalii). Most were dung-pellets, sparkling with beetle-shards and when freshly ejected had a covering of mucilaginous secretion. During July when the birds first return in flocks pellets are usually scarce and small. In August and September they appear to reach a maximum both in size and numbers. In October a noticeable decrease in numbers and size takes place, while in November the pellets are even smaller and scarce. During December it is hard to find any at all, those that are ejected being about the size of a small pea. Often they consist of a few pieces of grit held together by mud. From January to March pellets appear in negligible quantities or not at all. Field observations showed conclusively that when food changed from the insectivorous and grain types to that of earthworms and other soft foods the pellets diminished in number and size to a marked degree. Grit and stones are the main composition . from November to February. Size. — All pellets were measured. They showed a large range in both length and diameter, but were all, large and small, very similar in general shape. The following are examples : — (a) 3.7 x 2.4 cms. ( b ) 2.8 x 1.7 cms. (c) 2.3 x 1.6 cms. (d) 1.7 x 1.2 cms. (e) 1.9 x 1.3 cms. Nature of food by months, derived from a summary of pellet contents. JULY. Coleoptera abundant: Preponderance of Geotrupes, including Ceratophyus typhosus. Weevils and very many very small beetle fragments. One small downy bird. Frogs (small). Matrix, dung with very few stones. AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER. Geotrupes, usually the only content, embedded in dung. Ceratophyus typhosus very abundant, as well as G. stercorarius. Weevil fairly frequent. Pterostichus. Aphodius. Some pellets entirely composed of Tipula fragments and eggs. Earwigs occasional. Fragments of mollusca. Seeds. Lumbricus sp. A few pellets composed of mud contained heads of worms and portions of body with setas. Matrix, dung, mud, moss. Stones absent from only two out of nine dung pellets, being present in numbers ranging from three to fifteen, in one pellet twenty-two. . Size of stones — pea. vol. xxxviii ] FOOD HABITS OF COMMON CURLEW. 25 OCTOBER. Little variation from the two previous months as regards chief contents. Mostly Geotrupes in dung matrix, and beetles* in moss matrix, which is the usual type of matrix to contain them. One small pellet contained twenty-one stones. NOVEMBER. Report not available. Matrix, moss, moss and Equisetum, mud, soil. JANUARY. One pellet consisting entirely of tangled lengths of earthworms about i" long. FEBRUARY. One pellet consisted entirely of wpodlice. It was conclusively proved that pellets and gizzard-linings are ejected in daytime while birds are at their resting places (day roosts) as well as at their roosts. All evidence also pointed to the fact that pellets are not ejected nightly by every bird. Items of food found in addition to those given in The Handbook. Young birds. Fish fry (teeth-bearing bones). Insects and larvae. Orthoptera : Forficula. Hemiptera : Corixa. Coleoptera : Carabus, Phosphuga, Aphodius, weevils. Diptera: Tipnla eggs. Seeds. Blackberry. Wheat husks. The Evacuation of Gizzard-Linings by Curlew. It came to us as a surprise to find among the pellets large numbers of light yellow pouch-like objects with the consistency of thin rubber. Dr. Percy Lowe kindly identified them as “ the rolled-up c.uticular linings secreted from the tunica mucosa of gizzards. They are rolled up by the muscular coat of the gizzard wall before ejection.” As the tunica mucosa contains mucous glands only (i.e., it produces no chemically acting secretion) the separation of this mucous secretion must be achieved by mechanical trituration brought about by the action of the gizzard muscles, aided by the friction of the stones, grit, beetle shards and other hard objects swallowed by the bird. The folding and ridging of these linings is also due to muscular action. The fact that Curlew share this habit with certain other birds was not our discovery. It came to our notice later that this habit was first made known by Macintyre (1913), who found discarded DECEMBER. Small frogs. Earthworms. Grass husks. Earwigs. Diatoms. Millepedes. Pterostichus madidus. Small beetles* and insects. *The small beetles remained to be identified. 26 BRITISH BIRDS. [vol. xxxviii. gizzard-linings in hundreds on a moss in Scotland where Curlew were in the habit of roosting. A note giving illustrations of ejected lining membranes of Curlew gizzards was also published (Smith, 1913). Evacuation of gizzard-linings through the bill. It is certain that all linings scattered on a Curlew roost or resting- place have been evacuated by way of the bill. Some of them are entire and pouch-like, enclosing in their folds beetle shards, grass husks, stones, etc.; these, in fact, form pellets. Size and shape vary considerably. Others, folded and ridged from muscular action are incorporated with the pellet contents. Small fragments of linings also occur in many pellets. A view of a hitherto un- searched roost would certainly give the impression that Curlew evacuate these linings on a large scale. Macintyre’s (1913) letter might further lead one to the same conclusion. A roost examined early in November was littered with linings. It must, however, be kept in mind that the number of birds at that roost varied from 80-300 and that it had been occupied from July, so that this litter represented the evacuated linings of at least three months and may therefore have represented not more than one lining ejected by any individual bird. In smaller roosts under constant observation two to five linings were found to be the normal production in any one night for 50-80 Curlew. There were nights during which no linings were ejected. An endeavour was made to witness ejection, but this was not accomplished in spite of much watching, nor was pellet ejection actually witnessed. The choking noise (Macintyre, 1913) was never distinguished, which was not .surprising when it is considered how few linings were ejected per night, and the difficulty of correlating that sound amongst the continual guttural gurgling and croaking noises uttered by Curlew at roost. During 1942 in August and September it was easy to collect linings, and they were on the whole very fine specimens similar to those portrayed by Smith (1913), whereas later the linings became small or fragmentary. In 1943, however, the reverse was the case and it was not until December that tfie really good specimens were found in numbers. We had not arrived at any conclusions in this matter. It was proved conclusively That linings are shed and evacuated through the bill from the last week of July until the second week of March, during which period they are shed spasmodically. When freshly evacuated a mucilaginous secretion adheres to them. Evacuation of gizzard-linings through the intestines. In the light of McAfee’s (1917) experience with duck it seemed advisable to examine the possibility of evacuation of linings through the intestines as an alternative method. Faeces were collected and examined. They were of two types, the normal guano type devoid of any gelatinous character, and a vol. xxxvm ] FOOD HABITS OF COMMON CURLEW. 27 very liquid dark brown type (resembling mud) with a preponderance of gelatinous matter. Both types enclosed abundant small particles of beetles and other foods. The brown type faeces are found where Curlew habitually perch and roost and when fresh form a distinct run down the slopes of rocks. They are also found where Curlew have been feeding and standing about. When fresh’ they are very liquid, but after a day or two, according to climatic conditions, the substance dries and cakes to form a hard mat, which rain does not wash away. Naturally the other type also occurs along with it. On a roost approximately 75 per cent, feces were found to be the normal white type, 25 per cent, the gelatinous brown type. Tests as follows were carried out to prove the nature and origin of the brown type. (1) A clean gizzarddining was soaked in water for a period. No change took place. • (2) A small amount of fluid derived from some brown feces was added and in a fortnight the lining was no longer recognisable. (N.B. — Linings do not disintegrate for a considerable period when exposed to weather.) There was formed a brown gelatinous mud which caked on drying and which was identical with the fecal mud collected in the field. Fragments of linings were eventually separated both from the liquid “ mud ” and from two solid brown feces collected later. These remnants were mere films of the original lining, but they retained the characteristic ridges and grooves of the lining. It seems clear, therefore, that the highly gelatinous brown mud is derived from gizzard-linings which have passed through the intestines. REFERENCES. Macintyre, Dugald (1913). Field, March 1, 1913. McAtee, W. L. (1917). The Auk, Vol. xxxiv, pp. 415-421. Parker, Eric (1941). World of Birds, pp. 190-192. Smith, H. Hammond (1913). Note on the ejection of the lining membrane of the gizzard by the Curlew. Brit. Birds, Vol. vi, pp. 334-336. (28) RECOVERY OF MARKED BIRDS COMMUNICATED BY E. P. LEACH. Hon. Sec. Bird-Ringing Committee, British Trust for Ornithology. No. Ringed. Recovered. Raven ( Corvus c. corax). 405787 Lowgill (W.Yorks), 23.5.42, Reeth (N. Yorks), 5.12.43. young, by Sedbergh School. 405744 Pontrhydygroes (Cards), Llanbrynmair (Mont), — .10.42. 23.4.40, young, by W. A. Cadman. 32251 1 322642 324026 323614 SA.760 WR.343 OT.731 WX.736 OX.S3 ZS.398 SC.558 TM.847 JT-577 DM.737 HX.835 Hooded Crow ( Corvus c. comix). Rogart (Suth), 24.5.42, young, Culrain (Ross) 26.4.44. by R. Carrick. Carrion Crow ( Corvus c. corone). RINGED AS YOUNG. Sedbergh (Yorks), 24.5.42 Kendal (Westmor), 1.5.43. by Sedbergh School. Ditto 16.6.42. Long Sleddale (Westmor), 22.4.43. Gayton (Staffs), 9.5.43, by Penkridge (Staffs), — .11.43. A. H. Johnson. Starling ( Sturnus v. vulgaris). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN York, 25.1.42, by Bootham School . Ditto 25.2.39. Wilmslow (Ches), 6.11.36, by E. Cohen. Wistaston (Ches), 28.12.39, by F. J. Brown. Malvern (Worcs), 28.10.36, by P. Morshead. Ditto 16.1.36. Coventry (Warwicks), 29.1.44. Hvalpsund, (Jylland), Den- mark, — .3.43. Sale (Ches), — .5.43. Wombwell (Yorks), 29.9.43. Heerenveen, (Friesland), Holland, 19.6.43. Rotterdam, Holland, 9.1. 41. Greenfinch ( Chloris ch. chloris). Brecon, 22.1.42, ad. by J. W. Lyonshall (Hereford), 9.4.43. Matthew. Ewhurst (Surrey), 16.3.44, ad. Hounslow (Middx), 14.4.44. by L. G. Weller. Yellow Bunting ( Emberiza c. citrinella). Evesham (Worcs), 5.4.37, ad., Where ringed, 25.1.39 ; 22.3.44. by A. J. Harthan. Pied Wagtail ( Motacilla a. yarrellii). Ambleside (Westmor), 15.6.43, Kendal (Westmor), 23.6.43. young, by R. Walker. Malvern (Worcs), 18.12.38, ad., Crieff (Perths), 9.4.44. by P. Morshead. vol. xxxviii ] RECOVERY OF MARKED BIRDS. 29 No. DP.968 CE.503 TB.281 CJ-594 CJ550 CK. 895 DR. 776 CL. 377 EL.687 CD. 350 AC. 6825 402306 305611 322446 RX.8731 Ringed. Recovered. Spotted Flycatcher ( Muscicapa s. striata). Hackthorpe (Westmor), Where ringed, 31.7.43. 25.6.39, young, by the late H. J. Moon. Melksham (Wilts), 1.7.41, Ditto 22.7.43. young, by D. Garnett. Song-Thrush ( T urdus e. ericetorum). Cumdivock (Cumb), 28.6.43, Maryport (Cumb), 25.10.43. young, by R. H. Brown. Black Redstart ( Phcenicurus ph. gibraltariensis) . Charterhouse, London, 11.6.43, New Southgate, London, young, by London N.H.S. 26.7.43. Swallow ( Hirundo r. rustica). RINGED AS YOUNG. Stocksfield (Northumb), 5.7.42, Where ringed, — .7.43. by Mrs. Hodgkin. Sedbergh (Yorks), 26.6.42, by Riversdale, Cape Province, Sedbergh School. 8.12.42. Andreas, I. of Man, 18.6.39, Onchan, I. of Man, 23.5.43. by Manx F.C. Iden (Sussex), 16.7.43, by Hawkhurst (Kent), 17.8.43. T. Bagenal. Swift ( Apus a. apus). Canterbury (Kent), 17.7.38, Faversham (Kent), 3.7.43. young, by St. Edmund’s Sch. Kingfisher ( Alcedo a'.ispida). Ponteland (Northumb), 1 1.7. 43, Gateshead (Durham), 5.9.43. young, by Ash & Ridley. Barn-Owl ( Tyto a. alba). Great Budworth (Ches), 7.8.39, Churton (Ches), 25.12.41. young, by A. W. Boyd. Peregrine Falcon ( Falco p. peregrinus). Cumberland, 9.6.35, young, by Asby (Westmor), 1.4.43. R. H. Brown. Kestrel ( Falco t. tinnuuculus) . Rugby (Warwicks), 4.7.38, Lincoln, 8.1.44. young, by Rugby School. Sparrow-Hawk [Accipiter n. nisus). Ticknall (Derbys), 13. 7. 41, West Leake Hills (Notts), young, by Repton School. 22.11.43. Limpsfield (Surrey), 9.7.43, Oxendon (Northants), 19.2.44. young , by London N . H . S . BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. 10 No. 402409 502987 502996 107347 125501 900458 901138 902493 900716 90061 1 900757 3093 2478 900271 Or.3786 925359 Or. 3303 313985 113388 Ringed. Recovered. Marsh-Harrier ( Circus a. ceruginosus) . Hickling (Norfolk), 21.6.43, Felixstowe (Suffolk), 29.8.43. young, by J. Vincent. Heron ( Ardea c. cinerea). - RINGED AS YOUNG. Newport (Salop), 7.5.43, by A. H. Johnson. Ditto 7-5-43- Llanwern (Mon), 29.4.43, by B. Campbell. Chettisham (Cambs), 26.5.40, by Cambs. B.C. Frodsham (Ches), 20.8.43. Abergele (Denbigh), 20.10.43. Chepstow (Mon), 22.6.43. Chingford (Essex), — .12.42. Teal ( Anas c. crecca). RINGS ISSUED TO WILDFOWL INQUIRY COMMITTEE. Dilham (Norfolk), 22.11.38. Holland, 1941. Pembroke. 22.10.38. Where ringed, 10.2.44 Ditto 26.10.39. Karlshamn, S.E. Sweden, 10.4.44. Ditto 29.12.39. Nakskov, (Laaland), Denmark, 27.8.40. Ditto 10.12.39. Heerenveen (Friesland), Holland, 5.5.43. Ditto 1. 1. 40. Vollenhove (Overijssel), Holland, — .1.41. RINGS OF THE ORIELTON DECOY, PEMBROKE. 6.T.38. Otterbourne (Hants), 29.1.43. 19. 1 1.37. Golden (Tipperary), — .2.43. Wigeon ( Anas penelope). Strath Bran (Ross), 4.7.39, Chanak-Kale, Turkey, 3.2.42. young, for Wildfowl Inq. Ctce. Pembroke, 22.12.38. Ovrb, (Sjaelland), Denmark, — -2-43- Pintail ( Anas a. acuta). Abbotsbury (Dorset), 24.1.40, Terschelling, W. Frisian Is., for Wildfowl Inq. Ctee. — .9.42. Shoveler ( Spatula clypeata). Pembroke, 24.1.38. Kampen (Overijssel), Holland, 14.9.40. Tufted Duck [Aythya fuligula) . St. James’s Park, London, Staines (Middx), 16.1.44. 21.2.42, by London N.H.S. Eider (, Somateria in. mollissima). Collieston (Aberdeen), 5.6.34, Where ringed, 1 1.4. 43. ad., by M. Portal. vol. xxxvm] RECOVERY OF MARKED BIRDS. 31 No. 122473 H395S 107697 122083 126343 126375 126365 126000 124514 124270 123867 502187 502490 123716 124308 502104 118255 RX.9950 323383 230710 220652 231710 AS. 7148 Ringed. Recovered. Cormorant ( Phalacrocorax c. carbo). RINGED AS YOUNG. Big Scar (Wigtown), 5.7.39, by Lord D. Stuart. Mochrum (Wigtown), 30.6.35, by Lord Dumfries. Puffin I. (N. Wales), 16.6.38, by T. Tallis. Ditto 8.7.39. Lambay (Dublin), 13.6.39, by Skokholm Bird Obs. Ditto 13.6.39. Ditto 13.6.39. Shag ( Phalacrocorax a. Calf of Man, 4.6.42, young, by Cowin, Ladds and Williamson. River Dee Estuary (Kirkcudbr) 3I-5- 43- Kilmore Quay (Wexford), —•7-43- Menai Straits (N. Wales), 18.7.43. L. Neagh (N. Ireland), — .6.43. Sandy Cove (Dublin), —.6.43. Roslea (Fermanagh), 2.2.44. Noya (Coruna) Spain, 21.1.43. aristotelis ) . Lendalfoot (Ayr), 5.3.44. Gannet ( Sula bassana). RINGED AS YOUNG. Bass Rock, 28.7.38, by Bootham School. Grassholm, 31.8.38, by Skokholm Bird Obs. Ditto 16.7.38. Ditto 15-8. 39- Ditto 15-8. 39- Ditto 16.7.38. Ditto 10.9.38. Ditto 15-8.39- Harlingen (Friesland), Holland, 23.8.40. Soay, I. of Skye, 1.6.43. Hell’s Mouth (Caernarvon), 20.8.43. Fishguard (Pern), — .8.43. Wolf Light (Cornwall), 17.6.43. Harlingen (Friesland), Holland, 312. 39. Cape Ortegal (Coruna) Spain, 2.2.43. Rio de Oro, W. Africa, — .2.43. , RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Grassholm, 6.6.40, by Gwithian (Cornwall), 28.11.43. Skokholm Bird Obs. Wood-Pigeon ( Columba p. palumbus) . Arley (Ches), 29.7.42, Rufford (Lancs), 7.4.43. young, by A. W. Boyd. Nuneham Courtenay (Oxon), Brook, I. of Wight, 23.6.43. 11. 3. 43, ad., by M. K. Colquhoun. Lapwing ( Vanellus vanellus). RINGED AS YOUNG. Isle of Bute, 18.5.40, by Lord D. Stuart. Aberlady (E. Lothian), 23.5.40, by Mrs. Greenlees. Burgh Marsh (Cumb), 7.6.42, by R. H. Brown. Buxton (Derby), 17.6.36, by the late H. J. Moon. Fedamore (Limerick), 3.1.44. Swansea (Glam), 13. 1.44. Swinford (Mayo), — .3.43. Rainford (Lancs), 14.10.43. 32 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. No. XT.391 302848 2x0649 305058 309730 227168 309910 323223 323228 323643 AD. 1 706 AD. 1 707 322619 RX.5594 RV.8227 RT.4675 RX.6786 325403 AC. 9186 AC. 9850 400257 AT. 1 1 13 AB.5824 Ringed. Recovered. Redshank (Tringa t. britannica). Uldale (Cumb), 26.5.42, Maryport (Cumb), 8.3.43. young, by R. H. Brown. Curlew ( Numenius a. arquata). Wolsingham (Durham), 2.7.40, Millom (Cumb), 20.1.44. young, by R. Martinson. Woodcock ( Scolopax r. rusticola). RINGED AS YOUNG Clackmannan, 15.6.43, for Where ringed, 17.12.43. G. Charteris. Arden (Dumbarton), 4.5.38, Ditto 2.10.43. by Wellington Coll. N.H.S. Arnside (Westmor), 19.6.41, Appleby (Westmor), 18.4.43. by J. Barnes. Sandwich Tern ( Sterna s. sandvicensis) . Salthouse (Norfolk), 11.6.39, Accra, Gold Coast, Spring, young, by E. Cohen. 1943. Black-headed Gull ( Larus r. ridibundus) . RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Westminster, London, 14.12.39. by London N.H.S. Ditto 26.1.43. Ditto 4-2-43- Ditto 9-3-43- Ditto 26.11.42. Ditto 27.11.42. Ditto 23.11.42. Ditto 20.11.38. by Oxford Orn. Soc. Littleton (Middx), 21. 11.35, by P. Hollom. Ditto 29-I-35. Ditto 24.1.39. Where ringed, 1.3.43. Ditto 31. 1. 44. Ditto 13.12.43. Ditto 9.12.43. Ditto 10.3.44. Ditto 5.2.44. Ringsted (Sjaelland), Denmark, 12.7.43. Where ringed, 15.12.43. Peterborough (Northants), 13.3.44. Gravesend (Kent), 9.5.43. Nakskov Fjd. (Laaland), Denmark, — .8.41. Common Gull ( Larus c. canus). L. Carra (Mayo), 25.5.43, Kilcreggan (Dumbarton), young, by R. F. Ruttledge. 5.8.43. Herring-Gull ( Larus a. argentatus). RINGED AS YOUNG. St. Abb’s Cliffs (Berwick), 9.7.39, by G. Waterston. Calf of Man, 20.7.41, by Cowin, Ladds and Williamson. Benbane Head (Antrim), 22.6.34, by T. Kerr. Lambay (Dublin), 12.6.39, by Skokholm Bird Obs. Great Yarmouth (Norfolk), 3°-IO-39. Tyrella (Down), — .10.43. Portstewart • (Londonderry), 10.10.43. Maynooth (Kildare), — .5.43. Lesser Black-backed Gull ( Larus f. gracllsii). Foulshaw (Westmor), 23.7.37, Noya (Coruna), Spain, — .3.43. young, by the late H. W. Robinson. (33) NOTES. ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM GALWAY & MAYO. The following observations are for the year 1943. Kestrel ( Falco t. tinnunculus) . — On July 17th I noticed a female which after landing on the ground started to run about with its body in a crouching attitude and gait a fast lope. The bird appeared to be picking up food, which I failed to identify. Long-tailed Duck ( Clangula hy emails) . — On February 17th and 18th I watched twenty-six, of which six were adult males, at close quarters in Greatman’s Bay, Connemara. Duration of dives varied between 45 and 55 seconds. Leach’s Fork-tailed Petrel (Oceanodromal. leucorrhoa). — Day and night search on Inishbofin, High Island, and Inishshark, Co. Galway, did not disclose the presence of any breeding colony. Messrs. Trant & Roche, Eeragh Island Lighthouse, and Mr. Sullivan, Slyne Head Lighthouse, Illaunimmul Island, report that none breed on these islands. Little Grebe ( Podiceps r. ruficollis). — “ Song ” heard at frequent intervals for about an hour on November 21st and persistently from December 26th up to the normal date of commencement at the end of January. Black-tailed God wit ( Limosa l. limosa). — The following appearances on Lough Carra form the only recorded inland occurrences for Co. Mayo, where the bird is rare. A party of 6-8, May 14th; two, August 3rd; two, August 19th ; three, September 16th. Whimbrel ( Numenius ph. phceopus). — On May 10th several repeatedly uttered the “ flight-call ” interspersed with low chuckles while on the ground. Once the bubbling trill, which seemed indistinguishable from that of the Curlew, was also heard from a bird on the ground. On May-i6th I heard several birds flying in a party utter the Curlew-like trill interspersed with their flight-call, whilst a single bird uttered the flight-call from the ground. Knot ( Calidris c. canutus). — Of a party of five in Galway Bay on August 5th, four were in summer plumage. It would appear that birds in this plumage are seldom met with in Ireland ( cf . Birds of Ireland, p. 290). A Knot seen on the shore of Lough Carra on September 3rd and four on September 4th form the first recorded inland occurrences in either county. Curlew Sandpiper ( Calidris testacea). — The following occurrences on the shores of Lough Carra are the only known instances of its appearance inland in either county, to which it is only an occasional visitor. Four, September 16th ; two, September 19th ; two, September 21st : as on each occasion the birds eventually flew away determinately to the south it seems improbable that they were the same in each case. 34 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Greenshank ( Tringa nebularia). — On December nth J observed one beside a flood 22 miles from the nearest sea [cf. antea, Vol. xxxvii, p. 160). Common Gull ( Larus c. canus).- — Birds returned to their Lough Carra nesting-site on February 7th. A juvenile marked on Lough Carra on May 15th was found dead in Dumbartonshire in mid-August. The colony on a marine islet adjacent to Inishbofin, the only one I knew of off the Galway coast, has ceased to exist. Herring-Gull ( Larus a. argentatus) .—I found two pairs nesting on Lough Mask, Co. Mayo [cf. antea, Vol. xxxvi, p. 244). A further two pairs were in all probability also nesting. Great Black-backed Gull ( Larus marinus). — A pair nested successfully on an islet in Lough Carra, 15 miles from the nearest sea-coast. The only previously recorded inland nesting-site in either county was that on Lough Conn. Pomatorhine Skua ( Stercorarius pomarinus). — An adult of the dark form was killed on October 20th three miles south of Lough Cullin, Co. Mayo, 20 miles from the sea. The bird was killed in the act of attacking a farmyard duck. Robert F. Ruttledge. WAX WINGS IN GREAT BRITAIN. With reference to the recent incursion of Waxwings ( Bombycilia g. garrulus) we are able to add the following records to those already published [antea, Vol. xxxvii, pp. 196-7, 213-14). Sussex. — One at Bexhill in early December (Effie Furley, Bexhill Observer, Dec. xx, 1943). One at Fishbourne, near Chichester, February 28th (Dr. N. H. Joy). One sent for preservation to G. Bristow from Pett in third week of January ; several others reported as seen there at same time and a flock of twenty-four, February 9th to 12th. Five seen by G. Bristow in Alexander Park, Hastings, on January 26th and two later. Kent.- — At least twelve at Dover, January 17th (O. G. Pike). A small party of six or seven arrived in the Bessels Green district, near Sevenoaks, on or about March 8th or 9th and were noted daily till about March 20th. A single bird was seen as late as March 30th in the same district. One of the party of six, a female, was killed, presumably by a cat, and was sent to the recorder (Dr. J. M. Harrison, from particulars supplied by Messrs. Fawkes and Kemp and Mrs. Chancellor, of Bessels Green). Essex. — Three seen near Rettendon, January 24th, by Mr. H. Huggins (H. R. Tutt). Middlesex. — Twenty-six three-quarters of a mile S.E. of Hillingdon Church, April 7th (H. A. Bilby). Berkshire.— Two at Old Windsor Lock, January 7th (H. A. Bilby). Two at Abingdon, February 19th (Mrs. M. Brooks). Two reliably reported on Boars Hill, near Oxford, in early March (V. Belfield). One on Boars Hill, February 23rd, and about ten near there on February 20th ; also four at Northcourt, near Abingdon, March 14th, and three near same place, March 15th (I. M. Kimbrey, Oxford Times, March 17, 1944). One dead in the grounds of Fort Belvedere, Virginia Water, April 14th (Mrs. J. A. Hillman). Buckinghamshire. — Two or possibly three seen at Datchet by Mr. L. E. Morris, January 6th (H. Money-Coutts) . Two at Drayton Beauchamp, March 7th (W. E. Glegg), and fourteen there on March 8th (Rev. C. E. Martin). Suffolk. — Reported by Mr. J. P. Clatworthy at Bardwell, West Suffolk, January 17th ( East Anglian Times, Jan. 19, 1944). Two parties of six and twelve between Mildenhall and Thetford, March 18th (R. J. Raines). VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 35 Norfolk. — One at Norwich, inside city boundary, April 3rd (Capt. G. K. Yeates). Worcestershire. — One at Sheriff’s Lench, near Evesham, March 23rd (A. J. Harthan). Shropshire. — Five seen at Hanwood by Mr. W. Hughes on Februarj^ 27th and several days subsequently ; over a dozen seen at West Felton on February 29th and still there on March 5th ; single bird seen on the outskirts of Shrews- bury by Mrs. K. Mayhew, March 18th (L. C. Lloyd). Male found dead by roadside about two miles N.W. of Ludlow, March 5th (M. J. W. Irwin). Lincolnshire.' — Eight to ten seen in the Louth district (D. G. Clarke, Field, Mar. 18, 1944, P- 3°4)- Single birds on December 4th and 7th, about a mile apart in the Northcotes district ; about six in the Northcotes area, December 24th (F. Stubbs, per Dr. J. M. Harrison). Leicestershire. — Two at Bitteswell, near Lutterworth, February 14th (Leading-Aircraftman G. Giles). Yorkshire. — Mr. R. Chislett has kindly supplied some further notes. On January 29th the big flock had gone from Catterick, but a few birds were still about (Capt. J. P. Utley). Major G. F. Dixon informs us that he saw a single bird there as late as April 17th. In the Whitby district, ten were reported near Grosmont on January 8th and about thirty seen between Grosmont and Sleights on January 15th (C. E. A. Burnham). Near Robin Hood’s Bay about fifteen on January 12th and two on January 29th (J. M. Brown). A late flock of about fifty on the edge of Richmond Moors, March 26th (E. W. Lomas). East Riding : Seven seen by Mr. and Mrs. R. E. Thistleton, at a road junction in Hull, March 5th, and one in North Hull by the Rev. Beresford Peirse, April 1st (G. H. Ainsworth). West Riding : One near Pateley Bridge, December 14th (Rev. K. Uderton) ; one at Harrogate, March 17th (Miss M. Christopher) and one there, April 4th (Ilderton). Fifteen birds at Malin Bridge, near Sheffield, February 13th (N. Slater). At localities previously reported. Middlesborough : last reported (five birds), February 7th (O. C. Hill). Pickering : last observed (three birds), March 22nd (R. M. Garnett). Scarborough : numerous small flocks during January, February and March, 1944, but numbers in each not so great as in December, most containing less than twenty birds. Last seen (a dozen in a garden on the outskirts of the town), April 8th (W. J. Clarke). Durham. — Fifteen in Rowlands Gill, January 2nd ; reported to have been in the neighbourhood during the previous three weeks (D. Wise). Northumberland.— One killed against a house at Slayley on May 10th when trying to escape from a hawk was handed to Dr. Hird, of Corbridge and is now in the Hancock Museum ; one seen at Newton Hall, Stocksfield- on-Tyne, May 12th (LI. Tully). Cumberland. — Two at Cowraik Quarry, Penrith, November 14th (M. G. Robinson). Haddingtonshire. — One at Dunbar in January (Miss M. Christopher). One at Gullane, April 21st and 22nd, two on 23rd and one on 24th (Sir Harold J. Stiles : also recorded in the Scotsman, May 6, 1944). Forfarshire. — One seen at Edzell, December 12th, and one picked up dead on December 24th (Corpl. P. A. Humble). Single bird seen in the parish of Panbride, March 8th (Robert A. Cant). Aberdeenshire. — A pair reported at Balmoral on April 8th by Mr. Frank Gordon, head stalker on Balmoral Forest. They had then been in the district for some time (Seton Gordon). Elgin. — Some seen in Kinloss area at end of February ; one killed by a boy with a catapult. Three at Forres, March 31st, and one still there, April 2nd (Corpl. P. A. Humble). Ross-shire. — Single bird (first year male) in garden at Avoch from December 23rd to 28th (Rev. John Lees). Caithness.- — Party of eleven reliably reported at Berriedale, November 4th (Miss Eleanor O. Armstrong). Fair Isle. — Several hundreds appeared in mid-October and remained for a fortnight (G. Stout per G. Waterston). Two seen on April 3rd and 4th (G. Waterston and G. T. Arthur). BRITISH BIRDS. VOL. XXXVIII. 36 SONG-THRUSH'S DISPLAY AT NEST. On April 2nd, 1944, in the company of my son I observed an unusual display at the nest of a Song-Thrush ( Turdus e. ericetorum). We were visiting a nest of this species in my garden in Gloucestershire and as we approached the nest the hen bird flew off and perched on a tree twelve feet away. From this perch she adopted a most curious and threatening atti- tude. She puffed out her feathers until she assumed an enormous size and then proceeded to open her bill to the full extent and then close the mandible with a very resounding snap. This she did twelve times in five minutes, occasionally using the Blackbird type alarm note and wiping the bill on her perch. After this time she flew on to another tree and ceased display and “ bill-snapping.” In the afternoon of the same day I flushed the hen again and the same episode occurred. G. E. Took. DISPLAY OF BLACKBIRD. On April 2nd, 1944, at Charing, Kent, I observed a male and female Blackbird ( Turdus m. merula) on the flat top of a brick wall. They were facing each other and both in exactly the same posture, wings and tails, and as far as I could see all plumage, quite neatly in the resting position, i.e., no fluffing, no quiver or movement of wings or tail and tail not erected or fanned. Both birds’ heads were elevated at a small angle to the horizontal and the beaks open (say \ to \ inch) with the tips about one to two inches from each other. The female was moving forwards with little short, quick steps (not hops) : the male was moving backwards with precisely the same movements', the position of beaks and plumage remaining as initially in both. After they had moved about two feet, a rapid change took place : the female stopped and crouched, swinging round to a direction almost opposite to her initial move- ment, whereupon the male mounted, performing coition very rapidly. The female then followed the male along the wall, but after this I lost them in foliage. H. E. Little dale. On the evening of March 23rd, 1944, as I walked along a footpath at Sidmouth, Devon, my attention was attracted by the song of a Blackbird ( T urdus m. merula) in the hedge beside it. The singer was perched 2 feet, sometimes 2| feet, away from and a little higher than a hen. He was very softly singing a sub-song, with hardly a pause in it. All the time he kept his head below the level of his back, and slowly moved it down on one side to near the front of his feet, then up the other side, and back again — a pendulum-swing along an arc of a circle, without any accompanying swaying of the body. He moved now and again from one perch to another, not always facing the hen — once his tail was towards her. The hen stood stolidly still on a branch all the time, looking straight in front of her. Noisy passers-by caused the cock to stop, but he soon resumed VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 37 the song and head-swing. Another disturbance, and both birds flew away. I had watched them for some ten minutes. W. L. Colyer. [This observation should be compared with that of M. Brooks- King (antea, Vol. xxxvii, p. 215). — Eds.]. HOOPOE IN CAITHNESS On April 16th, 1944, at Dunbeath, Caithness, a Hoopoe ( Upupa e. eftofts ) was observed by Mr. Alex Thomson. On April 17th it was again seen by Mr. Thomson, accompanied by Dr. Kennedy, M.V.O., Dunbeath. No further news of the bird has been reported to me. Eleanor O. Armstrong. WHOOPER SWANS GRAZING. Considerable numbers of Whooper Swans ( Cygnus cygnus) regularly spend the winter on suitable lochs in north Ayrshire and south Renfrewshire. During February, 1943, there were heavy rainstorms which caused extensive flooding and the levels of the lochs and marshes were raised so much that the swans were unable to reach the roots and weeds on which they normally feed. During this time they repaired to flooded grassfields and fed on the submerged grass. When the water subsided most of them returned to the lochs, but six to eight of them remained on the fields for weeks after all trace of water had disappeared. There were four different fields on which they grazed, the nearest to a loch being about a mile and a half distant and the farthest about three miles. All the fields are bounded by small streams and to them they went to drink and wash. Occasionally they would return to one of the lochs in the neighbour- hood, but only for a short time. I noticed that they appeared to feed only on the grass which had been submerged. I have known Whoopers walk from a loch and feed on grass nearby, but I have never seep them go so far from their usual haunts. J. A. Anderson. BILL-COLORATION OF THE IMMATURE WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE. When watching wild geese, invariably at a distance of several hundred yards, on the New Grounds in Gloucestershire, I have often gained the impression that the bill-coloration of the im- mature White-fronted Goose (Anser a. albifrons ) can best be described as drab-yellow or, as given in The Handbook of British Birds for both the juvenile and the 1st winter bird, greyish-yellow. On February 12th, 1944, however, when visiting this noted Severn haunt, I was able, by making use of exceptionally good cover, to view some 20 or 30 birds (adults and immatures in about equal proportions) at the extremely close range of between 10 and 20 yards and was surprised to find that in all cases the bills of the immatures were rosy-pink — differing only from those of the adults in that their nails were brownish instead of white. It should further be stated that a young White-front shot near Kenn Moor, 38 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. N. Somerset, on December 26th, 1943 was forwarded to me some days later, when I found its bill showed no trace of having been yellow in life. It was, in fact, dark pink or pinkish-red, and though it had evidently darkened since the bird was killed it differed little from those of the immatures subsequently examined at close range on the New Grounds. It thus appears that, whatever may apply to the juvenile, pink should be recorded as a bill-coloration of the first winter bird. It is, of course, possible that the bill-coloration of the young White-front is dependent on the origin of the bird for, as mentioned in The Handbook and as Dr. John Berry has informed me, there is evidence to suggest that adults from breeding-grounds in Greenland have yellow bills whereas the bills of those from continental areas are pink. Recent observations make it clear that adults visiting the Severn are pink-billed birds. H. H. Davis. GADWALL DIVING. On the evening of March 27th , 1944, I observed three Gadwall ( Anas strepera), a paired male and female and a male, on the northern portion of Wilstone Reservoir, Herts. The appearance of this species on these reservoirs would not justify special recording, but the actions of the paired birds are worthy of notice. Both the male and the female dived several times during the few minutes that I had them under observation. The dives were clean cut actions, the birds disappearing completely under the water and being submerged for several seconds. The diving was clearly a concerted action ; if one sex submerged the other immediately did likewise. Unfortunately I did not notice if the lead was given by a particular sex and the hour prevented me from devoting more time to the birds. It is probable that this unusual behavour resulted from sexual impulse, this idea being supported by the fact that the unmated male was not seen to dive. Millais ( The Natural History of the British Surface-Feeding Ducks, 1902, p. 32), describing the courtship of this species, does not include diving and states that the display is quiet and self-possessed. J. C. Phillips (A Natural History of the Ducks, 1923-6, Vol. ii, p. T48) records that “ These birds never dive in true diving habits except when wounded or before reaching maturity. The many notes in which they are referred to as “ good divers ” must all apply to their behaviour when winged.” The birds seen by me are not covered by this statement. Montagu ( Ornithological Dictionary , 1802, Vol. i), under Gadwall writes “ It is said to be a great diver.” This view probably arose from ignorance of the species and may be the source from which other writers have drawn their inspiration. William E. Glegg. WOOD-PIGEONS’ NESTS WITH THREE EGGS AND YOUNG. With reference to Lt.-Col. B. H. Ryves’s note on a nest of Wood- Pigeons ( Columba p. palumbus ) containing three young ( antea , VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 39 Vol. xxxvii, p. 117), I write to record that on April 23rd, 1941, I found, in Herefordshire, near the village of Eardisley, a Wood- Pigeon’s nest which also contained three young. The birds were not more than three days old. The nest was only about six feet from the ground. I left Hereford on April 26th, and later I heard from a friend that the birds left the nest on May 17th, twenty-four days after I had found it. I do not know whether one of them became bigger than the other two, but on April 24th, they were all the same size. Also on May 7th, 1943, in Bedfordshire, there was a nest containing three eggs. Thirteen days later two of the eggs hatched, but the third did not and was presumably infertile. I. J. Ferguson Lees. SOUTHERN CORMORANT IN HAMPSHIRE. At the mouth of the Avon at Mudeford, Hampshire, on February 7th, 1944, amongst some Cormorants fishing in the sea, I saw one of which the appearance was unmistakably that of the Southern Cormorant ( Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis). The light was very good. I had Zeiss field-glasses, and was about 100 yards from the bird. The whole head and neck were quite white with the exception of a dark line running down the nape and just a little dark running from the eye and dividing the white throat from the neck. I have seen quite a number of Cormorants here showing many degrees of whiteness, but none so striking or evenly marked as this one. Christine H. Popham. HERRING-GULLS FEEDING INDEPENDENT YOUNG. During the second week in March, 1940, my wife and I frequently watched from a convenient station just above them a group of Herring-Gulls ( Lams a. argentatus), which daily haunted the sandy beach (according to tides), at the foot of Castle Hill, Tenby. At this time “ courtship ” had already begun among the local Herring- Gulls, though there were naturally no signs of it in the particular group of shore-loafers which I have just mentioned. On the contrary there was among the adults of the party a good deal of squabbling and pursuit over the food found by individuals. The party, however, usually contained a sprinkling of immature — perhaps last year’s birds— and we were soon struck by the notably different way in which they were treated as regards food found by the adults. These young birds, though now perfectly well able to fend for them- selves, were constantly pestering the adults the moment they saw food found, in the characteristic begging posture, that is stretched horizontally from head to tail while uttering their thin piping food-call. This also happened even on the sea, when both ages were swimming together just off the beach towards high tide. This we noted particularly on March 10th and nth. Sometimes the adults would walk or swim testily away from these importunate young, but we could never perceive that any squabbled with or angrily drove off such food-beggars — though this doubtless occurs 40 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. at times. On the contrary ; on a number of occasions we saw adults good-humouredly “ give up ” to one of these pressing young- sters some tit-bit which it had just extracted from the tide-wash, often actually shoving the food well into his throat. Once indeed an adult Herring-Gull at this spot, which had just salved a large starfish, actually shared it amicably with the posturing immature bird, each tugging and tearing at the prey without any sign of bickering, and each in the end swallowing half of it. This response on the part of adult Herring-Gulls to the stimulus of the food-call uttered by quite independent young (for the young birds which we watched would sometimes deign to collect food in the tide-wash for themselves), is doubtless common enough, though neither the late Charles Oldham, with whom I discussed it, nor I myself had ever noticed it before, despite our very frequent wanderings and watchings on this and many other gull-haunted beaches. Mr. B. W. Tucker has most kindly drawn my attention to a valuable article by G. J. Broekhuysen on “ The Behaviour of sexually mature and immature Herring-Gulls and Great Black- backed Gulls outside the breeding-season,” in Ardea, 1937. This includes a careful study of the variations and persistence of the food-begging behaviour in otherwise independent immature birds. I quote the following salient passages from a translation of this article which Mr. Tucker has obligingly lent me. “ Immature but perfectly independent birds of both -species perform outside the breeding-season an action agreeing precisely with the food-begging of young birds still dependent on the parents, and accompanied by an identical note Originally it is simply an expression of emotion in young birds still dependent on their elders, which respond by feeding them. When the young bird has become independent, it retains the behaviour though the emotions which give rise to it are now more general and less specialized.” Apparently the writer did not observe among the adults any feeding reaction to the begging behaviour of independent immature birds since he definitely ascribes the retention of this behaviour by the young birds to “ generalized emotion.” But it is obvious that the “ food-begging ” which I witnessed, as described above, could scarcely be classed in this category. Bertram Lloyd. Glaucous Gull in Inner London. — Mr. Jeffery G. Harrison sends us particulars of an immature Glaucous Gull ( Lams hyper- boreus) seen flying over the Thames just outside St. Thomas’s Hospital on December nth, 1943. Great Black-backed Gulls (L. marinus) were present for comparison of size, so that it was possible to be certain that the bird was not an Iceland Gull. It may be recalled that two or more Glaucous Gulls were recorded in the winter 1941-2. BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- Net. DREAM ISLAND DAYS An Idyll of the Days of Peace BY R. M. LOCK LEY. with many sketches by Mrs. Lockley and plates from photographs The author writes straight from the heart and from the vivid island scene. The book breathes his deep understanding of nature, and shows how two happy mortals found a life of true peace away from the struggle of the crowd. Lists of the birds and plants of the island are included. Fully Illustrated. Demy 8vo. 10/6 net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7/6 net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. New Impression nearly ready INLAND FARM BY R. M. LOCKLEY. Straight from twelve years of the simple life on the lonely sea-girt island of Skokholm (of which he gives such a vivid account in the book Dream Island Days ) to a derelict farm on the mainland of Pembrokeshire, came R. M. Lockley and his wife, moving with them the beginnings of the farm they had started on their island. With little money, but with a fresh clear out- look on life that showed an appreciation of true values, the author cut through red tape and demanded the fulfilment of the Government’s war-time pledges of assistance to the farmer. Having obtained the practical assistance of the Pembrokeshire War Agri- cultural Executive Committee, he threw his energies into reclaiming Inland Farm and its lovely old Welsh manor house. Like Skokholm had been. Inland Farm was without a tenant, neglected, needing a pioneer. In this book R. M. Lockley tells of a year’s striving on the land, and the winning of a great harvest. The book ends on a promising note : he finds a second farm and decides to operate both with fellow workers on a co- operative basis. Illustrated. 10/- Net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. AN'ItUSITArn) -miGOTiE DDWTED'QOEfDr'TOTHCBIRDS ^^m-Brarsn isst^ M0NTIIIY ls9d.YE ARLY 20 s. O26naaHOLB0RHKKD0N' JIFSGWITHERBYLTD- A new impression of revised edition is now in the Press. THE HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS By H. F. Witherby, M.B.E., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U., Editor; Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain, M.A., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U. ; Norman F. Ticehurst, O.B.E., M.A., F.R.C.S., M.B.O.U., C.F.A.O.U. ; and Bernard W. Tucker, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. 133 Coloured and 24 Monochrome Plates figuring all the species, 300 Text Figures and 37 Maps. Each of the 520 birds isT fully treated in the following sections : — HABITAT, FIELD-CHARACTERS AND GENERAL HABITS, VOICE, DISPLAY AND POSTURING, BREEDING, FOOD, BRITISH DISTRIBUTION, MIGRATIONS, DISTRIBUTION ABROAD, DESCRIPTION (all plumages), CHARACTERS & ALLIED FORMS. Large Demy 8vo. 5 Vois. £6. SONGS OF WILD BIRDS By E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by Julian Huxley. With two double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge-Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. 30s. net. By the same authors Postage 8d. MORE SONGS OF WILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood-Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle-Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. “All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. BRITBMBIKD5 With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, "The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED by Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 3, Vol. XXXVIII, August i, 1944. PAGE Changes in Status among British breeding Birds. By W. B. Alexander and David Lack . . . . . . . . . . 42 Further Notes on a Type of Insight Learning in Birds. By W. H. Thorpe, Sc.D. . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 The Ejection of Pellets by Passerine and other Birds. By B. W. Tucker, M.A., M.B.O.U 50 Notes : — Ravens nesting in a rookery (W. S. Cowin and H. M. Rogers, Jnr.) 53 Jackdaws “ billing ” (C. H. Cooke) . . . . . . . . 53 Song of female Chaffinch (B. Forsyth) , . . . . . . . . 53 Snow-Bunting in Surrey in April (L. G. Weller) . . . . 53 Breeding of Grey Wagtail in S.E. Kent (Major G. E. Took) . . 54 Roosting behaviour of Long-tailed Tits (David B. Grubb) . . 54 Cloaca-pecking display by female Hedge-Sparrow (C. Clay Kneale) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Early nesting of Swallow (G. L. Bullard) . . . . . . 54 Display of Lesser Spotted Woodpecker (E. V. Southam) . . 55 Little Owl hovering (T. C. Gregory) . . . . . . . . 55 Scops-Owl in Kirkcudbrightshire (Olaf J. Pullen) . . . . 56 Tawny Owl taking carrion (Fl.-Sgt. E. L. Roberts) . . . . 56 Kite in Northumberland (George W. Temperley) . . . . 56 Gadwall in Bedfordshire (J. A. Miller) .. .. .. .. 56 Oyster-catcher far from land in the Atlantic (Sub-Lieut. E. A. Duffey) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Predatory habits of Black-headed Gulls (William E. Glegg) 57 Short Notes : — Golden Oriole in Monmouthshire. Early Spotted Flycatcher in Buckinghamshire. Early Pied Flycatcher in Gloucester- shire. Swallow crossing Helvellyn. Early House-Martin in Somerset. Hoopoes in Cornwall, Hampshire and Merioneth. Garganey in Yorkshire. Unusual number of Gannets in the Mediterranean. Sooty Tern in Dorset. Puffin in Surrey . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Reviews : — The Birds of Lakeland. By Ernest Blezard (Editor), Marjory Garnett, Ritson Graham, and Tom L. Johnston . . . . 59 The Way Birds Live. By Edward A. Armstrong . . . . 59 Somerset Birds and Some Other Folk. By E. W. Hendy . . 60 Bird Music. By A. L. Turnbull . . . . . . . . 60 Letter : — Ornithology of Holy Island (Richard Perry) . . . . . . 60 E (42) CHANGES IN STATUS AMONG BRITISH BREEDING BIRDS BY W. B. ALEXANDER and DAVID LACK. Introduction. In view of the present interest in animal fluctuations, a survey has been made of every bird breeding in the British Isles, to see what proportion of the species have increased, decreased or remained at about the same level during the last one hundred years. Thanks to a large number of county avifaunists and to a smaller number of biographers of particular species, British breeding birds have been well covered during this period, and it is unlikely that any species would have changed markedly in status without the fact being on record somewhere. Knowledge prior to 1840 is much less complete, but any changes recorded before this date are included in the summaries below. Acknowledgment should be made to an earlier survey of the same subject by E. M. Nicholson ( Birds in England, 1926, pp. 25-110). We are also much indebted to Miss L. J. Rintoul and Miss E. V. Baxter for reading through the present paper and for valuable criticisms and additions in regard to status in Scotland. The best evidence for fluctuations occurs in those species which have colonized new areas or deserted former haunts. An increase or decrease of a widespread species is less easily detected, and such a species could probably double or halve its numbers without the fact being noticed. However, any really marked change would probably have been recorded. To keep this paper within reasonable bounds only a very brief summary is given for each species, but where a detailed survey has been published a reference is given. Purely local changes are omitted; so are changes which can be inferred to have taken place, but which are not documented. From a knowledge of the distribution of woods, agricultural land, marshes and heaths in, say, the eighteenth century, it would be possible to infer that many British birds have either increased or decreased, but such speculations are omitted unless there is direct evidence for change. Changes during the present war are also not included, as some of them are likely to be only temporary. Causes of fluctuations are added to the summaries where they are known or can be reasonably surmised. Those causes which are noted should not necessarily be considered the sole factors involved, and in some cases the main cause may be some less obvious factor which has been overlooked. Thirty-six species for which there is no evidence of any change in status are omitted from the annotated list, but they are given in the summaries at the end of the paper. They include twenty- two passerine and near-passerine species and fourteen others. 43 vol. xxxviil] CHANGES IN STATUS. if ^ Annotated List. Raven ( Corvus c. corax). Great decrease in first half of 19th century, when exterminated over a large area of eastern and central England, though a few persisted in Essex till 1890, and in Sussex till a year or two later. Increase in 20th century in W. and N. and recolonized Sussex in 1939. Main factors human destruction, and decrease of carrion in settled districts, and later protection. Hooded Crow ( Corvus c. cor nix). ■ Marked decrease in southern and central Scotland, due at least partly to human destruction and perhaps to competition with Carrion Crow ; also decreased in many parts of Ireland. But holds its own in wilder parts and in coastal districts of north and west Scotland and islands. Carrion Crow ( Corvus c. corone). Locally decreased through human destruction, especially in S and E. England, but has increased and replaced Rook in outskirts of London, Birmingham and other large towns. In southern and central Scotland has largely replaced Hooded Crow and has spread to N. Scotland and Isle of Man. The zone of interbreeding between Carrion and Hooded Crows appears to have shifted considerably northward in Scotland, but still remains a narrow belt. Rook ( Corvus f. frugilegus). Lias spread to areas in northern Scotland and Ireland owing to growth of trees in formerly treeless districts, and has colonized Orkney, Skye and Outer Hebrides. Jackdaw ( Corvus monedula spermologus) . General increase, especially in Scotland, where it has spread west and north and colonized Outer Hebrides and new islands in Orkney. Cause unknown. Magpie {Pica p. pica). Marked decrease in 19th century in some parts of England ■ especially S. and E., and throughout Scotland. Increase in Ireland which was colonized towards end of 17th century. Increase in many parts of England and Scotland since 1914. Main cause human destruction or its cessation. British Jay ( Garndus glandarius rufitergum). „ Marked decrease generally, especially in northern England and Scotland, but with local increases, especially in southern England Gince 1914. Cause human destruction or its cessation. In Ireland G. g; hibernicus was nearly exterminated early in [9th century and in latter half of that century was confined to a muted area in the south-east, but in 20th century has increased ind colonized woods in most counties. ..hough {Pyrrhocorax p. pyrrhocorax). General decrease extending over two centuries. Main cause mknown. In Scotland, where in 18th century it occurred in small lumbers in numerous inland localities as well as on the coast, >articulars as to dates of disappearance are scanty. It lingered F 44 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. in Sutherland till early in 19th century, in Berwickshire till about 1850, in Skye till beginning of 20th century, and in the extreme south-west till quite recently, but is now confined to the Inner Hebrides. In England, where it seems always to have been confined to the coast, it became extinct in Yorkshire early in 19th century, in Kent and Sussex between 1830 and 1850, in the Isle of Wight and Cumberland about i860, and in Dorset and S. Devon about 1890. It still survives in decreased numbers in Cornwall and N. Devon, and more commonly in Wales, the Isle of Man and Ireland, but is now confined to the coast except in N. Wales. In some of these' areas it appears to be holding its own or perhaps even increasing. Starling ( Stunius v. vulgaris). Decrease towards end of 18th century, when became almost extinct in the north of England and the mainland of Scotland except Caithness, but survived, apparently without diminution, in the Shetlands, Orkneys and Hebrides. In Ireland isolated colonies survived on many islands and also on coastal cliffs and ruins, etc.., inland. Between about 1830 and i860 recolonized most parts of northern England and southern Scotland and increased enormously in England, extending west to Cornwall and into western Wales. From that time onwards has continued to increase and has spread into the Highlands of Scotland and many parts of Ireland where it was formerly only a winter visitor. Cause unknown. As regards Scotland, see Harvie-Brown, J.A. (1895), Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist., pp. 2-22. Hawfinch ( Coccothraustes c. coccothraustes) . Marked spread and increase. Possibly only began breeding in England at beginning of 19th century and in first half of that century was confined to S.E. England and Midlands. Has since spread west to Devon and Wales and north to S. and E. Scotland. Cause unknown. Greenfinch ( Chloris ch. chloris). Increasing and spreading in woods of northern Scotland. British Goldfinch ( Carduelis c. britannica). Huge decrease everywhere in 19th century, but in 20th century marked increase in England, southern Scotland and Ireland. Important factors have been the extensive catching of Goldfinches as cage-birds and its cessation, also the spread or decrease of thistles, and the incidence of hard winters. Siskin ( Carduelis spinus). Increasing in Irish woods. Lesser Redpoll (Carduelis flammea cabaret). Rather small but definite increase throughout Britain. Possible cause is cessation of bird-catching. Also helped, especially in northern Scotland where increase is very marked, by the planting of trees. VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 45 British Twite ( Carduelis flavirostris pipilans). Marked decrease in N. England and S. Scotland with complete disappearance from some areas, e.g., Cheviots, Pentland Hills. Cause unknown. Linnet ( Carduelis c. cannabina). In igth century decrease in central England and elsewhere, due mainly to bird-catching and decrease of waste land. In 20th century increasing in parts of southern England and perhaps elsewhere, perhaps due to cessation of bird-catching. British Bullfinch (. Pyrrhula p. nesa). .Spreading in woods in northern Scotland and Ireland. Common Crossbill ( Loxia c. curvirostra) . Fluctuating, but on the whole marked increase, mainly due to immigration from the continent of Europe and the recent planting of conifers. The Scottish Crossbill ( Loxia c. scotica ) also fluctuates. British Chaffinch ( Fringilla ccelebs gengleri). Spreading in woods in northern Scotland. Corn-Bunting ( Emberiza calandra). Marked decrease reported in Sussex, Essex, Suffolk, the Clyde and Tay basins, and some Scottish islands, and suspected decrease elsewhere. Hence probable general decrease. 'Cause unknown. Ctrl Bunting ( Emberiza c. cirlus). Possibly only colonized England at end of i8th century as White did not observe it at Selborne and it was first met with by Montagu in S. Devon in 1800. During the 19th century, it was occasionally found nesting as far north as Yorkshire, but does not now extend beyond the Midlands. On the other hand there is some evidence of increase in southern England. House-Sparrow (Passer d. domesticus). Huge increase in Scotland and Ireland ; in England the bulk of a similar increase probably occurred before iqth century. Decrease in towns in 20th century owing to replacement of horses by motors. Tree-Sparrow ( Passer m. montanus). Colonies are local and fluctuate markedly for unknown reasons. Wood-Lark (Lullula a. arbor ea). Marked decrease southern England and Ireland and complete disappearance from northern England. Certainly assisted by decrease in waste land and, till recently, by bird-catching. Yellow Wagtail ( Motacilla /lava flavissima). Decrease in Scotland and Ireland and complete disappearance from some localities where it formerly nested. In both countries during last 100 years its distribution has been almost confined to limited isolated areas suggesting that it may formerly have been more widespread. In Northumberland it became very rare during 19th century, but has increased during last 20 years. Blue-headed Wagtail (. Motacilla f. /lava). Perhaps increasing somewhat in S.E. England, but very local and perhaps overlooked earlier. (To be continued). (46) FURTHER NOTES ON A TYPE OF INSIGHT LEARNING IN BIRDS BY W. H. THORPE. Sc.D. Last year I published in Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxvii, pp. 29-31, under the title “ A type of Insight Learning in Birds ” a short account of the ability of three species of tit and of a number of other birds to pull up food which is suspended by a thread ; the pulled-in loop being held by the foot while the bird reaches for the next pull. As a result of this note a considerable correspondence reached the late editor, who passed it on to me with the suggestion that I might summarise any records of particular interest. Firstly, I would like to remedy an omission in my previous article by referring to the interesting article by M. Brooks-King, [Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxv, pp. 29-32) entitled “ Intelligence Tests With Tits.” This describes a number of remarkable performances of Blue and Great Tits, one or two of which suggest insight of the same type and degree as that described in my own article. Many of the letters received confirm, or amplify in some not very essential particular, examples already recorded. Such observations are interesting to have as confirmation, but do not require any comment. Mr. T. C. Witherby, however, sends some interesting recollections of experiments with caged birds supplied, with food and water in trolleys of the usual type. These serve to confirm the statements of other authors that there is great individual variation in learning ability. He says : — “ I myself succeeded only with cock Siskins and with seed in a trolley and not with water. I tried also Bullfinches (hand-reared), Redpolls (caught), and probably some other species now forgotten. It always seemed that as Siskins were (a) greedier than my other birds (they often died of over-eating) and the cock Siskin far greedier than the hen, and as ( b ) it was easy without starving them, to tempt them with their favourite seeds (hemp and maw) — that this accounted for the greater ease in teaching them tricks.” “Not all individual cock Siskins could be taught ; only those able to concentrate. There was always in all cage birds a marked difference as between the behaviour of different individuals.” He describes how cock Siskins could learn to pull out a drawer containing food in an apparatus similar to that used by Mr. Brooks-King, but emphasises that in order for the birds to persevere at learning the trick it seemed necessary for them to be able continually to see the seed in the box. Tits, on the contrary, seem extraordinarily independent of vision in this respect. Mr. Brooks-King remarks (p. 30) “ one is almost tempted to believe that a keen sense of smell is manifested.” In this connexion it is interesting that of a number of birds proved by Zahn (Z. vergl. Physiol., 19, 785-96, 1923) to possess a sense of smell the Blue Tit was the most rapid learner. Its odour perception, vol. xxxvm ] INSIGHT LEARNING IN BIRDS. 47 however, seemed little if at all more sensitive than that of other birds, being of approximately the same order as the human olfactory sense. It excelled merely in the rapidity with which in training experiments with odours as signals, it could profit by its perceptions. A very interesting record comes from Mr. J. Walker, of Clevedon, who describes how on one occasion only (winter 1932) a cock House- Sparrow after three ineffectual attempts to land a piece of swinging suet, commenced to pull in the string inches long and, after some failures, succeeded in holding the loops by means of both feet and so secured the food. This is, as far as I can find, the only record of a House-Sparrow solving a problem of this kind and seems at first sight surprising. But there is a certain amount of evidence that the House-Sparrow ranks in intelligence somewhat above the average of common passerine birds, for D. Lack ( The Life of the Robin, 1943, P- T4) speaking of his Robin traps says : — “ Of all the birds which entered the house traps only House-Sparrows and an occasional Blue Tit were able to go in and out regularly without getting caught : House-Sparrows are perhaps more intelligent than most birds.” Moreover, L. S. V. Venables {Bird Banding, 1936, Vol. vi, p. 45-46) describes how, when working the bird-banding trap on Isle of May, he noticed repeatedly that the House-Sparrow and Starling were more adept in escaping than any of the passage migrants or than any of the other five passerine species resident on the island. He says that when the birds were being driven into the deep cul-de-sac of the 36 ft. funnel trap the Starlings, and Sparrows “ without hesitation would fly straight towards the noise and danger, dodging our uplifted hands, and make good their escape.” He suggests that superior intelligence may be one of the many factors which have played their part in accounting for the great success of these species on both sides of the Atlantic. Some observations of Mr. Eric Evans on Chaffinches at Shipley, Yorks, serve to confirm Bierens de Haan’s statement that individuals of this species occasionally, by vigorous tugs, show evidence of understanding the connexion between string and food, but are unable to hold the string. Mr. A. H. V. Smith, of N. London, however, records a successful pull up by a Greenfinch after preliminary attempts at hovering, the bird using its foot to hold the loop without difficulty. Finally, Mr. Roger Casson and Mr. T. L. Bartlett give accounts from Walkerburn, Peeblesshire, and Harrow respectively, of Rooks pulling up suet — a useful confirmation of Sowerby’s •statement. Mr. Trevor Miller, of Riding Mill, Northumberland, in several letters, described in full and exact detail how in 1938 when a boy, he had suspended a conical tit-bell of the usual type 3 ins. in diameter half filled with fat. A fine string was hung centrally through the fat, its end about 4 ins. below the rim of the bell. To this end of the string a light stick of balsa wood 4 ins. long and \ in. thick was suspended, tied firmly by its middle. The second day after this apparatus was put up, one or more Blue Tits, failing to reach the 48 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. fat by any other means, landed on the bar and, hanging in an inverted position, rolled it up the thread with rapid movements of the feet and so reached the fat. This process was seen “ once or twice a day for several weeks ” and it is thought that more than one bird was concerned. Mr. Miller has, I understand, since repeated the experiment without success. That such an achieve- ment could have been an example of “ insight learning ” I do not for a moment believe, but I think some subsequent observations by myself and my friend Mr. T. C. Wyatt in Cambridge suggest how it might have come about. Having fitted up an apparatus similar to Mr. Miller’s I found that unless the bell was composed of some extremely hard smooth substance (wood, glass, bakelite and metal bells were all tried) both Great and Blue Tits were able to hang on to the edge. If this mode of access was denied them they climbed up the string even though it was well greased. If fine silk or cotton thread was used they were unable to do this and then the results were very instructive. The varied resources and “ ingenuity ” displayed by Blue Tits in reaching the fat was astonishing. Some would manage to pull themselves up the thread parrot-wise with beak and foot sufficiently well to make a rapid stab at the fat before falling off. Others would hover below and make quick upward darts at the food, securing a beakful each time. If the string was not too long others would straddle with one foot on the string and the other braced against the bar and so, with effort, would lever themselves up until just within reach. Yet others would stand on the bar and with a rapid stepping movement execute little fluttering jumps carrying the bar a little way with them. None succeeded in rolling the bar up the string, but I think this last performance shows how a bird such as a tit (a bird which is in any case habitually hanging from twigs and righting itself) might accidentally roll the bar up a little way. Having done so we may be sure that such a rapid learner, as this species is, would perceive the advantage and repeat the process. The absence of any record of the Robin pulling up a string led Mr. Wyatt (who has a number of hand-tame Robins in his garden) and myself to experiment with mealworms suspended by strings from a perch. In every case the Robin secured the bait, not without a little difficulty, by hovering in the air and snatching it off. When (in my experiments) this was prevented by standing on the feeding table below the perch a glass (lamp glass) cylinder io ins. high and 4-4 ins. internal diameter and allowing the string to hang down into it the Robins were completely defeated, even though the string was very short (3-4 ins.). The birds would look at the mealworm through the glass, occasionally pecking the glass but, even though they had a moment before been snatching a mealworm from an unprotected string, evinced not the slightest understanding of the potentialities of the string nor of its relation to the food. So far as our observations go, therefore, the Robin seems to be a bird of low problem-solving ability. vol. xxxviii] INSIGHT LEARNING IN BIRDS. 49 To sum up : — The general result of these communications, for which I would like to express sincere thanks, is (i) that individual birds of a species (as with other animals from ants upwards) evidently vary very greatly in their learning capabilities. (2) These records make it appear rather more improbable than before that the performance is dependent on a fully formed inborn automatism. Nothing final can be established till carefully controlled experiments have been carried out on a large scale with hand-reared birds of known experience. But in the meantime observations of wild birds in held and garden are suggestive and provide many valuable hints and indications for future work. It is to be hoped, therefore, that ornithologists will continue to make careful and critical observations on this type of behaviour, always attempting to establish with as much certainty as possible whether the initial step in any problem solving of this kind has been accomplished accidentally or whether true insight is involved. We are still completely without observations on many of our commonest birds ; e.g. Wren and Song-Thrush — birds which often give the superficial impression of a fairly high level of general intelligence. THE EJECTION OF PELLETS BY PASSERINE AND OTHER BIRDS BY B. W. TUCKER, m.a., m.b.o.u. That predatory birds such as hawks and owls -throw up the indigestible portions of their food in the form of pellets is common knowledge amongst ornithologists, and that various others, such as Rooks, Herons, gulls and at least some waders, do so is also fairly generally known. / But with regard to Passerine birds and various other groups recorded information is extraordinarily meagre. Definite records are available for a very small number of species, but the data are so fragmentary that when The Handbook was in preparation it was thought better not to deal with the subject at all, except in the case of the well-known pellet-producers, such as owls and hawks. It was felt that to mention the habit in a few scattered species where it happens to have been recorded and not in many others of similar habits in which it most probably occurs but has not been described, would give a misleading impression. It is now proposed, however, to make an appeal for further information and observation, and the present communication is intended both to direct the attention of readers to the subject and also to give some indication of what is known already. There seems little doubt that all insectivorous species eject the chitirlous hard-parts of their prey, as has been observed in some cases, but a reasonable presumption is not the same thing as positive evidence, and for many common species no information is available. Certainly the act of ejection is very rarety observed in small in- sectivorous Passerines ; but Mr. W. B. Alexander, who has given the subject considerable attention in Australia, informs me that amongst Australian insect eaters the indigestible matter is frequently not ejected in the form of coherent pellets, but rather as mere fragments and broken bits of appendages. The act of flicking these out of the mouth would very easily escape all but the closest observation and such fragments would be almost impossible to find amongst ground vegetation after ejection. It can scarcely be doubted that the same applies to European birds; nevertheless, at any rate under certain conditions, some species such as the Blackbird ( Turdus merula) and the Robin ( Erithacus rubecula), may disgorge tolerably coherent pellets of insect remains. The more predatory or scavenging members of the genus Corvus, such as the Raven (C. corax) and Carrion Crow (C. corone), produce pellets much like those of birds-of- prey, and Rooks (C. frugilegus), when feeding on grain, form pellets consisting almost entirely of husks. As to whether the small seed- eating Passerines eject the husks of seeds I have no evidence, but since I can find no single record of this being observed it may perhaps be supposed that they do not ordinarily do so and that the husks are broken up in the gizzard. VOL. XXXVIII.] EJECTION OF PELLETS. 51 It must be borne in mind that the formation of pellets must depend on the amount of indigestible matter in the food. In species with a wide range of diet this may clearly vary a good deal, and in these pellet production may be expected to vary from something substantial to almost, or actually, nothing. In some it may be comparatively rare. The cases in which to my knowledge pellet ejection has positively been shown to occur — other than the hawks and owls and the Heron, for which there are adequate data — are listed below. It is likely enough that some scattered references have been missed, and the list is in any case purely preliminary and exploratory. Raven ( Corvus corax), Carrion Crow (C. corone) , Rook (C . frugilegus) . — See above. Jackdaw ( Corvus monedula) . Starling ( Sturnus vulgaris). — Will disgorge stones of olive, cherry and other fruits, but no evidence found of any regular ejection of insect remains (P. Madon, Alauda, i, p. 236). *Pied Wagtail ( Motacilla alba yarrellii) . — -K. Evetts, quoting observations of W. Rolph, Brit. Birds, Vol. xxv, p. 332. *Great Grey Shrike ( Lanius excubitor).- — -Evetts ( l.t .). Red-backed Shrike (L. collurio). — Evetts ( l.c .) and others. Spotted Flycatcher ( Muscicapa striata). — Harting, Zoologist, 1880, p. 292. Also reported to H. F. Witherby by R. A. Houblon. *Grasshopper-Warbler ( Locustella ncevia). — Evetts (l.c.). *Great Reed-Warbler ( Acrocephalus arundinaceus) . — P. Estiot, Alauda, L P- 52. *Reed-Warbler ( Acrocephalus scirpaceus). — Estiot (l.c.). *Sedge-Warbler (A. schcenobcenus) . — Evetts (l.c.). *Whitethroat (Sylvia communis).- — Evetts (l.c.). Song-Thrush (Turdus ericetorum) .- — H. Terras, Brit. Birds, Vol. xxv, P- 364- Blackbird (Turdus merula). — See above. *Wheatear ( (Enanthe cenanthe). — Evetts, Estiot (l.c.). *Redstart (Phcenicurus phcenicurus) . — -M. Legendre, Alauda, i, p. 236. *Nightingale (Luscinia megarhyncha) . — Evetts, Estiot, Legendre (l.c.). ♦Bluethroat (L. svecica). — Legendre (l.c.). Mr. B. B. Osmaston also informs me that a captive Eastern White-spotted Bluethroat (L. s. abbotti ), which was fed largely on earwigs disgorged a pellet consisting entirely of the chitinous forceps of the insects at least once a day. Robin (Erithacus rubecula). — Legendre (l.c.). Reported to H. F. Witherby by J. MacLaughlin, who observed a wild Robin disgorge a pellet, described as the size of a small haricot bean, consisting of the chitinous remains of beetles, etc. Swallow (Hirundo rustica). House-Martin (Delichon urbica). Swift (Apus apus). — The Swift family are mentioned as producing pellets by Stresemann (Aves in Kiilcenthal and Krumbach, Handbuch der Zoologie, p. 150). Nightjar ( Caprimuilgus europceus). Roller (Coracias garrulus). — J. L’Hermitte, Revue Frangaise d'Ornithologie, vi, p. 28. Wood-Pigeon ( Columba palumbus) . — Wood-Pigeons have been recorded as producing pellets about an inch in length composed of " husks of barley and beech-nuts, grass, or clover, and small stones ” (J. T. Mann, Zoologist, 1880, p. 193) or "chiefly of the husks of oats” (E. W. H. Blagg, id, p. 236). *In species so marked the habit appears only to have been definitely recorded in captive birds. BRITISH BIRDS. [vol. xxxviii. Curlew ( Numenius arquata). — For details see A. Hibbert-Ware and R. F. Ruttledge, Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxviii, pp. 22-27. Redshank ( Tringa totanus). — For details see J. F. Thomas, Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxvi, pp. 29-32. Gulls ( Larus ). — Gulls produce pellets with certain types of food, but information is scanty. C. Oldham (Brit. Birds, Vol. xxvii, p. 169) during an abundant emergence of a small chafer (Phylloperta horticula), which was being consumed in quantities by mixed flocks of Herring and Common Gulls (L. argentatus and canus ), with Lesser Black-backs (L. fuscus ) and Black-headed Gulls ( L . ridibundus) in smaller numbers, found large numbers of pellets of these birds consisting solely of the chitinous parts of the beetles. Pellets of grain are also disgorged by gulls which have been feeding on farmlands. (A. W. Boyd). Capercaillie ( Tetrao urogallus) — Tetrao is included by Stresemann (l.c.). amongst birds which produce pellets. It can hardly be doubted that some readers can supplement this obviously very imperfect list from previous experience and for the future I would commend the subject to the attention of photographers and others engaged on close watching of any species. I should also be glad to receive specimens of pellets of certain or almost certain origin, of any birds other than owls, hawks or the Common Heron, which can be addressed to me at 9 Marston Ferry Road, Oxford. They should be accompanied by the fullest possible data. It may be added that although observations on and material from wild birds are particularly desired, the subject is one upon which aviculturists should be in a position to provide very valuable evidence and a letter asking for information has been addressed to the Avicultural Magazine. A further communication will be published in due course. (53) NOTES. RAVENS NESTING IN A ROOKERY. On March 26th, 1943, K. Williamson and one of the writers, W.S.C., when engaged on a rookery census were surprised to hear a pair of Ravens ( Corvus c. corax ) croaking anxiously ' and flying around Montpelier Wood in the heart of Sully Glen, Isle of Man. Despite a search for possible alternative sites, such as crags overhanging the river or nearby quarries, no nest was found, and it was concluded that the Ravens must be nesting in the rookery amongst the Rooks. This year the writers re-visited the site on April 8th and once more the pair of Ravens came croaking to meet us. On this occasion, however, the nest was definitely located about 30 feet from the ground in the branches of a fir tree on the edge of the wood containing a large rookery of approximately 115 nests. The nest held young, but we were unfortunately unable to climb the tree without irons and on paying another visit a fortnight later found the nest empty. As we are unable to find a similar case of Ravens nesting in a rookery we venture to put the above on record. Erom previous experience we have known extreme hostility being displayed by Rooks to herons and owls nesting in their rookery, but on no occasion did we see any friction between the Rooks and their larger cousins. W. S. Cowin and H. M. Rogers, Jnr. JACKDAWS “ BILLING.” On March 30th, 1944, I saw a pair of Jackdaws ( Corvus monedula spermologus ) on a large chimney-stack, a distance of approximately 50 yards from their nesting-site in a church tower, displaying and “ billing.” One bird, which I took to be the male, was inserting his beak into the wide-open mouth of the other. This behaviour continued for a minute or so, but the birds then flew off following each other in close proximity. I have not seen this behaviour before among Jackdaws and have been unable to trace any references to it in The Handbook or other literature. C. H. Cooke. SONG OF FEMALE CHAFFINCH. On April 4th, 1944, at Brasted Chart, Kent, I heard a song from a female Chaffinch ( Fringilla ccelebs gengleri ) which was perching alone, with no male in sight. The song was a rather thin warble, interspersed with a subdued rattle lasting about three seconds. In The Handbook of British Birds a rattle is attributed only to the male bird in connexion with display and pairing. B. Forsyth. SNOW-BUNTING IN SURREY IN APRIL. On April 14th, 1944, while on my tractor ploughing at Ewhurst, near Guildford, I was able to observe a male Snow-Bunting (. Pledrophenax nivalis) for several hours, at times at a distance of less than 15 yards. The bird would perch on a clod and then run with an agitated head jerk over the rough earth away from the tractor, until it was obliged to take wing for a few yards. Each 54 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. time it stopped it continually jerked its tail and occasionally flicked its wings. The plumage corresponded almost exactly with the summer plumage figured in The Handbook except that the head was huffish white rather than white and the back blackish rather than black. L. G. Weller. BREEDING OF GREY WAGTAIL IN S.E. KENT. I am informed by Mr. Guy Mannering, of Dover, that a pair of Grey Wagtails ( Motacilla c. cinerea) nested and reared a brood of young in a wall of a water mill in Dover in May, 1941, 1942 and 1943. There seems to be no previous record of this species breeding so far east in Kent. G. E. Took. [This is a long way south and east of any previously recorded breeding except for a single record prior to 1908 near Dover. The regular breeding localities appear to be north and west of a line from Maidstone to Tunbridge Wells. — Eds.] ROOSTING BEHAVIOUR OF LONG-TAILED TITS The following account of Long-tailed Tits (Mgithalos caudalus rosaceus) going to roost, given me by a neighbour, may be of interest. Early in March she was walking in a narrow Somerset lane at dusk and saw several Long-tailed Tits preening themselves in a bramble thicket. Presently one, having finished its preening, settled down on a branch to roost, and was quickly joined by a second, then a third came and snuggled close to the first ; but/vhen a fourth joined them it flew to a twig immediately above and dropped down into the middle of the party, so likewise did five and six, and four more who gathered up from a distance. All flew to exactly the same twig, and by dropping down into the middle of the bunch caused much re- shufflingand waving of tails up and down in the effort of balancing. David B. Grubb. CLOACA-PECKING DISPLAY BY FEMALE HEDGE-SPARROW. With reference to the display of the Hedge-Sparrow (Prunella modularis ) described in The Handbook of British Birds, wherein mention is made of the male pecking the cloaca of the female, the following may be of interest. On March 28th, 1944, in the evening I witnessed a similar display between a pair in my garden, but in this instance the female was pecking the male, who stood with wings spread and quivering rapidly. I have no doubt of the sex of each bird, as the cock, which I have observed singing on several occasions, had recently lost the greater part of his tail, and since this incident I have seen the display with the positions reversed as noted in The Handbook. On March 26th, the hen laid an egg in a last year’s nest, but no more eggs were laid and at the time of writing (April 5th) she is building about three feet away from the old nest. C. Clay Kneale. EARLY NESTING OF SWALLOW. On April 29111,1943, in company with Mr. E. G. H. Mack, I found a nest of Swallows ( Hirundo r. ruslica ) in Tims’s boathouse on VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 55 the River Cherwell at Oxford, containing four eggs. The nest was freshly lined with feathers and the eggs were warm. The Handbook of British Birds gives the period for eggs as “ mid-May onwards, rarely earlier.” G. L. Bullard. DISPLAY OF LESSER SPOTTED WOODPECKER. The following notes on display behaviour of the Lesser Spotted Woodpecker ( Dryobates minor comminutus) were made near Lowestoft, Suffolk, on April 6th, 1940 : — (1) Two birds, male and female, flew excitedly from the branch of an elm and round in a circular course, one appearing to chase the other. They alighted on the same tree and perched in an attitude with .quivering, half-opened wings and tail spread. They moved excitedly from one branch to another or about the same branch, pausing to stand in the attitude described, with the head poked forward. Throughout the performance a loud churr or screech with a suggestion of a hiss in it was given. The two birds then flew' to another elm, where they were joined by two more, also male and female. All four repeated the performance of moving about excitedly with frequent pauses to assume the same attitude, the hissing churr being again given throughout the display. After each bout of displaying the birds fed for about five seconds until one or more of the party started again, but this did not necessarily start the others. After a time the pairs flew off in different directions. (2) Male feeding on elm ; female feeding on next tree adopted the attitude described above, with quivering, half opened wings and hissing-churr note. She flew to the branch above the male and repeated the performance, but the male took no notice and she resumed feeding. (3) Two birds alighted on an elm and after feeding for a few seconds began the same behaviour with same note, moving wildly about the branches. The birds in (2) and (3) were almost certainly the same as those in (1). It is curious that the display action referred to does not appear to have been clearly described before. The display accentuated the barring of the back and outer tail-feathers and was often performed in such a position as to make the back noticeable to the other bird or birds. E. V. Southam. LITTLE OWL HOVERING. In the late evening of May 26th, 1944, I noticed a Little Owl ( Athene noctua vidalii ) hovering over a marsh in S.W. Kent. I knew there were several young Lapwings on the marsh in question and that a pair of Little Owls had a nest containing young in a nearby oak tree, so decided to take cover and await events. After a short interval a Little Owl flew out of the oak tree and alternatively hovered and gartered the marsh in " kestrel fashion,” finally closing its wings and dropping on a young Lapwing, which it later carried to its nest. 56 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. In past years I have watched scores of Little Owls seeking prey, but this is the first time I have noticed one seriously hovering and as no mention is made of this in The Handbook it may be interesting to place the action of this particular bird on record. T. C. Gregory. [For a previous record, see antea, Vol. xxxvii, p. 178. — Eds.]. SCOPS-OWL IN KIRKCUDBRIGHTSHIRE. A Scops-Owl ( Otus s. scops ) was captured by Mr. Dickson, Gillhead, Kirk bean, Kirkcudbrightshire, at the end of April, 1944, and he sent it to me. He caught it rather cleverly with a snare on the end of a fishing rod and he found, as I am doing, that it feeds well on mice. It also takes any insects we give it. Mr. Dickson thought by its size that it was a Little Owl, but I find it has all the features mentioned by The Handbook as characteristic of the Scops-Owl— the ear “ horns," the slim build, the dark shaft-streaks on the feathers, and the vermiculations on its plumage. Its feet are of the type shown in a figure in The Handbook. Olaf j. Pullen. [Sir Hugh Gladstone informs us that he has also seen this bird. — Eds.] TAWNY OWL TAKING CARRION. On April 24th, 1943, I found a nest of three young Tawny Owls ( Strix aluco sylvatica) in a hollow ash tree in Lincolnshire. A number of pellets found at the nest contained the fur and bones of small mammals, but two consisted entirely of lamb’s wool indicating. that the parent birds had been feeding on a carcase. Since then, a local gamekeeper has informed me that he has, on several occasions, found Tawny Owls in his traps baited for rats with the viscera of rabbits. E. L. Roberts. KITE IN NORTHUMBERLAND. By a most regrettable accident, a Kite ( Milvus m. milvus), was caught in a trap and killed on Little Tosson Moor in Coquetdale near Rothbury, Northumberland, on March 29th, 1944. It was an adult female. This is the first occasion on which a Kite has been recorded in Northumberland for about 75 years. As related by the late George Bolam, in The Birds of Northumberland, one was trapped near Featherstone Castle in the Tyne valley above Haltwhistle in or about the year 1869. George W. Temperley. GADWALL IN BEDFORDSHIRE. On April 24th, 1944, I saw an adult drake Gadwall (Anas strcpcra ) at Bedford Sewage Farm. I saw the bird again on April 30th and on May 2nd ; it was not there on May 4th. I only saw the bird in flight, but had good views of it and it appeared to be in perfect plumage. The white speculum and the black upper and under tail-coverts were the most distinctive characters. The only previous occurrences of this species in Bedfordshire, as far as I know, were in the last century and have been recorded in Steele-Elliott’s Vertebrate Fauna of Bedfordshire. J. A. Miller. VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 57 OYSTER-CATCHER FAR FROM LAND IN THE ATLANTIC. On April 4th, 1944, on a voyage across the Atlantic, when we were in position 45 0 50' N, 25 0 W. an Oyster-catcher {Hcematopus ostralegus ) appeared and made a feeble attempt to settle on the ship. However its courage failed it and after circling the ship twice it flew off again in a south-westerly direction. The position referred to is about 450-500 miles N.E.N. of the Azores and about 700 miles from N. Spain. E. A. Duffey. PREDATORY HABITS OF BLACK-HEADED GULLS. With reference to the notes by Mr. Ingram and Major Boyd ( antea , pp. 12-15), the habit of the Black-headed Gull ( Larus r. ridibundus) of obtaining food from other birds by direct attack has been known to me for many years. I have witnessed these actions on many occasions, divers generally being the victims, on waters chiefly around London, but as these habits were well known I have never kept notes. I can, however, clearly visualize the Black-headed Gulls in close attendance on the feeding divers and attacking them when they came to the surface. I cannot remember actually having seen the gulls obtain food, as the divers were too quick for them and immediately dived again. I wish to emphasize that the attentions of the gulls were not of a “ jackalling ” nature, as Wigeon ( Anas penelope) eat parts of Zostera torn up and discarded by Brent Geese ( Branta bernicla). Black-headed Gulls are also predatory on Lapwings ( Va'nellus vanellus), their method being to mix with flocks of feeding Lapwings and attack them when they obtain food. Such attacks are in my experience of common occurrence. About six years ago I saw a Black-headed Gull pursue a Kingfisher ( Alcedo atthis ispida ), which had just secured a fish, on the Thames near Ham. The last instance of these attacks, which I can remember, was at Wilstone Reservoir, Tring, the victims being Goosanders ( Mergus m. merganser) and Golden-eye (Bucephala c. clangula). William E. Glegg. [With further reference to this subject, Mr. H. H. S. Hayward has drawn our attention to two notes from Tring by the late Charles Oldham in the Transactions of the Herts Natural History Society for I937 and I93§ respectively. The first records a Black-headed Gull attempting to snatch a fish as it was being passed to a nearly full- grown young Great Crested Grebe ( Podiceps c. cristatus) by the parent. The second describes a party of about a score of Black- headed Gulls harrying a group of eight Goosanders ( Mergus m. merganser) — though admittedly in this case it could not be seen whether the gulls were robbing the duck or picking up something disturbed by their diving — and also quotes an observation of the late B. Lloyd at Elstree of Black-headed Gulls robbing, or attempting to rob, a Coot ( Fulica a. atra). — Eds.]. Golden Oriole in Monmouthsire. — Lt.-Col. L. P. C. Tenison informs us that a male Golden Oriole ( Oriolus 0. oriolus ) was seen 58 BRITISH BIRDS. [vol. xxxviii. by 2nd-Lt. R. H. Tenison at Abercarn, Monmouthshire, on April, 23rd, 1944. Early Spotted Flycatcher in Buckinghamshire. — Mr. H. A. Bilby sends us particulars of a Spotted Flycatcher ( Muscicapa s. striata ) which he clearly identified at Eaton Wick churchyard, Windsor, on March 26th, 1944, as it made sallies after insects from a low branch of a tree. The Handbook records only one earlier date (March 10th). Early Pied Flycatcher in Gloucestershire. — Mr. H. H. Davis informs us that on April 8th, 1944, he saw a male Pied Flycatcher ( Muscicapa h. hypoleuca), at Little Stoke, Patch way, near Bristol. Only two earlier dates (March 12th, Scilly, and April 3rd, Lancs.) are recorded in The Handbook. Swallow crossing Helvellyn. — Mr. Alan F. Airey informs us that on May 8th, 1944, he observed a Swallow ( Hirundo r. rustica ) evidently migrating over the summit of Helvellyn (3,118 ft.) in a north-westerly direction in good weather conditions. Early House-Martin in Somerset. — Mr. A. V. Cornish sends us particulars of a House-Martin ( Deliclion u. urbica), which he saw at close range at Minehead on March 19th, 1944. Hoopoes in Cornwall, Hampshire and Merioneth. — Mr. C. .J. F. Coombs sends us particulars of a Hoopoe ( Upupa e. epops) which was seen near Bodmin Moor on April 10th, 1944, by a local black- smith, who had a good view of the bird and whose description left no doubt of its identity. Another was seen by S/Lt. G. J. Lockley, R.N.V.R., in the grounds of Court Royal Hotel, Southampton, on April 24th, and another was observed about Pandy Woollen Mill, near Towyn, Merionethshire, by Mr. F. E. Jones, about the beginning of April. Later the remains of this bird, which had probably been killed by a cat, were found by Mr. Jones and sent by him to Mr. D. Seth-Smith, who kindly forwarded the head to us in confirmation of the record. Garganey in Yorkshire. — Capt. R. C. L. Pilkington informs us that on April 1st, 1944, he saw a drake Garganey ( Anas querque- dula) on a small pond on the borders of Yorkshire and Durham. This species is not often met with in Yorkshire. Unusual number of Gannets in the Mediterranean.— Pte. A. R. Jenkins writes to us from Algeria that on November 23rd, 1943, he saw about a hundred and fifty Gannets (Sula bassana) fishing about 300 yards off shore. This appears to be a quite exceptional number for the Mediterranean. Sooty Tern in Dorset. — In The Field, Dec. 11, 1943, p. 617, Dr. A. C. Coles describes a Sooty Tern {Sterna/, fuscata) seen under excellent conditions at Sandbanks, Poole Harbour, on August 30th, 1943. It was watched with powerful glasses from a car for about three-quarters of an hour while resting on the sands and was after- wards seen in flight. The identity of the bird is clearly established VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 59 by the careful description, of which the main points are : — “ about the size of a Sandwich Tern : forehead white, crown, nape and line through the eye deep black, upper parts and wing black, tail black, but outer tail feathers white, the whole of the underparts white, legs and bill black.” We have, moreover, been in direct touch with Dr. Coles and are fully satisfied with the record. Puffin in Surrey. — Mr. Hubert E. Pounds informs us that on February 19th, 1944, a female Puffin (Fratercula arctica grabce ) was picked up dead by Mr. Alvan G. Willcox, of Addington. It was found crouched against the exposed roots of an old yew border- ing a woodland path, and was in a fresh condition, though some- what emaciated. The weather at the time was bitterly cold with strong north-easterly winds and intermittent snow showers. The skin has been presented to the Natural History Museum. REVIEWS. The Birds of Lakeland. By Ernest Blezard (Editor), Marjory Garnett, Ritson Graham and Tom L. Johnston. (Carlisle Natural History Society, 1943) With map, 8s. 6d. ; without map, 6s. 6d. Macpherson’s Fauna of Lakeland was published in 1892 and has long been out of date, so that a new account of the birds of Lakeland was much needed. It has been known for a long time that Mr. Blezard and his collaborators were engaged on such a work and it is a pleasure to welcome its appearance, not- withstanding the war. This neat and handy volume, published as Vol. vi of the Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society, is a good example of , what a local fauna should be. The systematic part contains all the essential information about the status and distribution of the various species, concisely and excellently treated without any superfluous padding, and there is a brief but adequate introductory section on the physical characteristics of the area. There is also an account of the breeding of ducks at Netherby, which has affected the status of several species and been instrumental in adding Wigeon, Pintail and Gadwall to the Cumberland breeding list. The addition of sections on migration and on plant ecology as affecting bird-life would certainly have been valuable and welcome, but possibly war-time economy restrictions prevented such expansion. The area covered is considerably more extensive than the Lake District of the guide books and comprises the whole of Cumberland and Westmorland, with Lancashire north of the Sands. It is also more diversified, comprising not only the region of mountains and lakes which gives it its special character, but also a large area of cultivated lowland, especially in the north, and a long coastline including such famous bird haunts as the English shores of the Solway and the great gullerv at Ravenglass. Counting sub-species, 289 birds are definitely recorded for this area and three more are considered not fully authenticated. Almost our only criticism, and that a minor one, is that a few field records, not previously published, of less readily identifiable species, such as Great Snipe, Red-necked Grebe and Pomatorhine Skua, might perhaps have been accompanied by evidence of identification, though we have no reason to doubt their accuracy. The Way Birds Live. By Edward A. Armstrong. (Lindsay Drummond, 1943). Illustrated. 7s. 6d. This book was written, the author tells us, to meet a need which he felt as a boy for a book telling him not merely what birds looked like, but something “ about their singing and dancing, love-mdking and fighting, and why they do just what they do,” in short about their behaviour. This is certainly a praise- worthy object, and the book is without doubt a great improvement on the “ pretty dickie ” type of bird book for the young. It contains a considerable 60 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. amount of interesting information under such headings as “ finding a partner,” ” showing off,” “ battles and bluff,” “ courtship gifts,” " setting up house,” " about eggs,” " youngsters,” “ what’s for dinner,” “ roosting ruses,” and so on. Nevertheless we are not sure that it achieves its object as satisfactorily as it might. Any doubt on this score will be settled by the measure of its success with the young people for whom it is written, but to us it seems a weakness that the author fails to make anything like a coherent story. The treatment is too disjointed and fragmentary and often too much like a mere list of examples, and in some ways — though this must not be taken too literally — a large part of the book strikes us as too suggestive of an abridged edition of the author’s Bird Display. While we would not exclude references to exotic birds, we think that for children more stress might have been laid on familiar ones or at any rate that exotic and British birds might be differentiated when the former are referred to. This is not always done, and youthful readers who go out hoping to meet hornbills, penguins and pelicans in their rambles might have been saved the trouble. Somerset Birds and Some Other Folk. By E. W. Hendy. (Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1943). Illustrated. 12s. 6d. net. This is a volume of miscellaneous essays in Mr. Hendy’s usual pleasant style, held together by their common setting in Somerset and chiefly in the Exmoor district. They are mostly about birds, but also about country, country folk and four-footed creatures. The bird chapters include accounts of Exmoor Merlins, Chaffinches, Swallow migration in the south-west, and biographies of some garden birds based on colour ringing. These are for the most part essays by a bird lover who is also a reliable observer rather than set studies in the more formal and scientific sense — indeed we notice one or two characteristic digs at scientific ornithologists — but they contain much sound and accurate observation as well as vivid description. There are also some chapters on more general topics such as bird behaviour, and we are tempted outside our strictly allotted sphere to refer particularly to the very pleasing word portrait , from life of a Mendip woodman. Bird Music. By A. L. Turnbull. (Faber & Faber). Illustrated. 7s.6d.net. As a contribution to the study of bird song, even at the fairly elementary level intended, this book cannot be taken very seriously. The author has made no attempt to acquaint himself with the work of others on the subject : for example there is no mention of E. M. Nicholson’s excellent account in Songs of Wild Birds by Nicholson and Koch, and in the chapter entitled " How and why Birds sing ” there is little evidence of any real knowledge of current views. Readers who have taken the trouble to inform themselves on such matters and have noted such pretentious chapter headings as “ Analysis of vocal expressions ” and " Component elements of bird song ” will probably be exasperated before getting very far and may never reach the specific section, but they will not lose very much. Such distinct song types as warbles, trills, etc. are nowhere distinguished, and amongst much verbiage there is seldom any clear indication of the diagnostic characters of the various songs : observers hoping for guidance in recognising songs or in distinguishing between those which are more or less similar will find little to help them. Other points of criticism could be mentioned, but it seems hardly worth while. LETTER. ORNITHOLOGY OF HOLY ISLAND. To the Editors of British Birds. Sirs, — May I, through the courtesy of your columns, state that I should be interested to hear from any of your readers possessing unpublished notes on the Ornithology of the Holy Island of Lindisfarne and its environs. Drumguish, Richard Perry. Kingussie, Inverness-shire. BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- Net. DREAM ISLAND DAYS An Idyll of the Days of Peace BY R. M. LOCKLEY. with many sketches by Mrs. Lockley and plates from photographs The author writes straight from the heart and from the vivid island scene. The book breathes his deep understanding of nature, and shows how two happy mortals found a life of true peace away from the struggle of the crowd. Lists of the birds and plants of the island are included. Fully Illustrated. Demy 8vo. 10/6 net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7/6 net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. A new impression of revised edition is now in the Press. THE HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS By H. F. Witherby, M.B.E., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U., Editor; Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain, M.A., M.B.O.U., H.F.A.O.U. ; Norman F. Ticehurst, O.B.E., M.A., F.R.C.S., M.B.O.U., C.F.A.O.U. ; and Bernard W. Tucker, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. 133 Coloured and 24 Monochrome Plates figuring all the species, 300 Text Figures and 37 Maps. Each of the 520 birds is fully treated in the following sections ; — HABITAT, FIELD-CHARACTERS AND GENERAL HABITS, VOICE, DISPLAY AND POSTURING. BREEDING. FOOD, BRITISH DISTRIBUTION, MIGRATIONS, DISTRIBUTION ABROAD, DESCRIPTION (all plumages), CHARACTERS & ALLIED FORMS. Large Demy 8vo. 5 Vois. £6. SONGS OF WILD BIRDS By E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by Julian Huxley. With two double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge-Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. 30s. net. By the same authors Postage 8d. MORE SONGS OF WILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided io-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood-Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle-Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. “All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. BRI1H1BIKD5 With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, “The Zoologist^" EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED BY Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 4, Vol. XXXVIII, September i, 1944. PAGE Changes in Status among British breeding Birds. By W. B. Alexander and David Lack ( continued ) . . . . . . . . 62 Some Notes on the Song of the Wren. By the Rev. Edward A. Armstrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Obituary : — Bertram Lloyd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Notes : — Inter-breeding of Carrion and Hooded Crows in Co. Dublin (Rev. P. G. Kennedy) . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Male Cirl Bunting incubating (Brian Truscott) .. .. . . 74 Tree-Creeper climbing a man (Lt. -Col. B. H. Ryves) .. .. 74 Nestling Wood-Warblers killed by slug (Christopher M. Swaine) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Blackcap wintering in E. Ross-shire (Rev. John Lees and William Henderson) . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Green Woodpecker drumming (Sir B. H. Bourdillon) . . . . 76 Early vocal activity and egg deposition by female Cuckoos during the spring of 1944 (P. A. Adolph) . . . . . . 76 Early hatching of Golden Eagle (Seton Gordon) . . . . 76 Ospreys in Hertfordshire and Surrey (C. B. Ashby and F. M. Gurteen) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Spoonbill in Somerset (A. V. Cornish) . . . . . . . . 77 Shoveler nesting in Ayrshire (J. A. Anderson) . . . . . . 77 Curlew nesting in Northamptonshire (I. Hepburn)^ .. .. 78 An overlooked occurrence of Black-winged Stilt in Cornwall (A. C. Leach) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Iceland Gull in Dublin (Rev. P. G. Kennedy) . . . . . . 78 Short Notes : — * Early nesting of summer migrants in Kent. House-Sparrow feeding young Blue Tits. Swallow in Gloucestershire in winter. Late drumming of Great Spotted Woodpecker. Young Tawny Owl leaving nest at early age. Goosander breeding in Dumfriesshire. Turtle-Doves using Blackbird’s nest. Moorhen chasing Stoat in defence of young .. .. 79 G (62) CHANGES IN STATUS AMONG BRITISH BREEDING BIRDS BY W. B. ALEXANDER and DAVID LACK. ( Continued from page 45.) Grey Wagtail ( Motacilla c. cinerea). Marked increase in S.E. England (Kent, Surrey, Sussex, Hants). Pied Wagtail ( Motacilla alba yarrellii). Decrease in Scotland in recent years. British Nuthatch ( Sitta europcea affinis). Increase and extension of range in N.W. Wales (Merioneth, Caernarvon, Anglesey) and in Cheshire. British Great Tit ( Parus major newtoni). Increase in N. Scotland, due to increase of woodland. British Blue Tit ( Pams cceruleus obscums). Increase in N. Scotland and colonized Isle of Man. Due to increase of woodland. British Coal-Tit ( Parus ater britannicus) . Spreading in woods of northern Scotland, due to increase of woodland. Scottish Crested Tit (Parus cristatus scoticus). Doubtless formerly more widespread in Scotland and there are records of its occurrence in the west and south early in 19th century, though no evidence of its breeding there. In the second half of that century appears to have been restricted to the Spey Valley, but with extensive planting of conifers has now spread to pinewoods throughout the Moray basin. British Long-tailed Tit (Mgithalos caudatus rosace us). Numbers fluctuate owing to increased mortality in very severe winters. Bearded Tit (Panurus b. biarmicus). Huge decrease, in many counties extinct. Mainly due to big decrease in possible breeding grounds through drainage, also affected by hard winters and collectors. Red-backed Shrike ( Lanins c. collurio). Marked decrease in northern, western and parts of southern England, also in Wales. Also fluctuates with season. Cause of decrease unknown. Spotted Flycatcher (. Muscicapa s. striata ). Apparently increasing somewhat in northern Scotland. Pied, Flycatcher ( Muscicapa h. hypoleuca). Definite increase in northern England and southern Scotland. Cause unknown. British Goldcrest ( Regulus r. anglorum). In 18th and early 19th centuries was a comparatively rare bird. White called it “ almost as rare as any bird we know ” at Selborne. During 19th century increased enormously, partly at least due VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 63 to plantation of conifers and perhaps also to milder winters, since numbers are greatly reduced in severe winters and may take several years to recover. Still increasing and spreading in Scotland and Ireland with increase of coniferous plantations. Chiffchaff ( Phylloscopus c. collybita). Marked increase in Ireland in second half of 19th century. Willow-Warbler ( Phylloscopus t. trochilus). Colonized Outer Hebrides and increasing Orkneys in 20th century. Wood-Warbler (. Phylloscopus sibilatrix). Not recorded from N. Scotland (north of Inverness) or from Ireland till second half of 19th century, but was perhaps overlooked. In Ireland is still extremely local and rare, but in Scotland has increased and now breeds in Ross and S.E. Sutherland. Savi’s Warbler ( Locustella l. luscinioides). Extinct in mid- 19th century soon after its discovery in Norfolk and the fens of East Anglia. Probably due to drainage of fens, the small areas remaining perhaps being too limited to allow of its survival. Sedge-Warbler ( Acrocephalus schcenobcenus). Colonized Orkney in 19th century and Outer Hebrides in 20th, and increasing on mainland of Scotland. Cause unknown. Garden- Warbler ( Sylvia borin). Possibly increased in Ireland in second half of 19th century, but more probably overlooked earlier. Still very local. Blackcap ( Sylvia a. atricapilla). Increased in Ireland in second half of 19th century and increase perhaps continuing. Whitethroat ( Sylvia c. communis). Colonized Outer Hebrides in second half of 19th century. Increasing in northern Scotland. Lesser Whitethroat ( Sylvia c. curruca). Has probably increased in England and certainly in Wales. Spread west to Cornwall, Pembroke and Anglesey in 20th century. Dartford-Warbler ( Sylvia undata dartfordiensis). Widespread decrease, extinct in many counties. Due to clearing of waste-land, collectors, heath-fires and hard winters. Mistle-Thrush ( Turdus v. viscivorus). Great increase in first half of 19th century in England, Scotland and Ireland. In N. England and Scotland it was rare at end of 18th century and in Ireland unknown. First recorded in Co. Antrim in 1800 and first nest found in Co. Louth in 1807, it had spread to almost every part of Ireland by 1850. Continued to increase in Scotland throughout 19th century and colonized Orkneys and Outer Hebrides in 20th century. Main cause unknown, but incease in Scotland and Ireland assisted by planting of trees. Ring-Ouzel ( Turdus t. torquatus). Marked decrease in 20th century. Cause unknown. 64 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Blackbird ( Turdus m. mcrula). Increasing, particularly in Scotland (expecially the Northern Isles) and Ireland, helped by increase in woodlands, but main cause unknown. Wheatear ( (Enanthe cc. cenanthe). Decreasing in England, S. Scotland and Orkney in 20th century. Stonechat ( Saxicola torquata hibernans). Decreased locally due to decrease of waste-land; also decreases in hard winters. Redstart ( Phasnicurus ph. phceni citrus). Very marked decrease throughout southern, eastern and central England, and to a less extent in Scotland ; cause unknown. Black Redstart ( Phcenicurus ochrnrus gibraltariensis) . i\fter sporadic breeding for some years, now established as regular breeder in very small numbers in southern and eastern England. See Witherby, H. F. and Fitter, R. S. R. (1942), Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxvi, pp. 132-139. Nightingale ( Luscinia m. megarhyncha). Perhaps decreasing, but evidence meagre. Swallow (Hirundo r. rustica). Probably decreasing, particularly in Scotland, but evidence not quite definite enough. House-Martin (Delichon u. urbica). Probably decreasing generally, though still fairly common. Sand-Martin ( Riparia r. riparia). Probably decreasing, but evidence not quite definite enough. Swift ( Apus a. apus). Claimed to be increasing, including in Ireland, but evidence not quite definite enough. Kingfisher ( Alcedo atthis ispida). Decrease in 19th century due to human destruction. Local in- creases reported in 20th century. Numbers fluctuate owing to heavy mortality in severe winters. Green Woodpecker (Pints viridis pluvius). Colonized Isle of Wight in 20th century. British Great Spotted Woodpecker ( Dryobates major anglicus). Became extinct in Scotland and northern England (north of Cheshire and Yorkshire) in early part of 19th century. During second half of 19th century spread through N. England and S. Scotland to central and eastern Scotland and in 20th century colonized Argyll, Inverness, E. Ross and E. Sutherland. Cause of increase unknown. (See Harvie-Brown, J.A. (1908), Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist., pp. 210- 216). Wryneck ( Jynx t. torquilla ). Very marked decrease throughout its British range. Long-eared Owl (Asio 0. otus). Has decreased in parts of England, especially the Midlands probably through human destruction, and increased in many parts of Scotland with spread of plantations. vol. xxxviil] CHANGES IN STATUS. 65 Short-eared Owl (Asio f. flammeus). Marked fluctuations, correlated with numbers of voles. In 20th century a very small increase in Norfolk and Cambridgeshire and in southern Pennines. British Tawny Owl ( Strix aluco sylvatica). Decrease in 19th century due to human persecution, and increase in 20th century, particularly noted in southern Scotland, correlated with decline in persecution. White-breasted Barn-Owl ( Tyto a. alba). Marked and widespread decrease, due to human persecution. In 20th century perhaps holding its own in most districts, and increasing in parts of southern Scotland, but has not recovered to the same extent as other owls. Peregrine Falcon ( Falco p. peregrinus). Marked and widespread decrease, extinct in many counties, due to human persecution. Less marked decline in 20th century and probably holding its own by 1939. Hobby ( Falco s. subbuteo). Decrease in 19th century due to collectors and gamekeepers, but doubtful if ever abundant. Perhaps now holding its own. Merlin ( Falco columbarius cesalon). Widespread decrease due to human persecution, but in some areas now probably holding its own or increasing where land no longer preserved for game. Golden Eagle ( Aquila ch. chrysaetus). In 19th century marked and widespread decrease, becoming extinct in Ireland and some Scottish counties, due to human persecution. Local increases in 20th century due to protection. Common Buzzard (. Buteo b. buteo). Huge decrease in 19th century and extinct over much of Britain, due to human persecution. Since 1914 beginning to recover markedly, especially in west of England and Wales. Marsh-Harrier ( Circus ce. ceruginosus) . Huge and widespread decrease, in nearly all counties now extinct. Montagu’s Harrier ( Circus pygargus). Although sometimes stated to have greatly decreased, there is no real evidence that this species was ever much commoner than it is at the present time. Hen-Harrier ( Circus c. cyaneus). Huge and widespread decrease, becoming extinct almost every- where, due to human persecution. Remnant in Orkney, etc. somewhat increasing, thanks to protection. Sparrow-Hawk ( Accipiter n. nisus). Though undoubtedly decreased through persecution, it is still not uncommon. Kite ( Milvus m. milvus). Huge and widespread decrease; now extinct in most of Britain. Due to human persecution and decrease of carrion. 66 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. White-tailed Eagle (. Halieeetus albicilla). Widespread decrease and now extinct, due to human persecution Honey-Buzzard ( Pernis a. apivorus). Decrease due to human persecution. Formerly rare but regular, now only occasional breeder. Osprey ( Pandion li. halicetus) . Widespread decrease due to human persecution, and now extinct. Bittern ( Botaurus s. stellaris). Huge and widespread decrease due to drainage of swamps and human persecution. Became extinct in Scotland about end of 18th century, and in Ireland and most parts of England by middle of igth centur}'. In second half of 19th century occasionally nested in Norfolk Broads and early in 20th century re-established itself there. In recent years has also bred in other parts of Norfolk, in Suffolk, Cambridgeshire and Hampshire and perhaps elsewhere. Whooper Swan ( Cygnus cygnus). Became extinct in Orkney in 18th century. Colonized and slightly increasing in N. Scotland in 20th century. Mute Swan ( Cygnus olor). Spreading and increasing in Scotland and in Ireland. The view that all the breeding stock were originally introduced is now considered doubtful ; probably indigenous at least in East Anglia. Grey Lag-Goose ( Anser a. anser). Extinct in England and Ireland in 18th century and decreasing ' in Scotland in 19th century, due to human persecution. Sheld-Duck ( Tadorna tadorna). Increasing throughout Britain. Gad wall ( Anas strepera). Colonized and increasing in Scotland. Increasing in East Anglia from stock originally introduced. Has also nested in N. Ireland since 1933. Garganey ( Anas querquedula) . Small but definite increase in southern England. Wigeon ( Anas penelope). Very marked increase Scotland and N. England, and has nested in recent years sporadically in N. Wales and N. Ireland, and in Kent and Essex Pintail ( Anas a. acuta). Colonization and marked increase in Scotland, also in Ireland, and has bred sporadically in England in 20th century. Shoveler ( Spatula clypeata). Huge increase and spread throughout England, Scotland and Ireland. Perhaps an earlier decrease, as recorded breeding in Kent till 1840. Common Pochard ( Ay thy a ferina). Marked increase and spread throughout England, Scotland and Ireland, still continuing. Tufted Duck ( Ay thy a fuligula). Huge increase and spread throughout British Isles. VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 67 Common Eider ( Somateria m. mollissima). Very marked increase and spread. Colonized N. Ireland in 20th century. Common Scoter ( Melanitta n. nigra). Colonized and increasing in N. Scotland and N.W. Ireland. Goosander ( Mergus m. merganser). Colonized and markedly increasing in Scotland. Red-breasted Merganser ( Mergus senator). Very marked increase in Scotland and in Ireland, where spread to Wexford in 20th century. For the increase of the duck, see Baxter, E.V., and Rintoul, L. J. (1922), “ Some Scottish Breeding Duck, their arrival and dispersal,” and Berry, J. (1939), ‘‘The Status and Distribution of Wild Geese and Wild Duck in Scotland,” International Wild- fowl Enquiry II. Gannet ( Sula bassana). Somewhat increasing, helped by protection and reduction in former slaughter for food. Manx Shearwater ( Puffimis p. puffinus). Many colonies reduced or extinct, due to human destruction or introduced rats, but others, e.g., Skokholm, now protected and flourishing. Fulmar Petrel ( Fulmarus g. glacialis). Huge increase and spread ; see Fisher, J. and Waterston, G. (1941), Journ. Animal Ecol., Vol. 10, pp. 204-272. Great Crested Grebe ( Podiceps c. cristatns). Marked decrease, extinct in many counties, in 19th century, due to human destruction ; marked increase in latter part of 19th century, until present time, certainly greatly assisted by protection, if this was not the initiating cause. See Harrisson, T. H. and Hollom, P. A. D. (1932), Brit. Birds, Vol. xxvi, pp. 105-113. ■Slavonian Grebe ( Podiceps auritus). Recently colonized, and somewhat increasing N. Scotland. Black-necked Grebe ( Podiceps n. nigricollis) . Small but steady increase in England and Scotland, and probably much increased in Ireland, but may have been previously overlooked. Black-throated Diver ( Colymbus a. arcticus). Somewhat decreased through human persecution. Red-throated Diver ( Colymbus stellatus). Decreased in 19th century through human persecution, somewhat increasing in recent years. Wood-Pigeon ( Columba p. palumbus). Very great increase during 19th century, especially in Scotland, due to increase of woodland, destruction of natural enemies by game preservers and increased growth of green crops providing food in winter. Some decrease in Scotland in 20th century. See Alexander, W. B. (1940), Journ. Roy. Agric. Soc., 100, part III). Stock-Dove ( Columba cenas). At beginning of 19th century, confined to S. and E. England. 08 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Increased and spread rapidly and by end of century had colonized S.W. England, Wales, N. England, S. and E. Scotland, N.E. Ireland and Isle of Man. Has continued to increase and spread to N. Scotland and S. and W. Ireland, though not yet established on W. coast of Scotland north of Argyll, nor in Kerry. Main cause doubtful, but has probably benefited by destruction of birds- of-prey and much more general cultivation of green crops in winter. Rock-Dove ( Columba l. livia). Marked decrease generally, especially in southern parts of range, where now extinct in many places. Main cause of decrease unknown, and particularly curious in view of marked increase of other doves. Turtle-Dove ( Streptopelia t. turtur). At beginning of 19th century confined to southern, eastern and midland England, but rapidly increased and extended its range to Wales, Cheshire and Yorkshire before 1865. Has continued to increase and has nested occasionally in the northern counties of England and once or twice in eastern Ireland, but has not greatly extended its range in last fifty years. Black-tailed Godwit [Limosa l. limosa). Huge decrease and eventual extinction before middle of 19th century, due mainly to drainage of fens and increasing accessibility of breeding haunts. Has bred four times 1937-1942, so possibly about to become re-established. Common Curlew ( Numenius a. arquata). Marked increase in northern isles of Scotland, Inner Hebrides and many parts of England in 20th century. In parts of N. and W. England, where breeding was formerly almost confined to high ground, now breeds regularly in river valleys and on low moors. Has colonized Severn Valley in Worcestershire and Gloucestershire and heaths in Hampshire, Surre}' and Sussex and has bred sporadically in Oxfordshire and W. Norfolk. Cause unknown. Whimbrel ( Numenius p. phceopus). Decreasing markedly. Cause unknown. Woodcock ( Scolopax rusticola). At beginning of 19th century confined to certain districts of England, but in first half of century rapidly increased and colonized many parts of Scotland and considerable areas in N. and S.E. Ireland. In latter half of century colonized Wales, the Lake District, W. Scotland and W. and S.W. Ireland. In 20th century colonized Isle of Man and continued to increase in Scotland and N. of England, but decreased in southern England, Ireland and extreme N. of Scotland. Main cause of increase probably the cessa- tion of shooting in breeding season and protection of coverts in interest of pheasants. Recent decrease in Ireland due to break-up of estates and lack of protection. Common Snipe ( Capella g. gallinago). Decrease at beginning of 19th century due to drainage, but marked increase in southern England about end of that century VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 69 and beginning of 20th, when it colonized a large area in the South Midlands as well as many districts in southern counties where breeding was previously unknown. Red-necked Phalarope ( Phalaropus lobatus). Big decrease in 19th century almost entirely due to collectors. Partial revival in 20th century due to protection ; and colonization of N.W. Ireland. Southern Dunlin ( Calidris alpina schinzii). Possibly decreasing, but evidence hard to assess. Ruff ( Philomachus pugnax). Became extinct before middle of 19th century due to drainage of fens and extensive taking for food. Has bred sporadically since. British Redshank ( Tringa totanus britannica). Great decrease in England at beginning of 19th century followed by steady increase, beginning about 1865. There is no evidence of any change in numbers or distribution in Ireland or northern and western Scotland, but in southern Scotland, England and Wales the species spread west and south during the sixty years, 1865- 1925, till every county but Pembroke and Cornwall had been colonized. Cause of increase unknown. See Thomas, J. F., Brit. Birds (1942), Vol. xxxvi, p. 5. Greenshank ( Tringa nebularia). Increased in central Scotland in latter half of 19th century. Sporadic breeding in southern Scotland in 20th century possibly indicates extension of range. Kentish Plover ( Leucopolius a. alexandrinus) . Always local, decreased steadily and now almost extinct. Important causes have been the commercial development of seaside resorts, and egg-collectors. Southern Golden Plover ( Pluvialis a. apricaria). Decreasing both in Scotland and in Ireland. Cause unknown. Dotterel ( Eudromias morinellus). Widespread decrease, attributable to former extensive shooting of birds on migration and to collectors. Lapwing ( Vanellus vanellus). Widespread decrease due to decrease in waste-land and extensive taking of eggs. Marked recovery since the passing of the Lapwing Bill in 1926. Avocet ( Recurvirostra avosetta). Extinct before middle of 19th century due to taking of eggs for food, drainage of fens, etc. Bred Ireland, 1938. British Oyster-catcher ( Hcematopus ostralegus occidentalis) . Marked decrease in eastern and southern England in 19th century probably due to taking of eggs. Partial recovery in 20th century in Norfolk and a few pairs now breeding in old haunts in Suffolk, Kent, Sussex and Hampshire. Possibly increasing in northern Scotland and N.W. England. (To be continued). (70) SOME NOTES ON THE SONG OF THE WREN BY EDWARD A. ARMSTRONG. The normal song of the Wren ( Troglodytes t. troglodytes) is a territorial, advertising song of the single phrase type as distinct from the continuous utterance type of song, but it is subject to interesting modifications as regards its expression and function. The normal song-phrase is quite distinctive and clear-cut, but it may be abbreviated to two or three notes, or prolonged so that it resembles two or more songs run into one another. The prolonged song is the outcome of special excitement and may be heard during territorial competition or when the male is preoccupied with a female. The normal phrase usually lasts about five seconds and the average interval between songs is five-six seconds ; thus there are commonly five-six songs per minute when the male is in full and regular utterance. The female as a rule is very quiet and unobtrusive, but some individuals occasionally sing. There is no doubt that Kluijver et al. ( Limosa , Vol. xiii, pp. 1-51) are mistaken in saying that females never sing. In spring the males in occupation of territories come into full song and may be heard at all hours of the day between their rising and roosting, though the most regular series of songs is commonly uttered in the morning. Cocks usually sing very soon after flying out of the roost, sometimes immediately on reaching their first perch, and go off through the tetri tory singing every now and then. They may have a regular singing station consisting of certain tall bushes or trees, to which they make their way and sing regularly for some time. Singing takes priority over feeding with Wrens as with many other song birds in spring. This early song is in relationship to the songs of males in adjoining territories and is directed against them, though the possibility should not be excluded that singing against each other may give Wrens social stimulation or satisfaction. The birds respond to each other and the result often is antiphonal singing for longer or shorter periods. This antiphonal singing may be heard at any time of the Wren’s day. G. Marples (Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxii, pp. 397-398) records this type of song, but it is much commoner than his account would suggest. The listener to a long sequence of counter-singing may notice one bird superimpose his song on the phrases of the other, and both birds may continue to sing thus for some time, but none the less there are indications that this antiphonal singing is deliberate. Two birds starting their morning song will usually begin in this fashion and I have noticed birds making a pause and getting into alternation again after the songs had run together. It would seem that the duration of the song-phrase and length ol interval are adapted to antiphonal singing. If it were not for this system the relative loudness of the song and possibly a measure of deafness during utterance would prevent the birds from hearing vol. xxxviii ] NOTES ON SONG OF THE WREN. 71 each other readily. In the domestic cock we have another exemplar of the antiphonal advertising song. One of these birds usually waits some seconds before answering a rival, but the sequence is regular. It is, of course, a commonplace that some birds listen to and answer each other when engaged in advertising song, but the question of the adaptation of the song-type to counter-singing deserves further investigation. The song may be uttered from almost on the ground to a height of 35 feet or more on a building, or 40 feet, or even higher, in a tree. Early morning song may for a time be sung from a conspicuous perc 1 on the topmost twigs of a tree, and when in vigorous counter- song there is a tendency for the bird to sing from fairly high perches Now and then a fragment of song is heard while the Wren is in flight or while moving rapidly from perch to perch up a tree-trunk. Abbreviation of the song-phrase may take place in various circumstances. Sometimes when Wrens are counter-singing one or both may cut short the song. Abbreviated song occurs in territory disputes. When I placed a mirror where a Wren was wont to alight every evening near its roost the bird sang five times a congested, shortened song, one strophe being particularly brief, n ordinary circumstances a Wren does not sing immediatelv outside the roost. A cock Wren in the pairing phase or interested in a female frequently not only abbreviates his song, but modulates it to a sub- song As the Wren may have several females and may leave a female once she is established at one of the nests he has built I use pairing phase here as describing the period during which the male accompanies the female about the neighbourhood of the nest and endeavours to copulate with her. Males vary considerably in regard to the domestic responsibilities they undertake. I have known them help to feed the young in the nest and sing loudly during the intervals of feeding, but usually cock Wrens do not tend the young while in the nest. The sub-song is a sweet, simplified, quieter version of the normal song. A bird accompanying a female may sing loudly and again very soon afterwards sin^ the soft song ; he may begin his song vigorously and moderate it to a whisper-song. It may be no more than a few tiny notes or may reproduce in sweeter and softer tone a. good deal of the usual song. It is usually sung relatively close to the ground and when the female is not far away, but may be heard occasionally at other times, even during territorv disputes. The Wren sings the sub-song and displays on a twig in front of and near to the entrance of, each nest he builds, and the song appears to play a part in indicating the location of the nest to the female and in stimulating her to enter and busy herself in lining it with feathers. I have seen him singing thus with his beak full of noss, while the female investigated the inside of the nest. He often ungs close at hand or overhead while she takes in feathers. 72 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. A Wren with which I experimented sang a short, thin, stifled song before and after copulation with a mount. I have noticed attempts at copulation preceded, not by this type of song, but by fragments of the sweet, warbled sub-song as well as by occasional particularly loud and long songs. One bird watching a female intently for some minutes leaned over a branch singing a squeaky, broken song. ^ It has been stated that fighting Wrens sing “ between the rounds but I have not noticed this, although I have seen two birds with claws interlocked fall to the ground in a combative fienzy. xci e ment may facilitate or stimulate song. On February ist, 1944- 1 was fixing a nesting-box close to the place where a Wren regularly came to roost ; when he approached alopg a neighbouring hedge, finding that he could not go into his usual ‘roosting place because of my presence he sang loudly. I had noted very little song from this Wren at this date. Once when I put my finger into a nest the bn cl flew out, knocking against my hand ; but a few moments later he was singing his sub-song with draggling wings close above the female. When I released a Wren after ringing him he sang as he flew away. The Wren’s song is an interesting example of a song which can be modified to serve various functions. Study of it suggests the possibility that the psychological significance and function m the breeding cycle of some bird’s songs may be more varied than is at present generally realized. I hope in due course to be able to contribute further notes on other aspects of the Wren’s life and would welcome data from other observers. (73) OBITUARY. BERTRAM LLOYD (1881-1944) The death of Bertram Lloyd, on June 9th, 1944, at the age of sixty-three deprives us of a familiar and distinguished figure in the world of Natural History. He was one of our best observers and also one of those none too common personalities that are ready to shoulder the less exciting but very necessary part of Natural History work — committees, recording, editing, propaganda — and are capable of doing so wholeheartedly, competently and with initiative. His place will be difficult to fill. The following brief account will show the wide range of his activities. He was educated at Merchant Taylor’s School and then spent two years in Germany, where he acquired his taste for German classical literature and music. He was fluent in the German language and translated many masterpieces of poetry and drama. For a considerable number of years he worked with his father in an insurance office. This, however, was only drudgery to him, his real interests lying in wholly other directions. Lloyd was a keen humanitarian from his earliest years, and was a member of the original Humanitarian League, founded by Henry S. Salt and others. In 1932, he was instrumental in founding the National Society for the Abolition of Cruel Sports, of which he was the devoted and untiring Honorary Secretary up till the end of his life. To readers of British Birds he will be best known as a keen field naturalist. His main interest lay in close observation of bird-life and in noting any special features and aberrations of bird-song, for which he had a particularly fine ear. He contributed regu- larly to British Birds from 1920 onwards, his last communication being a note on “ Herring-Gulls feeding independent young.” For several years he made a close study of the birds of the island of Texel (Holland). From 1935 until his death he was the Editor of the Hertfordshire Natural History Society’s Transactions, to which he contributed frequent articles and short notes, being also the Society’s Recorder for Mammals, Reptiles and Batrachians. From 1939-1941 inclusive he was responsible for the annual Report on the Birds observed in Hertfordshire published in the above-named journal, and for many years past he devoted every available opportunity to the study of British Dragonflies, contributing various papers on this subject. Lloyd was a member of the B.O.U., a Fellow of the Linnean Society, and on June 7th, 1944, two days before his death, he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Entomological Society. He was fortunate in his wife, who shared all his activities and lightened his burden. Space is left only to add that his essentially kindly nature endeared him to all who were privileged to enjoy his friendship. F. B. Kirkman. (74) NOTES. INTERBREEDING OF CARRION AND HOODED CROWS IN CO. DUBLIN. As already reported in Brit. Birds ( antea , Vols. xxxiii, p. 194, xxxv, p. 58, xxxvi, p. 143), a female Carrion Crow ( Corvus c. cor one) and a male Hooded Crow ( Corvus c. cornix) interbred in a wood in south Co. Dublin in 1939, 1940, 1941 and 1942. In 1943 they mated for the fifth time and built a nest in a Scots pine which was so slender that it could not be climbed. No young left the nest and it is not known whether the young ever hatched out. It was thought at the time that the cause of the failure was the very heavy fall of snow which occurred on May 10th. At any rate after May 10th the Crow was not seen at the nest. In 1944 they interbred for the sixth successive year, building a new nest in the same wood. On May 6th young were heard in the nest. On May 9th the Carrion Crow was put off the nest, but the young were silent. Some days later it was noticed that the nest was abandoned. On May 23rd, when the tree was climbed, the nest was empty. It was deep and clean, not flattened and dirty as it would be if a family were reared in it. As the tree had certainly not been previously climbed by man this season, the young must have been taken by some animal or bird of prey. P. G. Kennedy. MALE CIRL BUNTING INCUBATING. It is stated in The Handbook that incubation, in the case of the Cirl Bunting ( Emberiza c. cirlus ), is carried out by the hen only. During the last fortnight in May, 1944, I watched a nest of this species in the Plymouth district, and on every occasion the cock bird was on the nest. The bird incubated the eggs, and later brooded the four young. I am very familiar with the species, as it is common here. It should be added that I saw the female on the nest before the full clutch was completed, but she was not seen again in spite of frequent visits and it is probable that she came to grief, perhaps as a result of the activities of a pair of Kestrels which nested in an adjoining disused quarry. Brian Truscott. TREE-CREEPER CLIMBING A MAN. The following incident, I think, well exemplifies the overwhelming and inborn instinct in the Tree-Creeper ( Certhia familiaris britannica) to climb up anything rather than remain on the ground. On May 30th, 1944, half an hour after a brood had left their nest in my garden, I was watching one of the fledglings clinging to the trunk of a tree when it spotted a parent and attempted to fly to it. But it missed its mark and fell on the ground about six feet from an old pine. I at once walked up to it to get a close-up view, but as soon as I stood perfectly still it leapt on to a turn-up of my trousers and, with ease and vigour, climbed my clothes until it reached my shoulder, all the time uttering shrill squeaks. Apparently seeing that it could VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 75 go no higher, it fluttered to the base of the pine and forthwith climbed up it until it reached a low, dead branch along which it crept upside down almost to the tip — a distance of ten feet. From there it flew to a nearby tree on which it very quickly climbed to a height of over twenty feet. I wonder if any other field observer can claim the distinction and privilege of having been climbed by a Tree-Creeper ! B. H. Ryves. NESTLING WOOD-WARBLERS KILLED BY SLUG. On June 6th, 1944, I found the nest of a pair of Wood-Warblers ( Phylloscopus sibilatvix) containing five newly-hatched young. Within the nest was also a very large, brown specimen of the slug Avion ater engaged in feeding on one of the nestlings. The latter was still alive, but two others, having been similarly attacked, were quite dead. In each case the surface tissues of the head and neck had been eaten, death ensuing from this and loss of blood. The remain- ing two nestlings were unharmed, but obviously feeble with cold. I concealed myself near the nest and watched the parents, who were most anxious to return. One of them dropped to the nest several times, but made no attempt to brood the young or to interfere with the slug in any way. The birds’ whole behaviour indicated uncertainty and distress. A medium-sized specimen of Avion subfuscus was also present in the nest, but seemed not to be concerned in the attack. I may add that I removed both slugs and that the other two nestlings were reared safely. Christopher M. Swaine. BLACKCAP WINTERING IN E. ROSS-SHIRE. This bird was first observed on January 7th, 1943, by the side of the railway near Avoch, feeding on withered elderberries, and was kept under view for 20 minutes, until it took shelter under a bank of old bracken ironds. It was then positively identified as a cock Blackcap (■ Sylvia a. atvicapilla) . Seen on several days later, it was found only to come out on mild days and to spend most of its time under cover. It was watched for about half an hour on January 15th. On February 1st it was found that the bird’s hiding place had been torn up by dogs hunting for rabbits, and the Blackcap had dis- appeared. Then on April 7th, some weeks earlier than the normal arrival time of spring migrants of the species, the Blackcap’s song was heard from an old garden nearly half a mile away. On the morning of April 8th, watch was kept on the place, and it was found that there was a pair of Blackcaps. Thereafter events proceeded normally, and young birds were seen not far from the place in July. While it cannot be certain that the cock Blackcaps of January 7th and April 7th were one and the same bird, the species is so rare in this locality that the identity is very probable. John Lees and William Henderson. [We are not aware of a January record for Scotland, though there are two or three for December. — Eds.]. 76 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. GREEN WOODPECKER DRUMMING. On April 6th, 1944, at about 8.45 a.m., I heard two woodpeckers drumming about 100 yards apart from each other. I located one in a tree about 250 to 300 yards away (a still morning) and went to look. The bird was a Green Woodpecker ( Picus viridis filuvius). The rate of drumming was ten to twelve taps in about a second and a half. I saw the bird drum three times in one spot, and it then began to climb the tree and drummed again several times, in two different places. It called twice or three times, in between drummings. There was no noticeable difference in the sound of the drummings in the three different spots as I was watching, but when I first heard the bird, at a distance, one drumming sounded considerably louder than others. By the time I had finished watching, the other bird had stopped drumming. At about 11.0 a.m. I heard drumming again in another tree about 100 yards off, and as I went up to the tree a Green Woodpecker flew out, but I did not see it drum. B. H. Bourdillon. [For other recorded cases, see antea, Vol. xxxvi, pp. 37-39.— Eds.]. EARLY VOCAL ACTIVITY AND EGG DEPOSITION BY FEMALE CUCKOOS DURING THE SPRING OF 1944. On April 16th, 1944, just after 8 p.m. (D.B.S.T.), I observed three male and three female Cuckoos ( Cuculus c. canorus ) flying in and out of several small oak trees bordering a pasture, near Tunbridge Wells, Kent ; sex identification was proved by the distinctive call notes of the sexes. During over thirty minutes observation of the birds, the inter-calling between the sexes was incessant ; the females, however, were disinclined to move far from the oaks, whereas the males flew low and swiftly around a wider radius of the trees. Coition was not observed Similar behaviour to the above at exactly the same period of day and in the same habitat, was repeated on the two subsequent evenings. In another locality over three miles distant two nestling Cuckoos were found in an advanced state in nests of the Hedge-Sparrow (. Prunella m. occidentals ) on May 26th, and both were seen fledged and being fed by the foster parents on June 3rd. It is likely that the eggs from which they hatched were laid about April 26th and 28th respectively, possibly by the same hen, as the distance between the two nests was under 50 yards. The details mentioned of vocal activity and egg deposition on the part of the female Cuckoo would appear to be unusually early in the year. E. P. Chance ( The Truth about the Cuckoo, p. 168) remarks on April 23rd being a very early date on which to hear insistent calls and rapid answers on the part of male and female Cuckoos. P. A. Adolphe EARLY HATCHING OF GOLDEN EAGLE. A friend of mine visited the eyrie of a Golden Eagle ( Aquila ch. chrysaetus) on April 15th, 1944, and saw in it one newly hatched VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 77 eaglet. This seems to be a very early date, although this particular Eagle is an earlier nester than most. Seton Gordon. OSPREYS IN HERTFORDSHIRE AND SURREY. On May 14th, 1944, an Osprey ( Pandion h. halicetus) was watched at Startopsend and Wilstone Reservoirs^ Tring. Twice it was seen to hover kestrel-fashion over the water, and later was found standing on the dried mud holding the remains of a fish under its feet, and tearing at it with its beak. It called three or four times. Two Crows flapped down, and pranced around the Osprey, their wings half opened and legs straddled, bold but uneasy, and ready to retreat. The Osprey rose from the mud, clutching the fish in both talons, and went out of sight. Presently, it returned and spent some time in sailing. Altogether it was under observation for about an hour. It is understood that the bird was last seen on the 15th, after a stay of about four days. C. B. Ashby. On the afternoon of May 15th, 1944, at Hedgecourt Lake, Felbridge, near East Grinstead, I had an excellent view of an Osprey ( Pandion h. halicetus) which was circling and hovering over the water for 25 minutes. Several times the bird came within 60 feet of my position and with binoculars I could clearly see the white and .dark head markings and whitish underparts. The bird finally plunged into the water, captured a fish and disappeared with its prey over the trees. F. M. Gurteen. SPOONBILL IN SOMERSET.' The following is a description given to me of a bird seen on the shore near Minehead, West Somerset, about the second week in May, 1944 : “ A tall bird like a Stork (Heron). Plumage white all over, with a topknot. Long dark flat bill like a duck. Long black legs. When feeding worked its bill from side to side. Did not push it into the mud.” This description was given without any prompting, and it seems to me the bird cannot possibly have been anything else but a Spoonbill ( Platalea l. leucorodia). The observer, who is a Coast Watcher, knows little about birds, but knowing I was interested he took particular notice of it. It was feeding in a shallow pool on the shore some 40 to 50 yards in front of his hut, and he was able to study it through a good pair of binoculars. He failed to note the actual date in May, but the time was about 8 p.m. As there is no Somerset record the above may be of interest. A. V. Cornish. SHOVELER NESTING IN AYRSHIRE. I note from The Handbook that the Shoveler ( Spatula clypeata ) has not been so far reported as nesting in Ayrshire. On May 14th, 1944, I flushed a duck of this species from a rushy field, but had not sufficient time to search for a nest. I returned to the place a week 7S BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. later and found the remains of the duck, which had evidently been very recently killed by a Fox. It had been taken on the nest which was only a yard away from the carcase. There were no eggs in the nest, but I found one which had probably rolled under a clump of grass when the duck was seized by the Fox. I blew this egg after considerable difficulty, as it contained a well developed young bird. Shovelers are not uncommon here in the spring and I suspect they have nested in recent years. J. A. Anderson. CURLEW NESTING IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE. ' Mr. Frank Wycherley, of Weekley, near Kettering, has informed me that in May, 1942, he found a nest of Curlew ( Numenius a. arquata) containing four eggs in the water-meadows by the side of the River Nene, between Barnwell and Oundle. The nest was in tussocky grass (Air a ccespitosa ) not far from the river. He also told me that a pair of birds were seen near the same site this year (1944) and suggested that it would be well worth while to locate a possible nest. The birds were duly seen near the site this May, but the nest was not' located until the bird was observed going to it from a view- point on the opposite bank of the river. The nest contained four eggs and was situated about 80 yards from the side of the river in an area which had previously been rough grass, but had been ploughed up to take a rather indifferent-looking crop. Most unfortunately on the next visit the nest was found completely robbed, as was also a neighbouring Lapwing’s nest. It is not unusual to see occasional Curlews along the river valley during February, but it appears likely that these observations are the first evidence of their nesting in the county. I. Hepburn. AN OVERLOOKED OCCURRENCE OF BLACK-WINGED STILT IN CORNWALL. A short while ago I was informed of the existence in a farm labourer’s cottage near Tamar Lake in N. Cornwall of a stuffed specimen of a Black-winged Stilt ( Himantopus h. himantopus). I identified the bird and found that it had been picked up dead on the Cornish side of the lake in 1917. There was a second bird present at the same time, which was not seen again. This is, I believe, the first and only record for the county. A. C. Leach ICELAND GULL IN DUBLIN. From May 6th to May 13th, 1944, an Iceland Gull (Larus glaucoides) , frequented the ornamental pond in Stephen’s Green, Dublin. It came daily to the pond at about 9.30 a.m. and left at about 5.30 p.m. During the day it associated with the other gulls, which were mostly Herring-Gulls with an occasional Lesser Black-backed Gull, and alternated between resting on the water and on the island in the pond. VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 79 The plumage of this bird was uniform throughout, almost pure white, with perhaps a tinge of cream which was not always notice- able. There were no mottlings of any kind and no sign of ash-grey on the wings. The bill had a conspicuous black tip ; the legs and feet were flesh-coloured and the eyes looked black. It was evidently a bird in the white phase of the second winter plumage. As E. M. Nicholson noticed in Greenland, the wing-tips at rest did not cross, but met in a narrow V. This, it seemed to me, gave the bird a neat appearance and, by contrast, made the Herring-Gulls beside it look untidy. In flight one wing showed the gap of a missing feather, such as is often seen in moulting birds. While the bird was on the island preening itself, it was very aggressive and would not tolerate another gull near it. When people fed the gulls on the water, as they do daily, the Iceland Gull came but remained outside the others, some five or six yards from the bank, and tried to pick up any scraps it could. I fed it on several occasions, always throwing the food near it. Soon it learned to catch the scraps before they touched the water like the other birds, and it gradually came nearer, but it never became quite so tame as the Herring-Gulls. While feeding it viciously drove away the immature gulls, but yielded to the mature birds, usually with a loud protest in the form of a petulant call much like a Herring Gull’s, but thinner in volume and more shrill. Mr. G. R. Humphreys tells me that on February 29th, 1944, he saw a similar, white-plumaged Iceland Gull on a quarry pond at Ardee, Co. Louth, eight miles from the coast. He watched the Stephen’s Green bird on several occasions and he believes it to be the same bird which he saw in Co. Louth more than two months previously. P. G. Kennedy. Early nesting of summer migrants in Kent. — Mr. P. A. Adolph sends us the following records for 1944 from the Tunbridge Wells district : — Willow-Warbler ( Phylloscopus t. trochilus). — Young observed leaving nest on May 26th. Wood-Warbler ( Phylloscopus sibilatrix). — Nest completed, but without eggs, May 6th ; completed clutch of six on May 12th. Blackcap ( Sylvia a. atricapilla) . — Complete clutch of five, April 25th. Nightingale ( Luscinia m. megarhyncha) . — Young about seven days old in nest. May 24th ; nest vacant on June 1st. House-Sparrow feeding young Blue Tits. — Mr. B. R. V. Toop informs us of a case at Sutton, Surrey, of a House-Sparrow (. Passer d. domesticus ) which fed a brood of young Blue Tits (Pams cceruleus obscurus) in a nesting-box. The bird had great difficulty in clinging on to the box, but went persistently to and fro, carrying bread ! When the young fledged, it was seen still chasing them with food, the parents, which continued to feed normally, apparently not objecting. V) rC?\^ ° c Q 80 BRITISH BIRDS. [vol. xxxviii. Swallow in Gloucestershire in winter. — Miss E. P. Leach sends us particulars of a Swallow ( Hirundo r. rustica ) which 'was seen and clearly identified by Commander Francis Cadogan, R.N., on the River Coin, near Quenington, Glos. on January 31st, 1944. Late Drumming of Great Spotted Woodpecker. — Supple- menting previous notes on this subject ( antea , Vol. xxxvii, pp. 150, 178, 218), the Rev. John Lees informs us that he heard a Great Spotted Woodpecker ( Dryobates major anglicus) drumming at Avoch, East Ross-shire, on October 10th, 1942, and subsequently saw the bird. Young Tawny Owl leaving nest at early age. — Mr. L. G. Weller informs us that when visiting a nest of Tawny Owls ( Strix aluco sylvatica) in a pollard oak at Ewhurst, Surrey, in which only two eggs hatched, he found the older nestling gone from the nest when it was 27 days old. Two days later he noticed the missing nestling sitting on a branch about 10ft. above the nest. It was difficult to understand how it reached the perch as there were very few branches. At his next visit the young bird had gone higher and after a week had almost reached the top of the tree — about 60 ft. — where it perched on quite small branches and must have been difficult for the parents to feed. All this time the second young bird remained in the nest. Goosander breeding in Dumfriesshire. — Mr. O. J. Pullen has sent us a sample of down and feathers from a nest of Goosander ( Mergus m. merganser) in a hollow ash tree, from which a brood was hatched successfully in 1944 in a wood up the valley of the Enterkin burn in Nithsdale, in other parts of which breeding was recorded in 1936 {antea, Vol. xxx, p. 87) and 1942 (Vol. xxxvi, p. 59). Mr. Pullen also informs us that he received a dead duckling found in the waters of the Shinnel burn, Tynron, which he is certain, from the position of the nostril, was a young Goosander. Mr. Pullen observes that the species is now breeding up three of the tributary burns of the River Nith, Enterkin, Scaur, and Shinnel, and is still nesting up the Water of Ae, on a tributary of which the first nest was found in 1936. Turtle-Doves using Blackbird’s nest. — Mr. L. G. Weller informs us, under date June 6, 1944, that a pair of Turtle-Doves (, Streptopelia t. tartur) at Ewhurst, Surrey, have utilized a Blackbird’s nest in an evergreen about 10 ft. high without making any additions whatever. The birds had young at the date mentioned. Moorhen chasing Stoat in defence of young. — Col. R . Sparrow informs us that on May 9th, 1944, on the bank of the River Wye at Symonds Yat, Glos., he saw a male Moorhen ( Gallinula ch. chloropus) in charge of a brood of seven young pursue and drive away a Stoat. The bird made a loud clucking noise and half spread its wings and chased the Stoat for 50 yards up the bank. BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- Net. DREAM ISLAND DAYS An Idyll of the Days of Peace BY R. M. LOCK LEY. with many sketches by Mrs. Lockley and plates from photographs The author writes straight from the heart and from the vivid island scene. The book breathes his deep understanding of nature, and shows how two happy mortals found a life of true peace away from the struggle of the crowd. Lists of the birds and plants of the island are included. Fully Illustrated. Demy 8vo. 10/6 net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are. birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7/6 net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. INLAND FARM BY R. M. LOCKLEY. Straight from twelve years of the simple life on the lonely sea-girt island of Skokholm (of which he gives such a vivid account in the book Dream Island Days) to a derelict farm on the mainland of Pembrokeshire, came R. M. Lockley and his wife, moving with them the beginnings of the farm they had started on their island. With little money, but with a fresh clear out- look on life that showed an appreciation of true values, the author cut through red tape and demanded the fulfilment of the Government’s war-time pledges of assistance to the farmer. Having obtained the practical assistance of the Pembrokeshire War Agri- cultural Executive Committee, he threw his energies into reclaiming Inland Farm and its lovely old Welsh manor house. Like Skokholm had been, Inland Farm was without a tenant, neglected, needing a pioneer. In this book R. M. Lockley tells of a year’s striving on the land, and the winning of a great harvest. The book ends on a promising note : he finds a second farm and decides to operate both with fellow workers on a co- operative basis. Illustrated. 10/- Net. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., LONDON. mnsn BIRDS ANmusn^D-moOTE DDOTEDOOtrLYTOTHEBIRDS ^CWTOEDPOlSn BST^* M0NTniYls9dYEARLY20s 326H(OH«OLBOPvNISm)OrS Hr&GWITHmBY LTD; SONGS OF WILD BIRDS BY E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by JULIAN HUXLEY. With two double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge- Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. “ Wonderfully successful gramophone records of British Birds singing in their natural Haunts. — Nature. 30s. net. Postage 8d. By the same authors MORE SONGS OF WILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood- Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle- Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “ The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. “ All the birds are remarkably true and clear.”- — The Field. “ To have the haunting cry of the Little Owl and the wild cry of the Curlew in one’s study of a night in London has been forme a fantastic piece of pure magic.” — News Chronicle. With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, “The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED BY Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 5, Vol. XXXVIII, October 2, 1944. PAGE Changes in Status among British breeding Birds. By W. B. Alexander and David Lack [concluded) . . . . . . . . 82 On Field Identification of Birds. By H. G. Alexander . . 89 Notes : — Carrion-Crow’s nest with six eggs and two young (H. R. Tutt) 94 Bullfinch’s Methods of feeding (A. C. Fraser and H. R. Tutt) . . 94 Song of female Chaffinch associated with normal sex behaviour (B. W. Tucker) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Chiffchaff raiding occupied nests for nesting material (P. A. Adolph) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Display of Wood-Warbler (P. A. Adolph) .. .. .. 96 Early arrival of Fieldfares in Warwickshire (R. F. Chatfield) . . 96 Cliff-breeding of House-Martin in Kent (Surgeon-Lt. M. N. Rankin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Behaviour of Grey Lag-Goose (P. J. Askey) .. .. .. 97 First breeding of Fulmar in the South-west (Martin Coles Harman and James Fisher) .. .. .. .. .. 97 Behaviour of juvenile Wood-Pigeon (John C. S. Ellis) . . . . 98 Predatory habits of Black-headed Gulls (L. C. Lloyd) . . .. 99 Short Notes : — Parasites taken by Magpies and Jackdaws from sheep and other animals. Goldfinches using same nest for two broods. Nightingale building again after fledging of young from early nest. Short-eared Owls perching in^trees in winter. Spoonbill in Somerset. Erroneous report of heronry. Little Gulls in the Channel, etc. Arctic Skua on Hants coast in late June. Quail in the summer of 1944 . . . . . . . . . . 99 1 (82) CHANGES IN STATUS AMONG BRITISH BREEDING BIRDS BY W. B. ALEXANDER and DAVID LACK. (' Concluded from page 69.) Stone-Curlew (. Burhinus ce. cedicnemus) . In second half of 19th century became extinct in Cotswolds (Glou- cestershire and N.W. Oxfordshire) and in E. Midlands (Leicester- shire, Rutland, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire). Has decreased elsewhere (almost extinct in Yorkshire) due -to disappearance of breeding haunts through increased cultivation and afforestation. Great Bustard ( Otis t. tarda). Extinct before middle of 19th century through enclosing of waste-land and human destruction. Black Tern ( Chlidonias n. niger). Extinct before middle of 19th century through drainage of breeding haunts and extensive taking of eggs. Sandwich Tern ( Sterna s. sandvicensis). Always local. Decrease in 19th century through taking of eggs, etc. Local marked increase in 20th century where breeding grounds protected. Roseate Tern ( Sterna d. dougallii). Always local, but great decrease in first half of 19th century, when ceased to breed in Ireland, Clyde area and Scilly Isles. Marked increase in 20th century, when recolonized Ireland, where over a dozen colonies now established. Common Tern ( Sterna h. hirundo ). Local decreases, particularly through human disturbance, in 19th century, and local increases where protected in 20th century. Little Tern ( Sterna a. albifrons). Decreasing, especially where bungalows occupy former breeding grounds. Black-headed Gull ( Lams r. ridibundus). Great decrease during 19th century, but widespread increase began about the end of the century and has continued. See Hollom, P. A. D. (1940), Brit. Birds, Vol. xxxiii, p. 202. Common Gull ( Lams c. canus). Very marked increase in Scotland and in Ireland in 19th century still continuing. In 20th century extended its range to N.E. Ireland (Antrim and Down), bred sporadically in N. England (Cumberland and Northumberland) and established small colony near Dungeness (Kent and Sussex). Herring-Gull ( Lams a. argentatus). Has increased in Scotland and probably elsewhere, but always abundant. British Lesser Black-backed Gull (Lams fuscus graellsii ). Increasing in Wales, Scotland and Ireland. VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 83 Great Black-backed Gull ( Lams mar inns). Very marked and widespread increase since about 1880. Before that was decreasing. See Harrisson, T. H. and Hurrell, H. G., Proc. Zool. Soc., Land., B, 1933, pp. 191-209 ; also Oldham, C., (1933), Brit. Birds, Vol. xxvii, pp. 38-41). Kittiwake ( Rissa t. tridactyla). Has increased in Scotland during 20th century. Great Skua ( Stercorarius s. skua). Marked decrease till near end of 19th century due to human destruction, marked increase in 20th century due t6 protection, and extending range south. Arctic Skua ( Stercorarius parasiticus). Somewhat decreased in 19th century, due to human disturbance ; somewhat increased in 20th century where protected. British Razorbill ( Alca torda britannica) . Ceased nesting on cliffs of Sussex about 1878 owing to falls of rock. Great Auk (Alca impennis). Formerly bred regularly on St. Kilda, and probably one pair for a few years on Papa Westray, Orkney ; extinct by early 19th century due to human destruction. Guillemot (Uria a. aalge and U. a. albionis). Ceased nesting on cliffs of Sussex about 1878 (though a few have since twice nested sporadically) and on cliffs of Kent about 1910, owing to falls of rock which destroyed their ledges. Black Guillemot (Uria g. grylle). Widespread decrease and extinct in former parts of range on coasts of Yorkshire, E. Scotland and N. Wales. Cause unknown. Southern Puffin ( Fratercula arctica grabce). Great decrease in some colonies in southern part of range, perhaps due to increase of gulls, especially Great Black-backed Gull. Ceased nesting on cliffs of Kent early in 19th century. Corn-Crake ( Crex crex). Very marked and widespread decrease, probably due to changed methods of agriculture. W'estern Ireland and Scottish islands apparently not much affected as yet. Numbers also vary much with the season. Spotted Crake ( Porzana porzana). Decreased with drainage of breeding haunts. Moorhen ( Gallinula ch. cliloropus). Marked increase in Scotland and probably increasing generally, but always common. Coot (Fidica a. atra). Marked increase in Scotland. British Black Grouse ( Lyrurus tstrix britannicus). Very marked and very widespread decrease, due to human destruction and to disappearance of breeding haunts. Extinct in most of southern portion of former range. Scottish Ptarmigan ( Lagopus mutus millaisi). Widespread decrease, and extinct in many areas. J 84 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Common Partridge (. Perdix p. perdix). Great decrease in Ireland, but recovering in Eire as result of special legislation for protection, 1932. Quail ( Coturnix c. coturnix). Very marked and widespread decrease, and now extinct in many of former haunts, except sporadically in good years. Attributed to changed methods of agriculture. The following species became extinct before the 19 th century. Goshawk ( Accipiter g. gentilis) Occasionally bred sporadically in 19th century and apparently regularly in earlier times. Spoonbill ( Platalea l. leucorodia). Common Crane ( Grus g. grus). Capercaillie ( Tetrao urogallus ? subsp.) The following species , introduced artificially , have greatly increased. Little Owl ( Athene noctua vidalii.) Mute Swan ( Cygnus olor). (Probably also some native birds). Canada-Goose ( Brant a c. canadensis). Capercaillie ( Tetrao u. urogallus). Pheasant ( Phasianus colchicus). Red-legged Partridge (. Alectoris r. rufa). The following species have bred sporadically or exceptionally, but have not become established. Golden Oriole ( Oriolus 0. oriolus). Brambling ( Fringilla montifringilla) . Tawny Pipit ( Anthus c. campestris). I uterine Warbler ( Hippolais icterina). Melodious Warbler ( Hippolais polyglotta), probably. Redwing ( Turdus musicus Psubsp.). Bee-eater ( Merops api aster). Hoopoe ( Upupa e. epops.). Little Bittern (. Ixobrychus m. minutus), probably. , White Stork ( Ciconia c. ciconia). Goldeneye ( Encephala c. clangula). Scaup-Duck ( Aythya m. marila). Long-tailed D.uc:k ( Clangula hy emails). Pallas’s Sand-Grouse ( Syrrhaptes paradoxus). Temminck’s Stint ( Calidris temminckii). Wood-Sandpiper ( Tringa glareola). Green Sandpiper ( Tringa ochropus). Little Ringed Plover ( Charadrius dubius curonicus). Baillon’s Crake ( Porzana pusilla intermedia). Other species doubtfully. Summary of Changes. In conclusion, it may be of interest to tabulate the fluctuations. This cannot be done with complete precision, as some species come VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 85 in more than one category, others are of doubtful category, and it is hard to draw the line between a local and a widespread change. (a) Passerine and near-Passerine Species. Marked increase, 17. Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Starling, Hawfinch, Lesser Redpoll, Common Crossbill, Cirl Bunting (?), House-Sparrow, Grey Wagtail (local), Nuthatch (local), Pied Flycatcher, Goldcrest, Sedge-Warbler, Lesser Whitethroat, Mistle-Thrush, Blackbird, Black Redstart. Marked decrease, 15. Hooded Crow, Chough, Twite, Corn-Bunting, Wood-Lark, Yellow Wagtail (local), Bearded Tit, Red-backed Shrike, Savi’s Warbler, Hartford Warbler, Ring-Ouzel, Wheatear, Common Redstart, House-Martin (probably), Wryneck. Decrease earlier, increase latterly. 7. Raven, Magpie, Jay, Goldfinch, Linnet, Kingfisher, Great Spotted Woodpecker. Increasing in Scottish and/or Irish woodland, 15. Rook, Greenfinch, Siskin, Bullfinch, Chaffinch, Great Tit, Blue Tit, Coal-Tit, Crested Tit, Spotted Flycatcher, Chiffchaff, Willow- Warbler, Wood-Warbler, Blackcap, Whitethroa|. No evidence for marked widespread change, 32. Yellow Bunting, Reed-Bunting, Snow-Bunting, Tree-Sparrow (fluctuates), Sky-Lark, Tree-Pipit, Meadow-Pipit, Rock-Pipit, Pied Wagtail (decrease Scotland), Tree-Creeper, Marsh-Tit, Willow- Tit, Long-tailed Tit, Grasshopper- Warbler, Reed-Warbler, Marsh- Warbler, Garden-Warbler, Song-Thrush, Whinchat, Stonechat fluctuates), Nightingale, Robin, Hedge-Sparrow, Wren, Dipper, Swallow (? decreasing), Sand-Martin (? decreasing), Swift, Nightjar dreen Woodpecker, Lesser Spotted Woodpecker, Cuckoo. Sporadic or exceptional, 8. Golden Oriole, Brambling, Tawny Pipit, Icterine Warbler, Vfelodious Warbler, Redwing, Bee-eater, Hoopoe. b) Owls and Hawks. Marked decrease, 11. (Some of these now increasing locally). Barn-Owl, Peregrine, Hobby, Merlin, Marsh-Harrier, Hen Harrier, Sparrow-Hawk, Kite, White-tailed Eagle, Honey-Buzzard, Osprey. Marked decrease, hut increase latterly, 3. Tawny Owl, Golden Eagle, Buzzard. 'ncr easing in Scottish woodland , 1. Long-eared Owl. Vo evidence for marked widespread change, 3. Short-eared Owl (fluctuates), Kestrel, Montagu’s Harrier. Ixtinct before 19 th century, 1 Goshawk. Artificially introduced, 1. Little Owl. c) Swans, Geese, Ducks. Marked increase, 13. 86 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Mute Swan, Sheld-Duck, Gadwall, Garganey, W'igeon, Pintail, Shoveler, Pochard, Tufted Duck, Eider-Duck, Common Scoter, Goosander, Red-breasted Merganser. Marked decrease, i. Grey Lag-Goose. Decrease earlier, increase latterly, I. Whooper Swan. No evidence for marked widespread change, 2. Mallard, Teal. Artificially introduced, i. Canada Goose (also Mute Swan and various duck locally). Sporadic or exceptional, 3. Scaup, Goldeneye, Long-tailed Duck. (d) Limicoline Birds. Marked increase, 4. Curlew, Woodcock, Common Snipe, Greenshank. XT nvbprl /7 p rv p n ^P & Black-tailed Godwit, Whimbrel, Ruff, Kentish Plover, Golden Plover, Dotterel, Avocet, Stone-Curlew. Marked decrease earlier, increase latterly, 4. Red-necked Phalarope, Redshank, Lapwing, Oyster-catcher (local). No evidence of marked widespread change, 3. Dunlin, Common Sandpiper, Ringed Plover. Sporadic or exceptional , 4. Temminck’s Stint, Wood Sandpiper, Green Sandpiper, Little Ringed Plover. (e) Sea-Birds (Cormorants, Gannets, Petrels, Terns, Gulls, Auks). Marked tJ'icrease 6 Gannet, Fulmar, Common Gull, Herring-Gull, Lesser Black-backed Gull, Great Black-backed Gull. Marked decrease, 6. Manx Shearwater, Black Tern, Little Tern, Great Auk, Pufhn (local), Black Guillemot. Marked decrease earlier, increase latterly, 3. Roseate Tern, Black-headed Gull, Great Skua. No evidence of marked widespread change, n. Cormorant, Shag, Storm Petrel, Fork-tailed Petrel, Sandwich Tern (moderate change), Common Tern, Arctic Tern, Kittiwake (some increase), Arctic Skua, Razorbill, Guillemot. (f) Other groups (Herons, Grebes, Divers, Doves, Bustards, Rails, Game Birds). l\/f n vh 1 n PYP fl <\P H Slavonian Grebe, Black-necked Grebe, Wood-Pigeon, Stock-Dove, Turtle-Dove, Moorhen, Coot. Marked decrease, 7. Rock-Dove, Great Bustard, Corn-Crake, Spotted Crake, Black Grouse, Ptarmigan, Quail. VOL. XXXVIII.] CHANGES IN STATUS. 87 Marked decrease earlier, increase latterly, 3. Bittern, Great Crested Grebe, Red-throated Diver. No evidence of marked widespread change, 6. Heron, Little Grebe, Black-throated Diver (some decrease), Water-Rail, Red Grouse (fluctuates), Common Partridge (change in Ireland). , Extinct before 19th century, 3. Spoonbill, Common Crane, Capercaillie. Artificially introduced, 3. Capercaillie, Pheasant, Red-legged Partridge. Sporadic or exceptional, 4. Little Bittern, White Stork, Pallas’s Sand-Grouse, Baillon’s Crake. Group. Marked increase M arked decrease Decrease earlier, increase latterly Increase Scottish Irish woods No evidence 01 change Extinct be] ore 19 th century Intro- duced species Spora- dic or excep- tional (A) Passerines and near- Passerines. 17 15 7 15 32 8 (B) Owls, Hawks. — II 3 I 3 I I — (c) Swans, Geese, Ducks. 13 I I _ 2 _ I 3 (D) Wading Birds. 4 8 4 — 3 — — 4 (E) Sea-Birds. 6 6 3 — 11 — — — (E) Other types. 7 7 3 — 6 3 3 4 TOTAL. 47 48 21 16 57 4 5 9 Percentage. 22 22 IO 7 26 2 2 8 The above tabulation shows that, omitting introduced and spora- dic breeding species, 132 out of 189 breeding species, or 70 per cent, have changed markedly in status during the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In the remaining 57 species (30 per cent.) there is no -evidence of marked change, but some of them have changed locally or moderately, and some others have shown short term fluctuation. The above tabulation also shows that on the whole the gains and losses are about balanced, but this is far from the case within each .group. In particular, there has been an exceedingly marked decrease among owls, hawks, marsh birds and English (but not 'Scottish) coast-nesting birds. The greatest gain is among the ducks, primarily in Scotland, where there has also been a marked increase in woodland species excepting hawks. Causes of fluctuations. In many species human activities have played a large part in causing the fluctuations, the most important factors being the direct destruction of birds or eggs, the drainage of fens and marshes, and the increase of agricultural land and woodland. But there are many other cases of marked change in which human factors do not appear to have been involved, or have played at most a subsidiary BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. 8tf part, and in quite a number of these instances the cause of the change is quite unknown, showing how little is yet known about the dynamics of bird populations. In a number of cases, the change in status has been by no means confined to the British Isles. The species in which the main cause of change does not seem primarily due to human factors are listed below. Some 40 out of 132 species which have changed come in this category, though in some of them, notably the ducks, human protection has certainly assisted the increase. It also seemed worth investigating whether any general faunal trend was involved, in particular whether there has been on the whole an increase in northern and a decrease in southern species, or the reverse. For investigating the latter problem, those species in which change in status is mainly attribu- table to human factors must obviously be excluded. Under “ northern species ” are grouped all British breeding species whose breeding ranges in western Europe extend considerably north of lat. 6o° N. but little, if at all, south of lat. 50° N. Under “ southern species ” are grouped those breeding considerably south of lat. 50° N. and little, if at all, north of 6o° N. When the birds are grouped in this way, it is seen that there is no general tendency for northern species to be increasing and southern species to be decreasing, or the reverse. Species in which marked change does not seem primarily due to human factors. (a) Increases. (i) Southern species, 4. Carrion Crow, Black Redstart, Black-necked Grebe, Turtle-Dove. (ii) Northern species, 10. Whooper Swan, Wigeon, Tufted Duck, Common Scoter, Goosander, Red-breasted Merganser, Fulmar, Slavonian Grebe, Greenshank, Common Gull. (iii) Others, 16. Jackdaw, Starling, Hawfinch, Pied Flycatcher, Lesser Whitethroat, Mistle-Thrush, Blackbird, Great Spotted Woodpecker, Gadwall, Pintail, Shoveler, Pochard, Curlew, Redshank, Lesser and Great Black-backed Gulls. (b) Decreases. (i) Southern species, 4. Chough, Corn-Bunting, Wood-Lark, Red-backed Shrike. (ii) Northern species, 7. Hooded Crow, Twite, Ring-Ouzel, Whimbrel, Golden Plover, Black Guillemot, Ptarmigan. (iii) Others, 4. Wheatear, Common Redstart, Wryneck, Rock-Dove. (89) ON FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF BIRDS BY H. G. ALEXANDER. One day in May, 1944, I found a flock of over fifty Dunlins by a Midland reservoir. Some had beaks that suggested a Curlew- Sandpiper ; others had beaks that suggested a Little Stint. As all were in full plumage with black bellies I had no difficulty in satisfying myself that no Curlew-Sandpiper and no Little Stint was present in the flock. It seemed quite clear, however, that some of the birds were Calidris alpina alpina, and others C. a. schinzii. So, when I referred to Theflandbook of British Birds, Vol. iv, p. 233 and read : “ Northern race ( alpina ) averages larger and longer billed than present form, but races are not separable in field ” I was somewhat disconcerted. I wonder whether the word “ always ” could not appropriately be inserted between “ not ” and “ separable”; in any case it may be inferred that the statement is intended as a warning against rash identification by impulsive field observers — a very common failing.* It is likely enough that, if I had inspected this mixed flock bird by bird, I should have found some whose sub-specific identification would have been doubtful. As it happened, a few days earlier I had been reading in the Ibis (Apr., 1944), Mr. F. Ludlow’s account of “ The Birds of South- Eastern Tibet”, where, in writing of a very local Willow-Warbler, (Phylloscopus tibetanus), he says : “I have sight records from else- where, hut such records are of no value when dealing with this difficult genus.” Again, I think he over-states the position. In fact, he has just written of Ph. fuscatus, a species very similar to Ph. tibetanus: ‘‘During the next fortnight we saw, and heard, large numbers in willow and holly oak bushes as we marched up the Tsangpo to Lilung.” Again, I happened to be particularly *Since Mr. Alexander raises the point, it is perhaps admissible to mention that the Handbook statement expressed the characteristic caution of the late editor, though I myself would have felt justified in qualifying it. My own view would be that the extremes of the two forms, viz. long-billed female alpina and short-billed male schinzii, are distinguishable in the field by observers of the requisite experience, and this was the opinion of even so critical a worker as the late C. B. Ticehurst ( Birds of Sussex, p. 353). But to alter “ not separable” to “ not always separable,” as Mr. Alexander suggests, would be going too far, 'Since this would imply that most are separable, which is not the case. A substantial majority are quite indeterminate as regards bills, as reference to the measurements in The Handbook will readily show. Moreover, it must not be overlooked that there are other races than these two to which a bird seen in this country might possibly belong, notably the Siberian and North American C. a. sakhalina (which has probably actually been obtained here, cf. Handbook, Vol. iv, p. 240) and C. a. arctica of East Greenland. This is not perhaps a very likely contingency, but it is possible, and it serves to emphasize the fact that field identification of even very distinct sub-species is subject to complications that do not arise in the case of species and can seldom be established with the certainty attainable in the case of even “ difficult." species, when these are seen under favourable conditions by sufficiently competent observers. B.W.T. 90 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. interested in this, as in the spring of 1943 I had opportunities of watching a number of different species of Phylloscopus in south-west China. Although some, even when seen at close quarters in their full spring plumage, seemed to refuse to fit any description in Ticehurst’s monograph, and although such important details as leg-colour and the number of visible pale wing-bars seemed to vary within a species, on the whole 1 was impressed by the ease of distinguishing most of them, under favourable conditions of tight and in their fresh spring plumage. Every experienced field observer, especially those whose experience among skins is limited, will agree, I think, that sometimes birds seen at close range in the open, seem easier -to identify than they are “ in the hand.” I believe the late C. B. f icehurst used to say that ( hiffchaffs and Willow- Warblers cannot be identified in the field by the colour of their legs. Again, I take it that he meant they cannot always be so identified. I am not aware that any Willow- Warbler has ever been shown to have really black legs, nor any Chiffchaff really pale legs ; 'but no doubt there are occasional indeterminate inter- mediates. So the field observer should beware. All of this is leading to two propositions which I would venture to make. First, that it seems likely that almost every separate species, and occasionally even separate sub-species, are in fact normally identifiable in the field, under favourable conditions, if you know exactly what to look for. But — and this is really by far the more important proposition— such identification can only be achieved by observers who know how to observe. , I o-day there are in this country scores of observers who are very keen, but sadly unreliable, simply because they have not learnt how to observe. T write this as the former editor of a local report, who has received again and again the kind of record that I believe all other such editors receive. 1 he recorder sends in a record, giving certain iacts about the bird he thinks he has identified which are all right as far . as thev go, but which do not go far enough. I hey are not diagnostic. And when you press him for further facts, which he cannot give, and finally reject his record, he is angrfy and asks why you do not believe him. The answer is, of course, that you do believe every- thing he has told you and you often think it probable that his identification is correct, but unfortunately his observational powers are such that he has not been able to produce any proof, and nothing but proof is any good. To take my " mixed ” Dunlins as an example, I am fairly confident that a good proportion of keen but not very experienced bird watchers, if they had seen those birds in autumn plumage, without the black bellies, would have wanted to record some ol them as Curlew-Sandpipers, and perhaps others as Stints. And if the unkind editor wrote asking :• ” Did you see the Curlew-Sandpipers in flight ? Did you see the white rumps?”, he would probably get an indignant reply : “ No, there was 110 need to put them up : the beaks were much too long and curved for Dunlins — and tfic record vol. xxxviii ] FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF BIRDS. 91 would have been rightly rejected. To check the “ Stint ” record might have been more difficult. Are there certain common rules that can be provided for assisting observers to be more exact in their observations ? I will suggest a few, though I think they are incomplete. First : negative, (i) General accounts of a bird’s shape or behaviour are practically valueless : e.g., “ it looked too plump for a sorimd-so” ; “it looked very long in the leg “ the flight was quite different from — some common bird of the same family such points are in themselves quite useless. (2) Size : unless the bird in question has been seen close to another of a known species, with which it could be compared, estimates of size are very unreliable. In the case of birds seen in the air they are worthless. Second : positive. (1) Always note as accurately as possible your distance from the bird. (2) Note the conditions of light: were you looking against the light, or with the light behind you ? Was the sun shining ? Were you looking up at the bird or was it below you ? (3) Learn some general anatomy, so that you can give the colour of wing-coverts, under tail-coverts, nape, throat, chin, or other parts of the plumage accurately. “ Some white near the tail,” “ a patch of red on the head ” or “ the wing looked grey,” are much too vague. (4) Give an exact description of the whole plumage of the bird, not only the parts that you think may help to identify it. (5) Try to see the bird from as many angles as possible, and both at rest and in flight. Accuracy in observing birds in flight is often of decisive importance for identification — especially perhaps with waders and birds of prey — and such accuracy can only be acquired bv persistent effort. (6) Drawings and descriptions -should be made or written down immediately, not written up hours later, after looking at books. It is remarkably easy to confuse one’s mind afterwards, and to convince oneself that points were noticed which in fact were not seen at all. (7) Voice can also be a very important aid to identification. But there are many pitfalls. In the first place, in spite of the careful and systematic attempt to describe the notes and songs of birds in The Handbook it is still difficult to arrive at a notation that means the same to everyone. And there is far more variety in voice, and much more frequent departure from the normal, than is the case with plumage. To illustrate the danger of identification from sound alone I may give a recent experience of mine. In the summer of 1944, in the Severn Valley, I heard a very liquid three-note call repeated rapidly some twenty times. It did not sound exactly like a Quail, but it was so near it that I thought it could be nothing else. After a pause of some minutes, it began again, and after four or five repetitions, it developed into a Curlew’s bubble ! On the other hand, it was my good fortune some years ago to see a Siberian Chiffchaff ( Phylloscopus c. tristis ) in Kent in winter. It is a much whiter bird than Ph. c. collybita, but there is, of course, a good deal of variation in plumage between individual Chiffchaffs, and a sight record of the first Siberian !)2 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Chiffchaff might hardly have been acceptable, even though the bird remained in one spot for about a fortnight, and was watched by three different members of the B.O.U. Happily, it frequently uttered a note which was quite distinct from the ordinary call-note of Ph. c. collybita. Incidentally, one of the ornithologists who came to see it, on hearing the call-note immediately said : “I understand why it was called tristis.” A good many years later I had the satisfaction of hearing that same “ sad ” call-note from a Siberian Chiffchaff in India. Probably, too, Mr. Ludlow would point out that in the field identification of Phylloscopus fuscatus which I quoted from the Ibis he was relying on sound as well as sight. In other words, sound alone may be misleading (as notoriously it is with early Cuckoo records) ; but sound can be an invaluable piece of additional evidence to support a good sight record. Until the beginning of this century and the founding of British Birds, held records of rare birds were, I think, always regarded with suspicion and as of dubious authenticity. We owe it largely to the late editor, and to his thorough and ruthless analysis of all records received, that sight records published in British Birds are now generally accepted as reliable. If I may give my own experience, he several times rejected records that I sent him. In some cases I now know that I was mistaken ; in others I recognize that there was an element of doubt. The history of the Hertfordshire Great Grey Shrike shows how even the best observers may sometimes be deceived by tricks of light, slight variations of plumage, or optical delusions.* I think all readers of British Birds owe it both to the memory of a great editor and to the maintenance of his high tradition under his successor to make themselves as proficient as possible in their powers of held observation. Rejection of one’s records is apt to be discouraging ; but it ought to be a stimulus to more accurate observation. Since I wrote the above, my attention has been called by the Editor to the note published by Mr. Witherby on pp. 343-4 of Vol. xxiii (May, 1930). I hope the points he there stressed can be republished. I am, naturally, pleased to find that they correspond very closely to the points I have tried to make. [The note published by Mr. Witherby in Vol. xxiii to which Mr. Alexander refers was prompted by a letter on sight records. We cannot quote the whole of it here, though the whole may be profitably read by those with access to the volume, as a statement of British Birds policy with regard to such records. But we are pleased to re-publish the actual recommendations to observers, for comparison with Mr. Alexander’s and to emphasize their importance to all held workers. They are as follows : — “ Do not record a bird as seen unless you have taken dozen on the spot its characteristics before consulting a work on ornithology. * Antea, Vol. xxxvi, pp. 51-3. VOL. xxxviii ] FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF BIRDS. DB One of the most unsatisfactory methods of identification is to view a bird in the field, taking insufficient notes, or no detailed notes, and then finding its supposed portrait or description in a book at home, to proceed to work out an account of what was seen. Field notes should state : — 1. Distance of bird from you and whether you were using glasses or not, and nature and direction of light. 2. Nature of ground it was on, what other birds (if any) it was associating with. 3. Whether you saw it from different angles, whether at rest or in flight. 4. What were its actions and what was the character of its flight, compared with other birds. 5. Its size and general form as compared with other birds, stating what birds at all like it are known to you, and how it differed from them. 6. Particular points in structure as compared with other birds, such as size and shape of bill, length of legs and feet, shape of wing, length of tail. 7. Colour of bill, legs, and feet. Any distinctive white or colour patches or markings and their exact position. General colour above and below. If possible, a rough sketch or diagram of the bird should be made, showing colour-pattern, distinctive marks and shape.” To these seven points of Mr. Witherby’s we would add the following : — 8. Any calls or notes, indicating especially the quality of the sound (harsh, rattling, shrill, hoarse, liquid, etc.) and comparing with notes of other species if this assists the description. — Eds.] (94) NOTES. CARRION-CROW’S NEST WITH SIX EGGS AND TWO YOUNG. On April 24th, 1942, near Bow, mid-Devon, Sgt. H. Huggins, R.A.F., found the nest of a Carrion-Crow ( Corvus c. corune ) contain- ing two young birds just hatched, three eggs just chipping and three which were found to be hard set, evidently about a week from hatching. All the eggs were alike, of a dark, heavily capped and rather unusual type so that they appeared to be all produced by the same bird. H. R. Tutt. [The different stages of incubation of the two groups of eggs, indicating a resumption of laying after an interval, implies some disturbance or abnormality of the normal physiological processes, the nature of which, however, we have unfortunately no means of deciding.— Eds.] BULLFINCH’S METHODS OF FEEDING. Between July 4th and 22nd, 1944, I watched a male Bullfinch [Pyrrhula p. nesa) feeding in the garden here. Its method appeared unusual and may be worthy of note. Starting at one end of a long Cupressus macrocarpa hedge it worked its way down the whole length of it, some thirty yards. It flew up from the ground and hovered with very rapidly vibrating wings before making a dart at its prey and then returned to the ground, to repeat the performance a little further down the hedge. It appeared regularly each day about 8 a.m. and was also seen in the evening. I have watched a pair of Hedge-Sparrows ( Prunella modularis occidentalis ) behaving in the same manner, but they do not work down the hedge so systematically. A. C. Fraser. At Hadleigh, Essex, on July 5th, 1944, I watched a cock Bullfinch (. Pyrrhula p. nesa) from a bedroom window, on the top sprays of a Victoria plum tree about 6 yards distant. These top branches had not been sprayed and the undersides of the leaves were crowded with aphides. With its mandibles the bird cut pieces from the leaves and then discarded the pieces, apparently after taking the insects. From one leaf, where the aphides must have been near the edge of the leaf the bird took hold of the leaf and scraped them off ; then it went to a very young leaf at the tip of a twig, cut a piece out and evidently swallowed it, for I did not see it fall, and must have done so had it been dropped, as the bird was facing me and in full view. The hen was working on the other side of the tree out of sight, but now joined the cock, when both Hew away. H. R. Tutt. SONG OF FEMALE CHAFFINCH ASSOCIATED WITH NORMAL SEX BEHAVIOUR. In April, 1943 — through an oversight I omitted to record the date- in the residential district of North Oxford, my attention was attracted by a curious song from a tree in a garden bordering a road. VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 95 It proved to come from a hen Chaffinch (Fringilla ccelebs gengleri) and was much like a poor version of the male song without the flourish at the end : that is it agreed substantially with the female songs recorded by Lack and Warburg ( antea , Vol. xxxiv, pp. 218 and 261). After several utterances the bird flew across the road to a small tree in another garden, where it was joined by a male. The two birds then flew on to the wall of the garden near where I was standing. The female crouched in the regular solicitation posture, while the male began to display, running round her with the body tilted to one side. At this point a passer-by disturbed them, so that the observation is incomplete. It is of interest, however, because one usually tends to connect female song in species in which this is exceptional with some aberration in the sexual physiology, and here it was associated with sex behaviour which appeared quite normal. B. W. Tucker. CHIFFCHAFF RAIDING OCCUPIED NESTS FOR NESTING MATERIAL. On May 5th, 1943, I ringed a female Chiffchaff ( Phylloscopus c. collybita ) which had a nest in a hawthorn stump in a wood at Langton Green, Kent. Around May 6th, misfortune happened to the nest. On May 9th, I watched a Chiffchaff fly to a Bullfinch’s (Pyrrhula p. nesa) nest situated in a holly bush in which bram- bles intermingled, and amidst many alarm notes uttered by the rightful occupiers, proceed to tear at the nest and subsequently fly away with the material so obtained. As she departed I noticed the ring which I had fitted on her leg. Upon immediate examination of the nest, I found that the inside hairs and fibres had been turned upside down with two eggs lying on the rim ; the remainder of the clutch (I had seen three fresh eggs a few days previously) were probably hidden in the undergrowth below the nest. After my withdrawal from the nest I watched the Chiffchaff repeat her 'raid (or raids). The above is recorded more fully in The Field, September 9th, 1943, p. 251. On April 5th, 1944, this same Chiffchaff returned to the wood, her identity being proved by the ring I had fitted during 1943. Up to the beginning of May, I could trace no nest belonging to this bird, although she remained in the wood. On May 8th, I watched her go to the holly bush which contained the Bullfinch’s nest in 1943 and proceed to tear at the nest of a pair of Blackcaps ( Sylvia a. atricipilla) , which contained 5 fresh eggs. The owners were not at the time in the vicinity. After several repetitions of this per- formance by the Chiffchaff, I watched her go to her nest with material from the Blackcap’s, which was added to her own. The following evening, accompanied by Mr. H. W. G. Betteridge, I examined the Blackcap’s nest and found the outside pattern entirely altered, with the inside lining deranged by much loss of its original quantity ; four of the five eggs were found unbroken on the ground beneath the nest. P. A. Adolph. 00 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. DISPLAY OF WOOD-WARBLER. On June 3rd, 1944, whilst searching for a repeat nest of a Wood- Warbler ( Phylloscopus sibilatrix), I heard the female bird uttering her usual call note with the male singing in close attendance high up in a wooded stretch of a common near Tunbridge Wells, Kent. The first nest of this pair of birds with completed clutch of eggs met with misfortune on May 20th. The female Wood-Warbler gradually moved through the trees to an approximate distance of 15 yards from where I first observed her, followed by the male. Both birds then flew down on to some birch saplings and the male commenced to display with swift wing beating and accentuated song ; the female was unresponsive, but appeared hesitant. The male then rose from one of the saplings with slow wing flapping, at the same time singing softly and slowly, and glided towards the female, who flew away with jerky action and dropped to a bare patch of earth (approximately 1 foot in diameter), where she stayed motionless for a matter of seconds, subsequently flying back towards the male (and as afterwards proved in the direction of her nest). The latter bird joined her and both then flew together in spinning-wheel flight, the female being the first to break away, returning with the jerky flight previously men- tioned to the same bare patch of earth. The male then proceeded — without vocal activity— to rise into the air from a sapling, 12 feet above the ground and then floated down in parachute manner towards the female. The latter then flew swiftly to a branch of one of the saplings, hesitated a second and dropped into her nest on the ground beneath ; upon inspection this contained 6 eggs, three days incubated. Though these three forms of display upon the part of the male Wood-Warbler are similar to those described in The Handbook, it would appear of biological interest that the male bird adopted consecutively, three distinct phases of display towards a female who showed no invitatory posture, and who all the time appeared anxious to resume incubating her eggs. P. A. Adolph. EARLY ARRIVAL OF FIELDFARES IN WARWICKSHIRE. At 9 p.nr. on August 12th, 1944, my wife and I were walking along the bank of the River Learn at Offchurch village, near Leamington Spa, when we noticed five birds alight in the same field. When they moved into the sunlight we were able to observe them clearly with a good pair of ibx glasses at a distance varying from 80 to 50 yards and saw them to be Fieldfares (T urdus pilaris). Their slate grey head and nape, and golden-buff and cream chest, mottled with black were especially noticeable. We were also able to observe the grey and black tail and chestnut backs. All were much more clearly marked than those we have observed later in the year. After ten minutes they flew over the hedge into a stocked corn- field, where they were joined by another six or seven that had VOL. XXXVIII.]' NOTES. 97 flown along the cover of the hedge. Here we were able to observe them clearly from the cover of the hedge as they moved amongst the stubble or half hopped and half flew up the side of a sheaf on to the top of the stook. After a time the flock of eleven to twelve flew up into some oak trees and for a few seconds a subdued “ chak- ehak-chak ” was heard. Only two earlier dates, August 5th and 10th, are mentioned in The Handbook. R. F. Chatfield. CLIFF-BREEDING OF HOUSE-MARTIN IN KENT. When searching the cliffs between Ramsgate and Broadstairs on June 8th, 1944, I found three isolated instances of the cliff nesting of the House-Martin ( Delichon u. urbica ) ; one was on the north side of Dumpton Gap, a second which has since fallen was on the south side and the third was further south. On revisiting this area on July 7th, I found that by the nest on the north side of Dumpton Gap there were three partially built nests and another completed within a very few yards. All were freshly built and occupied by the Martins. This area is not mentioned in “ Cliff-breeding in the House- Martin ” by Jourdain and Witherby ( antea , Vol. xxxiii, pp. 16-24 and 137). Nest sites abound on the many houses in the district, where the bird is very common. M. N. Rankin. BEHAVIOUR OF GREY LAG-GOOSE. I saw a curious performance by a few members of a flock of about eighty Grey Lag-Geese (Anser a. anser ) on the water at Leighton Moss, N. Lancs, on March 16th, 1944. Occasionally a bird would turn over on to its back, and with almost submerged outstretched wings maintain this position for a few seconds with feet kicking violently ip the air. It then resumed its normal position. The capsize and recovery were so rapid that I could not make out how the manoeuvre was performed — whether the bird rolled over or somersaulted. I was reminded of the display of the Red-throated Diver ( Golymbus stellatus), described by Selous and referred to in The Handbook, in which the diver rolls over on to its back. The behaviour of the geese appeared to be an individual performance, and I did not see that it aroused any particular interest in the other birds. P. J. Askey. [Closely similar behaviour has been recorded in the same district, on the Kent Estuary, by J. A. G. Barnes (antea, Vol. xxxvii, p. 158. — Eds.] FIRST BREEDING OF FULMAR IN THE SOUTH-WEST. The first Fulmar (Fulniarus g. glacialis) ever recorded in the breeding season at Lundy Island, off the Devon coast, was one that flew 98 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. past the North Landing on June nth, 1922 (Loyd, antea, Vol. xvi, p. 155). This bird showed no sign of being “ interested ” in the cliffs ; and Fulmars were not seen regularly about them until the summer of 1935 (Perry, Lundy , Isle of Puffins, 1940). In 1939 Fulmars were seen about the Lundy cliffs from April 12th to July 10th (Perry, l.c .) ; the greatest number of individuals seen was nine (June 13th) and up to four sites were occupied, though breed- ing did not take place. In 1944, on a date before May 21st, Mr. F. W. Gade informs us, a Fulmar at Lundy Island laid the first egg ever to have been seen in the south-west. Shortly after it was laid the egg was taken, in ignorance, by a temporary resident of the island. Three pairs were present in occupation of sites and it was thought that another 01 these was also incubating, in an inaccessible place. At the end of July, four empty “ nest-sites,” or scrapes, were found on a thorough examination of the cliff with the use of a rope. The Fulmars had by this time entirely disappeared (as is often the case at a station where Fulmars are simply “ prospecting ” or have made an unsuccessful attempt at breeding) and there was no evidence that any other eggs had been laid. One adult Fulmar returned and was seen at the cliff on August 3rd. Fulmars have been present for a long time, in the breeding season, at south-west cliffs. Though the above is the first and only record of breeding, birds have been present at the Sallies since 1937 (Ryves and Valentine, Rep. Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservn. Soc., 1937) ; on the Cornish mainland since 1936 (Boyd, communication to B.T.O. inquiry) (Land’s End first, now several other places on the north coast) ; on the South Devon mainland since 1943 (Fisher, antea, Vol. xxxvii, p. 140) (Start Point) ; on Dorset cliffs since 1943 (Gooch, antea, Vol. xxxvii, p. 98) ; at the cliffs of the Isle of Wight since 1942 (Fisher, l.c.) ; and in South Wales, at Skokholm since 1931 (Lockley, communication to B.T.O. inquiry) ; and the Pembrokeshire mainland since 1931 (Lloyd, antea, Vol. xxv, pp. 81-2). The British Trust for Ornithology is continuing its Inquiry into the distribution and spread of the Fulmar, and particulars can be obtained from J. Fisher at 39, Museum Road, Oxford. Martin Coles Harman. James Fisher. BEHAVIOUR OF JUVENILE WOOD-PIGEON. While watching a flock of Wood-Pigeons ( Columba p. palumbus), at Bretton, nr. Wakefield, on August 5th, 1944, I observed an apparently independent juvenile soliciting food- or displaying— to an adult by bowing with inflated crop and expanded tail exactly like an adult. After some three or four bows the youngster was put to flight by the old bird. John C. S. Ellis. VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 99 PREDATORY HABITS OF BLACK-HEADED GULLS. With reference to previous notes ( antea , pp. 12-15, 57) on the predatory behaviour of the Black-headed Gull ( Lams r. ridibundus), the following observation seems worth pitting on record. Black- headed Gulls are regular winter residents on the River Severn in 'Shrewsbury, and I was watching a party of about fifteen of them on December 10th, 1943. A number of Rooks (Corvus f. frugilegus) were feeding on the grassy margin of the river, and on several occasions when a Rook found a tit-bit one or two gulls immediately attacked it, with the apparent intention of making it drop whatever it had found. On no occasion did I see them succeed, but they “ chivvied ” the Rooks persistently and energetically. If the latter flew away, however, the gulls did not keep up the chase for more than fifty yards or so, but soon returned, either to forage for themselves or to watch for another Rook making a “ find ” when the whole performance would be repeated. L. C. Lloyd. [Attacks on Lapwings in the fields are not uncommon and we suspect that this is also true of Rooks, though we do not recall having seen this species victimized. — Eds.] Parasites taken by Magpies and Jackdaws from Sheep and other animals. — Mr. Derek C. Barber writes to us with reference to the recent notes on Magpies ( Pica p. pica) perching on the backs of sheep and other animals (antea, Vol. xxxvii, pp. 159, 199, 217) that he has examined the stomachs of both Magpies and Jackdaws ( Corvus monedida spcrmologus ) shot when so occupied and can definitely establish that the insects chiefly taken are the “ Sheep Ked ” ( Melophagus ovinns). This is as would be expected, as these insects are the commonest parasites of sheep. The much less common biting louse, Trichodectes sphoerocephalus, Mr. Barber has only rarely met with in stomachs. A form closely allied to the "Sheep Ked occurs on pigs and this is also taken by birds. Goldfinches using same nest for two broods. — Mr. Oliver G. Pike reports two cases of this. In May 1942, a pair of Goldfinches (Carduelis c. britannica ) at Leighton Buzzard reared four young in a nest in an apple tree and three weeks after they had fledged used the same nest for a second brood and reared four more young. In 1944 a pair at the same place reared a family and about three weeks after they had left laid four more eggs in the same nest, which, however, was destroyed by a cat when the bird had been sitting a week. Nightingale building again after fledging of young from early nest. — With reference to the early nest of Nightingales (Lnscinia m. megarhyncha ) recorded on p. 79, from which young appear to have been fledged about June ist, Mr. P. A. Adolph informs us that on June 4th he and Mr. H. W. G. Betteridge found a half completed nest about 10 ft. away from the previous one and 100 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. saw the birds at the site. By June nth the exterior was finished, but the interior was unlined and misshapen and it was never com- pleted. From the evidence given it seems fairly certain that the birds were the original early breeding pair, and the tact that they finished breeding so early probably accounts for the partial repeti- tion of the breeding cycle in a normally single-brooded species. It is possible that the young came to grief soon after fledging. Short-eared Owls perching in trees in winter. — Mr. D. Jenkins informs us that Short-eared Owls ( Asio f. flammeus) which were present in the Marlborough district in the winters of 1941-42 and 1942-43 were several times seen to perch in deciduous trees 20-30 feet high and were more often seen perched on hawthorn bushes than on the ground. Although Short-eared Owls will perch fairly freely in trees in the breeding-season and occasionally do so in winter (cf. Handbook), it is in our experience unusual for them to do so at all regularly at that season. Spoonbill in Somerset. — In the note under this heading by Mr. A. V. Cornish ( antea , p. 77) the statement that “ there is no Somerset record ” should read “ no recent record.” There are two old records for the county. Erroneous report of heronry. — In his report on the Index of Heron Population, 1942 {antea, Vol. xxvi, p. 207), Mr. W. B. Alexander stated that a heronry of six nests had been discovered in Nidderdale, Yorks. He now informs us that this information has proved to be unreliable. Though birds were seen to fly into the wood no nests were found there. Little Gulls in the Channel, etc. — Mr. J. A. R. Bickford has sent us particulars of Little Gulls (. Larus minutus) which he saw commonly in the Channel and off the north coasts of Devon and Cornwall in the winter months of 1942. Arctic Skua on Hants coast in late June. — Mr. Peter L. Day informs us that he saw an adult Arctic Skua {Stercorarius parasiticus) of the dark form flying along the beach at Keyhaven, Hampshire, on June 28th, 1944, an unusual date. There was a very strong S.W. wind and rough sea. Quail in the summer of 1944. — Information reaching us from widely separated localities suggests that Quail ( Coturnix c. coturnix ) have been commoner during the past season than for some years. We should be glad if readers would send us records of Quail in 1944, stating especially how they compare with previous recent years in the same districts. BIRD LOVERS’ MANUALS BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. “ ....... remarkable for its clarity of statement and distinction of style.” — The Times Lit. Supp. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. “ It is impossible here to do justice to the painstaking research and wide knowledge revealed in this book.”— The Field. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7/6 net. SPORTS AND PASTIMES LIBRARY A New Volume ready shortly FISHING FOR TROUT AND SALMON BY TERENCE HORSLEY Fishermen whether members of the Fleet Air Arm or not are likely to enjoy Lt. Cdr. Horsley’s ease of manner when imparting the lessons of experience in waters of the kind open to sportsmen with limited purses. A theory is seldom stated in this book without its immediate relation to practice. Tackle, seasons, temperature, the habits of fish, and ways of water, directly or indirectly are illustrated by diagrams or photographs to help along the information. 1 0/6 net. Reprints are ready of three other volumes in this series. 10/6 net each FLY FISHING by W. KEITH ROLLO. CARD GAMES by H. PHILLIPS & B. C. WESTALL. LIFEBOATS AND THEIR CONVERSION by C. E. TYRRELL LEWIS. Reprints of other titles will be available shortly. Please give the name of the Bookseller whom you would like us to advise. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., 326, HIGH HOLBORN, W.C.l British BIRDS AN-ntusn^rcD -mo/M DEWTEDOlimYTOTHEBIRDS ^ONTnEBRTISHBST^' NOVEMBER 1, 1944. Vol. XXXVIII. No. 6. MONTHLY- 1 s 9d.YE ARLY 20 s. 326HIGHHOLBOFNENDON- HF&GWHEIWLTD SONGS OF WILD BIRDS BY E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by JULIAN HUXLEY. With two double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge- Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. “ Wonderfully successful gramophone records of British Birds singing in their natural Haunts. — Nature. 30s. net. Postage 8d. By the same authors MORE SONGS OF WILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood- Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle- Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “ The gramophone records give the results with 'a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.”- — Edinburgh Evening News. “ All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. “ To have the haunting cry of the Little Owl and the wild cry of the Curlew in one’s study of a night in London has been forme a fantastic piece of pure magic.” — News Chronicle. BRITISH BIRDS With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, “The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED BY Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 6, Vol. XXXVIII, November i, 1944. PAGE The Breeding of the Little Ringed Plover in England in 1944. By M* D. England, E. O. Hohn, E. G. Pedler and B. W. Tucker 102 Sturnus vulgaris poltaratskyi ; a new sub-species to the British List. By Jeffery G. Harrison, B. A., M.B.O.U. . . .. .. 112 Notes : — Carrion-Crows and Rooks nesting on electric pylons (H. H. Davis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 14 Golden Oriole in Inverness-shire (William Leckie) .. .. 114 Egg-shell disposal of Greenfinch (J. R. M. Tennent) . . . . 1 14 Aquatic Warbler in Buckinghamshire (T. Bispham, W. R. Philipson, R. H. Ryall) .. .. .. .. .. .. 114 Icterine Warbler seen in Wiltshire (Major W. M. Congreve) . . 1 1 5 Unusual nest lining of Dartford Warbler (Major W. M. Congreve) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 116 Threat display of Song-Thrush at nest (J. A. G. Barnes, John Cudworth) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 116 Earlierffinging of Blackbird in towns (David Lack) . . . . 1 16 Extraordinary egg production by a Robin (H . W. Shove) . . 1 1 7 Kite in Northamptonshire (I. J. Ferguson Lees) .. .. 117 Wood-Pigeons’ nests with three eggs (Edwin Cohen, John S. Reeve) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 117 - Acquired feeding habit of Black-headed Gull (David Lack) . . 1 1 8 Diving of Black-headed Gull (P. J. Askey) .. .. .. 11S Breeding of Kittiwake and Lesser Black-backed Gull in Dorset (Rev. F. L. Blathwayt) . . . . . . . . . . 119 Short Notes : — " Gannet in Gloucestershire in June. Herring-Gulls nesting on a house roof. Moorhen chasing Stoat in defence of young . . 120 Letters : — Ravens nestingin a rookery (A. J. Harthan) .. .. .. 120 Chaffinch normally single-brooded (The Hon. G. Charteris) . . 120 K (102) THE BREEDING OF THE LITTLE RINGED PLOVER IN ENGLAND IN 1944 BY M. D. ENGLAND, E. O. HOHN, E. G. PEDLER and B. W. TUCKER. (Plates 1-4). In 1938 a pair of Little Ringed Plovers (Charadrius dubius curonicus) successfully reared a brood at one of the reservoirs near Tring, Hertfordshire and the event was very fully recorded by R. C. B. Ledlie and E. G. B. Pedler in British Birds, Vol. xxxii, pp. 90-102. In the subsequent six years the species was not seen at Tring, though birds were reported on passage in spring in Sussex (1939), Norfolk (1940), Kent (two, 1942), and Cambridgeshire (1942, 1943), and one in Berkshire in July 1943. In 1944, however, the breeding of no less than three pairs was proved in Southern England, two at Tring and one in Middlesex. Such an occurrence in the case of a species of which prior to 1938 only about a dozen examples had been recorded in Britain is certainly astonishing, even though the Little Ringed Plover does breed regularly just across the Channel. But especially curious is the fact that one of the Tring pairs bred in exactly the same locality as in 1938, although after a lapse of six years it is hardly conceivable that the birds (or even one of them) were the same as in 1938 or even the young of the original pair. Indeed the latter possibility may be considered definitely disproved, for the 1938 young were ringed and neither of the 1944 birds bore a ring. Even granted that the locality is one very well suited to the habits of the species and at the same time particularly well- watched, it seems very singular that two different pairs of a bird so rare as a breeder in Britain, in two seasons separated by so considerable a gap, should have selected the same place to nest in out of — presumably — a not inconsiderable number of possible sites. It is intriguing, but probably unprofitable, to speculate on possible explanations of this, but most ornithologists will recall somewhat analogous cases of particular breeding sites deserted by a species and re-occupied after a lapse of years by different indivi- duals, though not obviously more suitable than others available. It should, however, be added that a special attraction to the birds, though not obvious, may nevertheless exist. It may be remarked, however, that the third pair in 1944 bred in a partly flooded gravel-pit, and since such places are certainly less regularly watched by ornithologists than reservoirs it is possible that pairs have bred in other gravel-pits or similar sites in southern England in previous years and escaped notice. Whether this is likely to have been the case and whether in fact the species is actually in process of extending its range or whether the events of the past season must be regarded as merely an abnormal incident due to some chance or accident of migration are questions on which light vol. xxxviii] LITTLE RANGED PLOVER. ‘ 103 will be thrown by observation in future years. It may be suggested that ornithologists in southern England would do well to pay attention in May and June to old gravel-pits containing pools, but not completely flooded, and other possible breeding places, and in this connexion it may be useful to quote my description of the habitat of the species from The Handbook of British Birds, which reads as follows : " Markedly more a fresh-water bird than Ringed Plover, frequent- ing sand and gravel banks on rivers or borders of lakes and when found breeding on coast usually at the mouth of a river or stream ; also breeds by ponds and pools (sometimes quite small) with gravelly, sandy or rubbly waste ground, or occasionally merely dried mud, adjacent, and sometimes in disused sand or gravel pits.” It is noteworthy that two passage birds have been reported to us in the late summer from other not very far distant localities. Mr. H. Money-Coutts, who saw a Little Ringed Plover at Ham Fields Sewage Farm, near Windsor, on July 8th, 1943 ( antea , Vol. xxxvii, p. 1801), saw one there again on July 19th, 1944, and has supplied full and conclusive details of identification, while another was observed at the Brent Reservoir, Middlesex, by Mr. T. Bispham on August 3rd and Mr. W. J. L. Sladen on August 9th. Ham Fields is not many miles from the Middlesex breeding place now recorded and it is possibly significant that the bird observed there in 1943 was a young one. The 1944 bird, though in essentially adult plumage, had the orbital ring and white line above the black eye-band rather dull and was thought to be probably a bird of the previous year. A number of ornithologists have contributed observations on the three pairs, especially on No. 1 pair at Tring, but it has been thought best to treat the separate reports on each as sections of a single paper covering the whole subject of the breeding of the Little Ringed Plover in England in 1944. B.W.T. THE FIRST PAIR AT TRING BY E. G. PEDLER and B. W. TUCKER. The birds were first observed at 10.45 a.m. (D.S.T.) on May 15th by Pedler at the same reservoir where breeding took place in 1938, and in the course of this and subsequent days he was able to observe them closely. The water level was very low, as in 1938, and probably even lower than then, and the whole ground was almost covered with vegetation, but with several more or less bare, stony patches. The birds appeared to have taken possession of a certain belt of stony ground, to which they returned at intervals and made scrapes. One bird so engaged on the afternoon of the 15th was watched repeatedly going down on its breast, kicking up small stones from behind it, making sweeps from side to side with the breast, and 104 BRITISH BIRDS. [VQL. XXXVIII. spreading the tail fan-wise. On another occasion on the same day both birds were seen to do this together. It was observed that they used small natural depressions, entering them and excavating a few of the small stones. Both birds kept strictly together ; on three occasions the female spread her tail high in the air and once the male came and settled under it, remaining there for a few seconds.* At 8.10 p.m. coition was observed, the male afterwards flying away for about 50 yards, while the female remained where she was and preened herself. Prior to coition the male puffed out his breast feathers and stamped his feet sharply, holding the head high, as described in the case of the 1938 pair (p. 93), while the female waited in the usual crouching position. On May 16th, at 8 a.m., coition was again observed on the same area, to which the birds returned for this purpose, as well as to display and scrape. The preliminary behaviour was the same as before. The diagnostic characters of the species were well seen, the wings being sandy brown, showing no wing-bar in flight, the bills black or dark brown, and the yellow orbital ring conspicuous, especially in the male. The female’s breast band was narrower than that of the male. On May 17th, a cold and windy day, one of the birds was seen to bathe at the water’s edge, afterwards drying itself in the wind. In the late afternoon, from 6.20 to 6.35, the female on the nesting area appeared to be picking up small stones and throwing them now on one side and now on the other, but eventually flew off to the water’s edge calling “ pic, pic, pic.” This was the only occasion on which the recorder heard either bird call during a week’s observa- tion. The flight on this occasion was gliding, with slow wing-beats, recalling the wing action of a Greenfinch in the display flight. The pebble-throwing was observed on numerous occasions at the site which had evidently been selected for nesting ; this was also the area in which coition was observed. On May 18th the female was seen on one occasion to spread her tail, showing the white outer feathers, the male about 15 yards away taking no apparent notice. On this date she was also watched picking up small stones and putting them down beside her while sitting on the ground, evidently in one of the scrapes. The male was seen behaving similarly, but throwing them to one side and the other with jerks of the head. On May 19th, from 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. and from 3.30 to 4.30 p.m. no birds were present at the nesting site, but soon afterwards one of them alighted there, accompanied by a Dunlin. The Dunlin flew away and the Plover approached a growing tuft and sat for about three minutes, during which the mate came and walked * This agrees closely with the co-called “ symbolic nest -rebel ” ceremony described by J. E. Sluiters {Arden, 1938, pp. 130-141) and in the Ringed Plover by H. Laven (Beitr. Fortpfl.-biol. Edo1., 1938, pp. 49-34 . 9°_95) hut these observers agree in describing the bird which creeps under the other’s tail as the female. — B.W.T. vol. xxxviii.] LITTLE RINGED PLOVER. 105 round the sitting bird and then flew away. After the sitting bird had gone off the recorder approached the spot and found two eggs in a hollow lined with small stones all of about the same size and a few pieces of small stick. From 7.12' to 8.25 p.m. the bird sat on the eggs. On three occasions, at 7.27, 7.41 and 8.18, she stood up and appeared to be arranging them with her bill. At 8.25 she stood up and moved away from the nest, stretching the wings high above her, then flew to the water’s edge and had not returned at 9.30. On May 20th a Mallard drake was seen walking towards the nest, on which the female was sitting. The male ran first on one side of the intruder and then on the other in an agitated manner, but failed to divert him, but when he was within a few feet of the sitting bird she rose from the eggs and ran towards him, with tail fanned and depressed, touching the ground. When the duck appeared almost treading on the eggs she actually pecked him and made him jump forward and quicken his speed. He moved well away off the nesting area. The Plovers quickly recovered from their anxiety and within ten minutes coition took place, in the manner already described. At 7 p.m. on May 21st Pedler visited the nest in order to show it to Double, the keeper ; there were then three eggs. On May 22nd he left Tring and had to discontinue his observations. On May 27th R. H. Ryall visited the locality and saw both birds. The distinctive characteristics, including the pale yellowish flesh- coloured legs, were well seen and' the typical “tee- u” (or “pee- o ”) note heard. On the 28th C. B. Ashby and Miss H. M. Knapp were at the reservoir and found the nest, which now contained four eggs. They noted that the small white stones with which it was lined were about a quarter or three-eighths of an inch across. Earlier in the day a mild form of display was observed, the birds running after one another with fluffed-out feathers and once lifting the outstretched wings high above the back. On May 30th Ryall again visited the reservoir and has kindly placed his notes at our disposal. At 2.10 p.m. he observed a nest- relief. The relieving bird alighted some distance away and ran in a rather halting and circuitous manner to the nest. As it approached the sitting bird got up and, stepping away in a semi- crouching attitude, made a little display by extending the flank- feathers and twice fanning out the tail. It then ran a short distance and flew away to another reservoir. Another change-over took place at 4.15. On this occasion the returning bird, believed to be the male, flew up and settled about 18 inches from the nest and the sitting mate ran off with no display. Only once was the bird not sitting observed to return for a few minutes to the nesting area, or iifdeed to the same reservoir, without relieving its mate. Mandibu- lation of small stones round the nest was observed, as recorded by Pedler.. 106 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. On Tune ioth Pedler re-visited Tring. At 11.20 the male was sitting but after a few minutes he got up and walked a foot or so awav, ’bobbing his head, picked up something and returned to sit. At 11.30 a change-over took place. The relieved bird walked slowly away from the eggs with head bent low, while the mate alighted on the ground, went straight to the nest, and settled down. The other then flew away. At 4.10, when the male was again on the nest, another relief took place. He walked and ran some yards from the eggs then stopped and stretched his wings straight above his head, before flying away to the water’s edge. On the ground the female passed him hurriedly, went straight to the eggs and settled on them. On june nth, B. W. Tucker, with Dr. F. K. Boston and G. H. Spray, visited Tring to see the birds, as did also Rya 1 and Ashby and R S R. Fitter. Both birds were well seen and all the distinctive characters noted, including the distinctive “tee- u” note when the sitting bird was flushed. At 2 p.m. a nest-relief took place, it was accomplished unobtrusively with no ceremonial. On this occasion the relieved bird flew to the water’s edge and stopped there for a few minutes before flying away from the reservoir, the eggs were also examined. They were typical of the species, notably smaller than Ringed Plover’s, with stone-coloured ground fairly evenly marked with rather fine dark brown spots and here and there faint mauvish markings. Subsequently Double reported that there were two chicks hatched on June 15th. On June 16th one of the remaining eggs had gone and was presumed to have hatched. Double has recently assured us that he afterwards saw three chicks together at the nest, but it does not appear that a third chick was ever seen for certain by any- one else, and evidently it came to grief : it may have been killed by some predator soon after hatching. On the 17th the parents and two voung were seen by Rvall. One adult, believed to be the female, stayed with them and the other now kept fairly neni. The chicks ran about' with short intervals of being brooded Ry the attendant adult. Sometimes this took place at the nest and some- times the young merely ran under the parent where she happened to stand. The remaining egg was quite warm to the hand, as though the bird had just been brooding it, but it subsequently proved to be addled and was taken by Double, by whom it was handed to the Tring Museum, where it provides permanent proof of the record. . , , , , The further history of the young is unfortunately not so clearly documented. On July ioth Ryall saw the adults, but failed to find the voung and gathered that no one at Tring had seen them recently. However, the keeper, Double, who did good work m keeping a watch on the nest, assures us that he is convinced that the parent birds (probably disturbed by fishing, which began on June ioth), succeeded after a time in leading the young across the causeway to the adjacent reservoir. He saw both adults near the boathouse VOL. XXXVIII.] LITTLE RINGED PLOVER. 107 here, “ squealing and fluttering about ” and behaving in a manner which could leave no reasonable doubt that they had the young ones there. Later he saw four birds on the wing, so that it seems to be fairly well established that the two young were reared, though the lack of complete proof is regrettable. THE SECOND PAIR AT TRING BY M. D. ENGLAND. On May 13th, at Wilstone Reservoir, Tring, I saw four Ringed Plovers which I believed to be Little Ringed Plovers ( Charadrius dubius curonicus), but as I neither saw them fly nor heard their call identification had to remain uncertain. It was not until over five weeks later that I saw any more of them on this reservoir, but in the meantime, on June nth, Messrs. B. W. Tucker and R. H. Ryall, in company with two other observers, Dr. Boston and Mr. Spray, had visited the place and seen a pair of Little Ringed Plovers there. They were fully identified, but although they were watched for some time and indulged in a little mild display and chasing, they showed no evidence of having a nest. In the light of the subsequent observations, however, it can be said, since the first egg was hatched on July 5th and the shortest recorded incubation period is 24 days, that incubation must actually have commenced on June nth at the latest. The birds were watched again by Mr. Ryall a week later, on June 17th, when they were equally successful in concealing the fact that they were nesting. On June 22nd I found a single Little Ringed Plover feeding on the mud. During a considerable time that this bird was under observation it several times settled down and brooded in one or other of two depressions or scrapes which proved to contain nothing but a stone and two rather egg-like lumps of mud respectively. However, eventually, while it was' sitting, another flew over calling, and this one led me to a different part of the reservoir where, after a very long search and much watching from various hides, a nest was found with four eggs. It was on sandy shingle, and the eggs rested on very small pebbles and a few broken shells. It may be significant that it was within a few inches of a rusty broken tin half buried in the mud, recalling the Greenshank’s frequent nesting near some conspicuous stone or other object. I should have liked to experiment by moving the tin, but experiments are out of place on a bird as rare as this. Ten feet away were the remains of a wooden breakwater, and it seemed possible that with care some rather distant photographs might be obtained from a hide built behind this. Ordinary bird- photography tactics were of course out of the question, both from the point of view of attracting undesirable attention and of scaring the bird. Accordingly it was decided that nothing more was per- missible than a cloth over the head of the photographer crouched on the ground in an angle of the breakwater. This was not only BRITISH BIRDS. 108 [VOL. XXXVIII. almost invisible from a distance, but could be taken down instantly on the approach of strangers. > An assistant was constantly on the watch, and everyone from bathers and anglers to obvious ornithologists was treated with suspicion. I have to record my gratitude to Mr. A. H. Bishop, of the Natural History Museum, for acting as watcher during the photography, and for becoming expert at removing hides in a hurry. The keeper, Mr. Double, very kindly prevented angling in the vicinity, and in fact constantly patrolled the area, and it is largely owing to his help that the eggs hatched in a very public place. The notes which follow have, for the sake of brevity, been compiled as additions to, or in some cases because of differences from, the very complete report by Ledlie and Pedler {l.c.) on the 1938 pair. The differences, where they exist, are, I believe, due in large part to the fact that favourable circumstances made it possible for this pair to be watched almost continuously while in the vicinity of the nest, from a distance varying from 7 to 10 feet, and many of the things seen, and even more the things heard, could not have been otherwise recorded. Plumage and Sexing. — After a few days at close quarters I was able to distinguish the birds apart, and even to make up my mind which was which sex, but in view of the very great danger of false assumption in birds such as these, the word “ presumed ” should be understood in all references to sex which follow. There were two obvious plumage differences, one vocal difference, and several distinguishing habits. The cock had black ear-coverts, whereas the hen had brown. This seems to coincide satisfactorily with the note in The Handbook that “ some females have black patch on ear-coverts smaller and more or less intermixed with drab-brown and sometimes black feathers are more or less absent.” The black bands on breast and forehead were roughly the same width in both birds, but each had irregular white feathers along the edges which were sufficiently different to tell the birds apart. Voice and Display. — The call “ pee- u ” was used for many purposes and varied from a soft piping very similar to a Bullfinch to an urgent shrill call in immediate danger. The yoting began using a wheezy form of it at about three weeks old. The hen, when “ injury- feigning,” chattered in a way which was very noticeably like a Little Tern. A different form of this occurred during copulation. “ Injury-feigning ” consisted of running in a crouched attitude for a short distance, and grovelling in the sand with one or both wings fluttering and the tail spread, chattering all the time. If the “ releaser ” of this performance did not play its part, i.e. stood still instead of following, the display turned into an elaborate and self- conscious preening. Nest-relief was accompanied by calls heard at no other times, except on occasions when one or other bird came up to relieve but after display the original sitter returned. The cock flew to within vol. xxxviil] LITTLE RINGED PLOVER. 109 20 feet of the nest and called very softly “ quoyp, quoyp.” The hen replied from the nest “ quip ” almost inaudibly. The cock then approached by short runs calling “ quoyp, quoyj/, quoy-royp,” at the end of each run picking up small white pebbles and throwing them over his shoulder. The hen would then leave the eggs, and, running away from (see Plate 4) the direction in which, he was approaching, call (not always) “ quip, quip quip-pip-pip,” and also throw pebbles. She then turned in a wide semicircle (c. 6 ft. diarn.) and ran towards him, the two passing each other several times behind the nest, going in opposite directions in a series of runs with much stone throwing. One bird returned to the eggs, throwing as it came, and the other ran away, also throwing, until at about 25 feet it took to flight. The intensity of the stone- throwing increased towards the nest, and it ceased at the circum- ference of, roughly, a 25 foot circle around it. (Owing to the breakwater this was an incomplete circle) . A single bird, returning to the nest after a disturbance, often threw pebbles or picked them up and dropped them, and once only this was seen when the hen was guarding young 50 yards from the nest site. The fixity of the route followed to the nest was remarkable. If the hen was relieving the cock at the nest, she still called " quip ” and he responded with “ quoy-royp,” showing a noticeable vocal difference. When the young hatched, the “ quoyp ” turned gradually to the familiar “ quip-pip-pip-pip ” used all the time during the fledging period. When one bird was brooding three young about ten feet from the nest, and the other incubating the remaining egg, they still changed places, but without ceremony. The incubating bird rose and flew the few feet to the young, and the other ran to the egg. Sundry Notes.— The sitting bird depended on sight rather than hearing when sensing danger. Noises in the hide did not affect them in the least, but the slightest movement of the cloth by the wind caused suspicion. The warning calls of the Redshank and Lapwing registered danger, and the sitter would stand up and look round, but since the breakwater hid the Redshank’s area, incubation was usually resumed immediately. Swifts catching flies low over the nest caused a good deal of alarm, but all small birds on the ground were driven viciously away. When suspicious, a bird always left the nest at a crouching run, similar to that of hiaticula. The eggs hatched as follows : — one, July 5th, c. 5 p.m. (D.S.T.) ; two, July 6th, c. 7 a.m. ; one July 8th, 9.40 p.m. This gives a gap of about 77 hours between first and last. Although the young were led away from the nest almost immediately they were dry, they were constantly brought back, and the site was used as a “ rendezvous ” for at least a week after. It was observed that after the young hatched the parents often flew conspicuously higher in the air than they had done previously. All four young were ringed. 110 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. It is deserving of note that although we have no absolute proof, there is strong suspicion that three birds, two hens and one cock, were present all the time.* In addition to the bird sitting on “ oddments ” mentioned above, an odd bird was seen by several observers at some distance at a time when both cock and hen were known to be near the nest. On the day when one bird was brooding three young and the other incubating one egg, the incubating bird suddenly flew behind the hide and started calls which were quite new to me (a variant on the Little Tern chatter). I groped for a hole behind me and found one just in time to see the finish of coition between two birds. This cannot be taken as absolute proof, as it is just possible that in the moment when 1 was groping for a hole the bird brooding young flew round behind me (she was back on them when I turned round again). If so, coition occurs after young have hatched — if not, the cock was practising bigamy. At a fortnight old one adult only v\as in attendance on the young, which were still at the reservoir on August 23rd, feeding in the company of Common and Green Sandpipers, Dunlin and other small waders. At least one young bird was still present on September 10th, but had gone by September 16th. THE MIDDLESEX PAIR BY E. O. HOHN, B.Sc. On June 4th, 1944, my wife and I visited a group of three gravel pits in the Ashford district of Middlesex for the first time. At the largest pit, the area of which I estimate at about \ square mile water surface, we saw one and later two Ringed Plovers. I thought on seeing the first that it was a belated migratory Ringed Plover ( Charadrius hiaticula ), but noticed at once the absence of a white wing-bar in flight. When seen on the ground absence of white on wing was confirmed and the beak was seen to show no yellow, whereas the legs were pale orange. Further confirmation of the identity of these birds as Little Ringed Plovers (Ch. dubius curonicus ) was afforded by their call, a monosyllabic “ pioo ” and distinct from the Ringed Plover’s disyllabic “ pooeep.” Both birds confined themselves to a broad-based peninsula which projects into the waters of the pit. The base of this area consists of about one acre of gravel, while the southern shore is flat and sandy. We noticed that the birds or at least one of them returned repeatedly to the gravel area and when disturbed here flew about in wide sweeps, anxiously calling. This behaviour suggested nesting, but careful search failed to reveal a nest. *It should perhaps be noted that after nest-relief in the case of the other pair the relieved bird generally flew right away and, at least when 1 saw it, went in the direction of the other reservoir. — B.W.T. British Birds, Yol. XXXVIII., PI. i. Little Ringed Plover. The female settling on eggs. (. Photographed by M. D. England.) 'r*; % British Birds, Vol. XXXVIII., Pi. 4. VOL. XXXVIII.] LITTLE RINGED PLOVER. Ill On June nth we made another visit and again found both birds on the gravel bed, to which they returned repeatedly when flushed by any disturbance. Finally on June 17th the pair was seen now on the sandy shore, from which both flew up to circle round, calling even more anxiously than before. By watching the birds on their return to ground, through binoculars at a distance of about 20 yards, I saw at least one young bird, apparently only a few days old, on two occasions. When I approached it made for cover among the nearby herbage, where I was unable to find it. The adults, however, returned to the spot where I had last seen the young when it re- appeared on the first occasion ; though it did not come into view when I watched the returning parents the second time. When apparently calling for the young both birds used a softer call which I would render as “ trrw ”) (u pronounced as in French). It was thus definitely established that the pair had nested, and it seems probable that the nest was located on the gravel bed. In order to remove any possible question as to correct identification, Mr. R. S. R. Fitter visited the spot with me on July 2nd (at my request) and on this occasion we saw five Little Ringed Plovers, all able to fly. On a later visit on July 8th by myself, under better conditions of visibility, I saw that of the five, three were young birds. Hence the pair had successfully reared three' young. The birds must have left soon after, as on July 17th only one adult and one young were seen, while on July 26th none were to be found. Previous records of the Little Ringed Plover in Middlesex (Glegg, History of the Birds of Middlesex) are two, obtained in August 1864. In view of the other cases of breeding at Tring and the possibility that a definite attempt at colonization is taking place, it may be mentioned that there are also a number of other gravel pits in this western area of Middlesex which may be equally suitable for this species, and it is possible that a search of these next spring might reveal other nesting pairs. I am indebted to the manager of the company which works this particular pit, for permission to explore it. (112) ST URN US VULGARIS POLTARATSKYI: A NEW SUB-SPECIES TO THE BRITISH LIST BY JEFFERY G. HARRISON, B.A., M.B.O.U. On December 23rd, 1943, I obtained a Starling from a flock that was feeding beyond the sea wall on the Wash, at the mouth of the River Witham, near Boston, Lincolnshire. My father and I were at once struck with its unusual reflections. On preservation it proved to be a male ; the skull had the appearance of having just ossified, and this would make it a first winter bird. On comparison, it was found ^to match examples of Sturnns vulgaris poltaratskyi Finsch in my father’s collection. Capt. C. H. B. Grant, who kindly compared the bird with a series of this sub- species in the National Collection, has confirmed our identification. The bird has also been seen by the late W. L. Sclater, Mr. N. B. Kinnear and Col. R. Meinertzhagen, who all agree that it belongs to this race. The bird is in full winter plumage. A full description of it is as follows : Upper-parts — crown and nape purple, mantle green, scapulars, rump, upper tail-coverts, green ; (under-parts) ear-coverts, cheeks, chin and throat purple, with a tinge of green on the cheeks and a few immature feathers retained on the throat ; upper breast purple ; flanks blue-purple ; belly green ; vent and under tail-coverts black, with slight green reflections. Tail-feathers and primaries brown- black, secondaries same, but with brilliant blue-green gloss. Spots on upper-parts golden-brown, on under-parts white. The under wing-coverts are pale sepia brown, with broad pale golden brown edges. Hartert (Vogel der Paldarkt. Fauna, Bd. 1, p. 44) gives the following- description of the race — “ Distinguished from Sturnus vulgaris vulgaris on account of constant purple reflections of head and chin, and more or less purple ear-coverts. The whole back is uniform green, with super-imposed golden-brown spots, only absent in quite worn plumage. The breast and flanks are purple, the flanks brightest. Under wing-coverts in all plumages are brownish, with fairly broad light golden-brown edges, as in Sturnus vulgaris vulgaris.” The under wing-coverts serve to distinguish Sturnus vulgaris poltaratskyi from Sturnus vulgaris balcanicus, when occasionally this is rather difficult by other means. Hartert gives the breeding distribution as Siberia, including the Altai as far as Baikal. It is now known to be more extensive. Molyneaux ( Catalogue of Birds, 1930-31) gives Central Transcaucasia, S.E. Russia (west to Voronezh Gov. (rare)), Kirghiz .Steppes (Kustanai district), Aral-Caspian region, Siberia, Semipalatinsk, Altai, and N.W. Mongolia. The same author states that it occurs on passage or in winter in Egypt, N. Caucasus, Transcaucasia, VOL. XXXVIII.] A NEW SUB-SPECIES. 113 Mesopotamia, E. Persia, Transcaspia, Aral Sea region, Kizil-Kurn, Turkestan, Afghanistan, Baluchistan and India. It has also occurred casually as far north as Obdorsk on the River Ob in N.W. Siberia and accidentally in S.W. Russia. According to Meinertzhagen (. Nicoll’s Birds of Egypt, Vol. i, p. ioo) this Starling is “ probably the most frequent of all races in winter in Egypt,” while Whistler ( Popular Handbook of Indian Birds, Ed. 3, p. 195) states that it is also the commonest of the Starlings visiting India in winter. The habits of this race in winter do not seem to differ in any important way from that of other races, such as Sturnus v. vulgaris, but as regards breeding very little seems to be recorded in works or journals accessible in this country, though probably some in- formation is available in Russian. Stuart Baker ( Fauna of British India : Birds, Vol. hi, p. 34) writes that eggs sent to him from the Scully collection, found “ near Lake Baikal ” measure about 29.5 x 21.7 mm. and were taken on May 4th and 17th. It would seem that the Lincolnshire bird must have migrated westwards in autumn and joined up with birds of the typical race which regularly migrate to this country from the Baltic and Scandinavia. Four other Starlings obtained out of the same flock were examples of Sturnus v. vulgaris. This is the first record of the sub-species in the British Isles, its nearest previous occurrence being in south-west Russia, as mentioned above. Before ending I would like to thank my father Dr. J. M. Harrison for lending me examples of Sturnus vulgaris poltaratskyi/ and Sturnus vulgaris balcanicus ; also Capt. C. H. B. Grant for taking my bird to Tring and comparing it with those in the National Collection there, and Mr. B. W. Tucker for looking o,ut various references on this sub- species. (114) NOTES. CARRION-CROWS AND ROOKS NESTING ON ELECTRIC PYLONS. Although Carrion-Crows (Corvus c. corone) and Rooks ( Corvus f. frugilegus) have been recorded occasionally as nesting on electric pylons, it may be of interest to record that as a result of observations by Mr. A. E. Billett at Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, in 1944, it was ascertained that both species were breeding thus in that area. Single nests were located in mid-April on nine of a total of fifteen pylons over a distance of if miles and, though the actual identity of the birds was not then determined, there was evidence to show that all the nests were in use. On May 4th, when visiting the district with Mr. Billett, l found that four of the nests had been deserted. Of the remainder, four were occupied by Rooks and the fifth by Carrion-Crows. In each case the nest was at the top of the pylon — about 55 feet up. Some were bulky structures resting on a conveni- ently shaped cup at the apex of the framework, and were plainly visible at a considerable distance. Others appeared to consist of little more than a few sticks lining the cup and could easily be passed by unnoticed. H. H. Davis. GOLDEN ORIOLE IN INVERNESS-SHIRE. On July 13th, 1944, a Golden Oriole ( Oriolus 0. oriolus) was seen by my wife at Bracara on the north shore of Loch Morar, Western Inverness-shire. The bird was on the ground when lirst seen and flew up into some trees when disturbed. It was described as about the size of a thrush, golden yellow in colour, with black on the wings, and was positively identified by Mrs. Leckie as a male Golden Oriole from a plate in Kirkman and Jourdain’s British Birds. The description of the note of the species coincided with a bird- call which I had heard and had puzzled me several times at Bracara, and there is some evidence that the bird had been about in the locality from the beginning of June. William Leckie. EGG-SHELL DISPOSAL OF GREENFINCH. Whilst watching a Greenfinch’s ( Clitoris ch. clitoris) nest on July 13th, 1944, in which two of the eggs had already hatched, I noticed the hen bird breaking up and eating the shell of the third and last egg. The paper on egg-shell disposal by C. and D. Nethersole- Thompson ( anted , Vol. xxxv, p. 196) makes no reference to this habit in the Greenfinch. J. R. M. Tennent. [It may be noted that eating of egg-shells as an alternative to removal is recorded in most other common finches. — Eds.] AQUATIC WARBLER IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE. On August 6th, 1944, an Aquatic Warbler (Acrocephalus paludicola) was seen by one of us (W.R.P.) in a reed- bed at Slough Sewage Farm. It was identified by the sharply defined broad buff band VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 115 down the centre of the crown, but other characteristics of the species were not definitely observed. The bird was seen by T.B. on August gth. He paid particular attention to immature Sedge- Warblers in the vicinity. Some of these were decidedly pale on the crown, but the central band appeared broader and ill-defined and in every bird observed contained at least slight brown flecks : there was no trace of this in the Aquatic. On August ioth R.H.R. spent about two hours by the reeds and located the Aquatic Warbler after about 20 minutes. Subsequently it was seen several times as it came to the reed tops to rest or preen. It kept mostly to one area of the bed, sometimes making short flights of a few yards, and at least twice it was under observation for a couple of minutes or so. Notes taken on the bird were as follows : — “ This [crown] stripe and the superciliaries are quite distinct /and yellowish : those of the Sedge-Warbler are whitish. Besides this the Aquatic is a distinctly more colourful bird. The upper-parts are more tawny and the under-parts, especially flanks, quite yellowish. After seeing it a couple of times I was able to pick it out by the colour even when it flew. The Sedge- Warblers appeared dull in comparison. On occasions I also had the two species close together and then the striations on the Aquatic’s back were seen to be much more distinct against the tawny background.” The striations on the breast were not obvious and from this and the yellowness of the plumage it seems probable that it was a bird of the year. T. Bispham, W. R. Philipson, R. H. Ryall. ICTERINE WARBLER SEEN IN WILTSHIRE. To my complete amazement, on walking out of the garden door of my present residence in a very quiet and secluded part of Salisbury town (practically in the Cathedral Close), at 6.35 p.m., D.B.S.T., on July nth, 1944, I was greeted by the loud and extremely distinc- tive song of what I could only ascribe to an Icterine Warbler (. Hippolais icterina ) coming from a dense patch of hawthorn, copper beech, lilac and syringa, on the boundary edge of my small garden. At first all my efforts to get a clear view of the bird failed, as it kept 1 dodging about, as it sang, amid dense greenery some fifteen feet from the ground. Then the song ceased, but I had by now retrieved my Zeiss glasses and I patiently sat down to watch. I was finally rewarded by a quick but very clear view of a conspicuously yellow- breasted Warbler that was larger than any British Phylloscopus. This view at once satisfied any doubts lest a Marsh-Warbler or other acrocephaline songster might, by chance, have strayed into the garden from the River Avon some two hundreds of yards away. I should like to add that I knew the Icterine -extremely well in France during the last German war and met with it again as a passage migrant just outside the border of S.W. Transylvania, much more recently. I have never forgotten the remarkable chattering and discordant notes of its cheerful song. I have not overlooked the fact that the IK) BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Melodious Warbler (H. polyglotta) is almost indistinguishable from the Icterine Warbler by appearance in the held. The song, however, which I knew extremely well in S. Spain in former years, is much less vehement and harsh and I do not think I have made a mistake in identification. Subsequently I again heard a very brief snatch of song from this bird. This was just outside my boundary fence, at 12.45 p m. on the 12th, but I failed to see it again. W. M. Congreve. UNUSUAL NEST LINING USED BY DARTFORD WARBLER. On May 1st, 1944, 1 found a remarkably beautiful nest of a Dartford Warbler ( Sylvia undata dartfordiensis ) deep down in dense gorse, on a north Hants heath. The four eggs it contained made an amazing contrast against a beautiful pink lining. I could see that the lining was of some sort of fibrous root or stem, but it was only some two months later that my botanist brother brought to my house a plant of Heath Dodder (Cuscuta epithymum ) with reddish, thread-like stems. I at once recognized the fact that the nest in question was thickly lined with stems of Heath Dodder, which grows commonly on the heath where the nest was seen. The Handbook of British Birds does not mention this plant as a lining for Dartford Warblers’ nests. W. M. Congreve. THREAT DISPLAY OF SONG-THRUSH AT NEST. When ringing nestlings I have twice seen a Song-Thrush (T Urdus c. ericetorum ) adopt the threat display described by Major G. E. Took ( antea , p. 36). In each case the bird left the nest reluctantly and assumed a highly inflated appearance with bill-snapping, exactly as described, one on the ground and the other on a branch only a few feet from the nest. Perhaps other bird-ringers will have observed the same performance. J. A. G. Barnes. With reference to Major G. E. Took’s note (antea, p. 36), I write to record a similar incident. On April 29th, 1944, in company with Roger Glover, I visited the nest of a Song-Thrush (Turdus e. ericetorum ) in an apple tree. When we reached the tree the bird flew on to a branch near the nest and begati snapping its beak and giving the alarm-note with all its feathers puffed up in much the same way as described by Major Took. John Cudworth. EARLIER SINGING OF BLACKBIRD IN TOWNS. I spent January 23rd-3ist, 1944, in the country near Cuckfleld, Sussex, during which time I did not hear any Blackbirds ( Turdus m. menda ) singing. But on my return to London on January 31st, I heard four Blackbirds in full song during an hour’s walk in and near St. James’s Park. This observation is not conclusive, but supports my previous impression that Blackbirds commence their spring song earlier in the centre of towns than they da in the country. It may be tentatively suggested that the warmer temperature is a factor involved. ' David Lack. VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. J 17 EXTRAORDINARY EGG PRODUCTION BY A ROBIN. In May, 1944, a Robin ( Erithacus rubecula melophilns ) built a nest in an old strawberry basket in a garage at West Wickham, Kent, and proceeded to lay no less than twenty eggs. Towards the end of this performance the eggs were three deep in the nest and the bird had great difficulty in balancing herself on the pile. She' was quite tame and used to be seen each morning about 8.30 to 9 a.m. (D.S.T.), when she would add another egg, but she showed no inclination to sit. Between about every six or seven eggs she took an interval of a few days. When the number of eggs had reached twenty she was, I think, disturbed by a cat and never returned. The eggs were counted after this and are in my possession. H. W. Shove. [We do not know of any parallel to this astonishing case. It is known that a number of birds can be induced to lay a large number of eggs by removing one or more daily, and Aflalo (A Sketch of the Natural History ( Vertebrates ) of the British Islands, 1898) induced a Robin to lay ten or more eggs in this manner. It thus appears that when the full clutch is laid some physiological process, operating through a sensory channel, possibly visual, but perhaps more probably tactile, inhibits the laying of further eggs. It is evident that in this case there was a breakdown of the normal inhibitory mechanism, but more than this it does not seem possible to say in view of our present imperfect understanding of the nature of the inhibition. — B.W.T.] KITE IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE. On August 7th, 1944, while walking near the Northampton Sewage Farm at Ecton, I saw a large hawk gliding in wide circles rather high up. The' flight distinctly reminded me of that of a Buzzard (. Buteo b. buteo), but the shape, even at first glance, was quite different instead of the blunt, rounded, moth-like wings of the Buzzard it had longer and less blunt wings, and when I examined it through binoculars I saw that the tail was deeply forked. I watched it for about/ fifteen minutes, but it came no lower. How- ever, half an hour later I again caught sight of it and this time for about five minutes at a much lower height, low enough to see the large grey-white patch on the underside of each wing, clinching the identification of the bird as a Kite ( Milvus m. milvus ). I. J. Ferguson Lees. WOOD-PIGEONS’ NESTS WITH THREE EGGS. With reference* to I. J. Ferguson Lees’s note on Wood-Pigeons’ (Columba p. palumbus ) nests with three eggs ( antea , pp. 38-39), I write to record that on June 6th, 1944, while working for the Wood-Pigeon Investigation I found a Wood-Pigeon sitting on one egg ;• on revisiting the site on July 15th there was a Wood-Pigeon sitting on three eggs in the same nest. One of the eggs was clearly / 118 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. far more incubated than the other two and was presumably addled. I have no means of knowing whether it was the same bird or whether another bird had subsequently laid two eggs in the same nest after the first had deserted. The first egg measured 40.7 x 29.55 mm and the volume was 18.2 cc. The other two measured 37.4 x 28.05 mm< volume 15.4 cc and 37.75 x 27.7 mm, volume 15.2 cc. I am indebted to Mr. H. N. Southern for kindly supplying these figures of measurement. Edwin Cohen. With reference to the notes on this subject, I found a Wood-Pigeon’s (' Columba p. palumbus) nest containing three eggs on June 18th, 1928, in the parish of Tilshead, Wilts, on a hedge about 5 ft. up. I still have these eggs and one is slightly smaller than the other two. John S. Reeve. ACQUIRED FEEDING HABIT OF BLACK-HEADED GULL. Black-headed Gulls (Lams r. ridibundus) follow a plough and have other acquired feeding habits, but the following was new to me. On June 15th, 1944, I crossed from Leamington to Yarmouth, Isle of Wight, on the ferry boat. As the boat started to move down the river, Black-headed Gulls began to collect and to show excitement. They followed along the mud banks of the river which were exposed as the tide was low, and settled on the edge of the water wherever the bow wave produced by the vessel caused miniature waves. Once the waves ceased at any particular place, the gulls left and followed the ship along to another favourable place. The birds on several occasions anticipated the arrival of the bow wave, flying along rather ahead of the vessel and settling in expectation of its arrival. This indicates that the habit is of long standing. It is an interesting extension of the bird’s normal habit of feeding on the edge of the waves with an incoming or receding tide. David Lack. DIVING OF BLACK-HEADED GULL. Diving of Black-headed Gulls (Larus r. ridibundus ) for food has been shown to be not uncommon under favourable conditions (antea, Vol. xxxvi, pp. 183, 228), but on April 22nd, 1944, at a nesting site on a Cheshire mere, I noticed that in addition to the usual display, described in The Handbook and in F. B. Kirkman’s Bird Behaviour, some gulls were giving an exhibition of diving which appeared to me to have definite display significance. A bird would rise from the water to a height of four or five feet, and then dive vertically with almost opened wings. It was a spectacular plunge but it did not carry the bird deep, and the wing tips were usually just visible. The bird was under water for a very short time and came up carrying something in its beak, perhaps weed or a water creature, which it held aloft with upstretc.hed neck. A second gull, perhaps a female, would then swim round the diving bird with neck outstretched in the usual “ forward ” display, described by VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 119 Kirkman. If this was begging it was not often successful, as the prize was usually swallowed by the diving gull. In the commotion and movement of birds it was difficult to follow the fortunes of individuals, but I had the impression that the diving and subsequent behaviour was confined to relatively few pairs. However, I saw it often enough to be confident of the details described. The performance seemed to me more than diving for the sake of food. There was a more noticeable air of excitement about the birds taking part than among those around them, even taking into account the usual excitement in a gullery. It is of interest that I saw this behaviour only on this occasion, soon after the gulls resumed tenancy of the gullery (there were no gulls there on April ioth). On visits to the gullery a week later, and subsequently, there was no diving, only the usually described display. P. J. Askey. BREEDING OF KITTIWAKE AND LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL IN DORSET. To Mr. Leva Green (Portland) and Mr. A. Blinn (Weymouth) must be given the credit of being the first to record the breeding of the Kittiwake (. Rissa t. tridactyla ) and the British Lesser Black-backed Gull {Lams fuscus graellsii ) in the County of Dorset. On June 26th, 1937, Mr. G. M. Spooner (Weymouth) saw about eight adult Kittiwakes among thirty birds of the species flying about the cliffs on the west side of Portland near the Bill. On July ioth he only saw two immature birds there and it was concluded that no nesting had taken place. On June 15th, 1944, Blinn lowered Green (who had noticed Kittiwakes in increasing numbers about the cliffs for a few years past), over the cliffs, and eggs were found. It was estimated that about eight pairs were nesting, but many more were about the cliffs, perhaps thirty pairs. • On July 5th, Mr. W. J. Ashford (Blandford) went to the cliffs with Green and verified the record, seeing both birds and eggs. Kittiwakes began to colonize Berry Head in Devon some 50 miles west of Portland about the year 1930 and now over 200 pairs breed there, so perhaps the Devon colony is overflowing and colonizing Portland, where, however, breeding has not been established until 1944. Messrs. Blinn, Green and Ashford have also established the fact that two pairs of Lesser Black-backed Gulls nested in the west cliffs of Portland in 1944. Green , saw a bird sitting on three eggs on June 12th and another pair had eggs not far off, and Blinn and Ashford also saw the .birds and eggs, and the identity of the species was verified. At the end of June, Blinn also saw a Lesser Black-backed Gull sitting on eggs at Bats Head, some eight miles east of Weymouth. This species-has often been seen among colonies of Herring-Gulls on the Dorset coast (where I have noticed them myself) , and most probably has bred in past years, though the fact had not been definitely established. F. L. Blathwayt. 120 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Gannet ix Gloucestershire in June. — Mrs. Audrey Lane informs us that on June 13th, 1944, she identified an adult Gannet (Sula bassana ) which" had been found dead with a broken wing in a field at Aston Subedge, near Campden, Gloucestershire. Mr. A. J. Harthan subsequently opened the bird and found the stomach empty. As the prevailing wind at the time was (and had been for several days) N.E., the bird may have been driven inland from the east coast rather than from the nearer coast of Wales. The time of year is unusual for an inland occurrence. Herring-Gulls nesting on a house roof. — Mr. W. Walmesley White informs us of a Herring-Gull’s ( Lams a. argentatus) nest on a flat portion of the roof of a house at Budleigh Salterton, Devon. At the time of writing it contained one young bird hatched about July 15th. This is the second case within the recorder’s experience at the place named, the first (in 1923) being mentioned in The Hand- book. Another instance, in Cornwall, is recorded in British Birds, Vol. xxxvii, p. 120. Moorhen chasing Stoat in defence of young. — In connexion with Col. R. Sparrow’s observation of a Moorhen ( Gallinula ch. chloropus) chasing a Stoat in defence of its young ( antea , p. So), Mrs. D. A. MacAlister informs us of a somewhat similar incident which she witnessed in June some ten years ago on the River Lark, near Icklingham, Suffolk. She heard a great commotion among a party of Moorhens and saw one of them chasing a Stoat along the opposite bank and then driving it across the river with outspread, splashing wings. The Stoat continued its hunting not at all perturbed. LETTERS RAVENS NESTING IN A ROOKERY. To the Editors of British Birds. Sirs, — With reference to the note under this heading [antea, p. 53), I found a pair of Ravens breeding in a similar situation in mid-Wales during early April, 1929. The Raven’s nest was situated in a tree about 30 yards from a rookery of eighteen nests. A. J. Harthan. CHAFFINCH NORMALLY SINGLE-BROODED. To the Editors of British Birds. Sirs, — Mr. P. R. Cox in his article " A Statistical Investigation into Bird Song ” [antea, p. 3), assumes that the Chaffinchis double-brooded, but The Handbook of British Birds (1938) gives no such authority, as the following quotation shows : — " some late nests may be second broods but not general.” Like other species of small passerines, Chaffinches will make repeated attempts to rear a brood, and considering the number of nests that are destroyed one way or another, the number of late nests is no greater than one would expect to find. Certainly the great majority of Chaffinches do not attempt to rear a second brood and I have yet to prove a single contrary case. If this correction be accepted, then in the case of this species the single song peak corresponds. G. Charteris. BIRD LOVERS’ MANUALS BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. “ remarkable for its clarity of statement and distinction of style.” — The Times Lit. Supp. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- net. THE LEFE OF THE ROBSN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. ” It is impossible here to do justice to the painstaking research and wide knowledge revealed in this book.” — The Field. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7 6 net. SPORTS AND PASTIMES LIBRARY A New Volume ready shortly FISHING FOR TROUT AND SALMON BY TERENCE HORSLEY Fishermen whether members of the Fleet Air Arm or not are likely to enjoy Lt. Cdr. Horsley’s ease of manner when imparting the lessons of experience in waters of the kind open to sportsmen with limited purses. A theory is seldom stated in this book without its immediate relation to practice. Tackle, seasons, temperature, the habits of fish, and ways of water, directly or indirectly are illustrated by diagrams or photographs to help along the information. 1 0/6 net. Reprints are ready of three other volumes in this series. 1 0/6 net each FLY FISHING by W. KEITH ROLLO. CARD GAMES by H. PHILLIPS & B. C. WESTALL. LIFEBOATS AND THEIR CONVERSION by C. E. TYRRELL LEWIS. Reprints of other titles will be available shortly. Please give the name of the Bookseller whom you would like us to advise. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., 326, HIGH HOLBORN, W.C.l ANEU5TPecrCD*mG^ZIPiE DEV^ffllErLYT^TnEBIRDS ^(9NTIlEDM15n HST^ M0NTHIY ls9d. YEARLY- 20 s. 326HCGH HOLBOFNENDON H F & GW1T HEFVBY LTD SONGS OF WILD BIRDS BY E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by JULIAN HUXLEY. With two double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge- Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. Wonderfully successful gramophone records of British Birds singing in their natural Haunts. — Nature. 30s. net. Postage 8d. By the same authors MORE SONGSOFWILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood- Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle- Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “ The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. “ All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. “ To have the haunting cry of the Little Owl and the wild cry of the Curlew in one’s study of a night in London has been forme a fantastic piece of pure magic.” — News Chronicle. BRITEmiRDS With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, “The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED BY Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 7, Vol. XXXVIII., December i, 1944. PAGE The Manx Shearwater on Lundy. By H. N. Southern and B. W. Tucker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 Some Observations on a tame Robin. By M. Brooks-King .. 130 Notes : — Disturbance of coition by Rook (David Lack) . . .. .. 133 Curious feeding behaviour of Magpies (Mrs. Kathleen Gough) . . 133 A wild-caught Goldfinch-Linnet hybrid (J. Staton) . . . . 133 Observations on Crested Larks’ nests in Southern Italy (P. A. Clancey) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 134 Strange nesting site of Bearded Tit (Jim Vincent) .. .. 134 Cliff nesting of House-Martin in N. Devon (N. V. Allen) .. 134 Swifts scavenging in House-Martins’ nests (Mrs. Margaret V. Gilbert) ;. 135 Great Spotted Woodpecker climbing a man (Howard Bentham) 135 Qsprey in the Isle of Bute (Lord David Stuart) . . . . 135 Herons swimming and diving (M. T. Hill, M. W. Pickering) . . 136 Early nesting of Mute Swan (M. J. W. Irwin) . . . . . . 136 Display of the Black-necked Grebe (P. I. Askey and Major A. W. Boyd) .. .. 136 Large clutch of Stock-Dove’s eggs (Major W. M. Congreve) . . 138 Temminck’s Stint in Surrey (Jeffery G. Harrison and David Seth-Smith) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 138 American Pectoral Sandpiper in Buckinghamshire (Sergeant Allan D. Cruickshank) . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 Spotted Redshank in Pembrokeshire (H. G. Alexander, W. B. Alexander and Mrs. M. C. Radford) . . . . . . . . 139 Short Notes : — Late fledging of Goldfinches. Tree-Creeper climbing a man. Dipper on seashore in August. Late fledging of Swifts. Osprey in North Devon. Grey Phalaropes in Dorset, Somerset and Cornwall. Spotted Crake and Great Snipe in Norfolk .. .. .. •• •• •• 139 Review : — The Meaning of the Names of Some British Birds and their First Use in British Ornithology . By Sir Hugh Gladstone . . 140 o (122) THE MANX SHEARWATER ON LUNDY* BY H. N. SOUTHERN and B. W. TUCKER (Plate 5). The status of the Manx Shearwater {Puffinus p. puffinus) on Lundy has long been problematical. It has been repeatedly stated to breed, but only very few observers have been able to obtain positive proof of this and no one has succeeded in establishing that it does so in any large numbers in spite of large flocks being seen off the island and much calling heard at night. The earlier statements about the species are quoted by Loyd (1925), and with regard to these it must suffice to say that it was stated to breed by Moore as long ago as 1837 an(l that D’Urban and Mathew (1895) mention it as “ very numerous ” as a breeder, but give no details. Apparently the first ornithologist to examine eggs and young was Roberts at •some date prior to 1903, when he published a little volume called The Bird Book. As his account is more explicit than that of any other writer and only receives passing notice by Loyd, who had apparently not seen it, it deserves quoting. Roberts writes “ Their nesting burrows were situated just under the brow of some loose- faced cliffs, and in some cases, at least, had an exit at the top. About three or four feet down was a chamber excavated by the birds, and the nest itself was nothing but a few dry scraps of bracken. Some of the holes that we examined contained a smooth white egg, others, a young bird Resembling a young Puffin, except for a curious tuft on the head, but in every case we found the parent bird at home, and they required careful handling, as some scars on our hands testified for many a day.” The plumage of the birds and their cries at night are also described. Unfortunately no mention is made of the numbers of eggs or young found. Cummings (1909) states, presumably from personal information, that the nesting haunt examined by Roberts was “ on the east side of the island near the granite quarries.” Another record of interest has not previously been published : on June 20th, 1903, Dr. H. B. Elton took a single egg from a number of burrows excavated. So far as he remembers, no birds were found in any of the other burrows opened. The site, as Dr. Elton most kindly informs us, was on the east side, perhaps half to a third of the way up towards the north end from the houses, and was approached down slopes overgrown with bracken, amongst which the burrows were. It will be noticed that this was about the same period as that of Roberts’s visit, and all the evidence points to the locality having been the same. Dr. Elton was taken there by the gardener to the then owner, the late Mr. Heaven, showing that the colony was known to people on the island. The next observer to find eggs was Loyd (1925), who writes : — “Years ago the colony was at the north end of the island, but that ground was deserted, probably during the first decade of the present century or a little * Publication of the British Trust for Ornithology. VOL. XXXVIII.] MANX SHEARWATER ON LUNDY. 123 later,* and a new spot chosen, in his efforts to discover which the writer experienced the greatest possible difficulty and weeks of disappointment, but was eventually successful. It is more than doubtful whether anyone else knows the exact or even approximate situation of the nesting site.” The colony was in fact, as Capt. Loyd has been good enough to inform us, on Puffin Slope, which, as will be seen later, was the only locality where we found definite evidence of breeding in 1942. Capt. Loyd also states that a few bred on a slope to the west of Puffin Slope, and that he had also heard birds grunting below the Quarries (on the east side), but had not investigated this area closely. The figure of fifty pairs, given tentatively in his book, Capt. Loyd is now inclined to think may have been an over-estimate. Evidence of breeding is also available from two or three other sources. Mr. F. W. Gade informs us that in 1934 he found a young Shearwater, evidently on its way to the sea, on the terrace of Millcombe House, and in 1935 he found another in the combe just below the house. He also tells us that one of the lighthouse keepers (H. Woodruff) has found eggs, and once found a young bird inside the North Lighthouse compound. Mr. R. M. Lockley informed Mr. Witherby that he also had confirmation of breeding at the north end of the island from a lighthouse keeper, who stated that eggs were chiefly laid in holes among granite boulders and difficult to dig out. Perry (1940) has further recorded having examined photo- graphs of birds and eggs dug out by the lighthouse keepers from accessible burrows. It will be seen, therefore, that although there are positive proofs of breeding scattered over a long period of years, none of the observations so far cited gives definite evidence of anything more than a quite small, and possibly rather unstable, breeding population. Indeed Loyd’s account of his prolonged search culminating in the finding of a colony of small size is definitely against breeding on any large scale. Recently, however, Perry (1940) has asserted that great numbers breed on the island. In his map he marks breeding places at three points on the coast, Puffin Slope near the north-east end, Lametry in the south-east and an area on the east coast above Mill Combe. Each of these is credited with “ 1,000 pairs.” In the errata “ 1,000 pairs ” is altered with commendable prudence to “ a certain number,” but it is stated that approximately 1,000 pairs breed on the island. It is apparent that this is little more than a guess influenced by the numbers of birds, of the order of fifteen hundred to two thousand, seen off the island in July and we shall not lay undue stress on the figure of the estimate, but it must clearly be taken as meaning “ a very large number.” The assumption of such a large breeding population is, however, in no way substantiated in Perry’s account, and it was primarily to try and obtain proper evidence on the problem that our visit to Lundy was made. * We do not know Capt. Loyd’s evidence for this statement, but it will be noted that it does not appear to square with the experience of Roberts and Elton. BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. 124 By kind permission of the Admiralty and Mr. M. C. Harman, Messrs. W. B. Alexander, J. S. Watson and the writers spent from July 2nd to ioth, 1942, on the island. Grateful acknowledgement is made of £20 received from the British Trust for Ornithology towards the expenses of the party, this being part of a donation generously made by Mr. Harman for the study of bird life on the island. Observations and conclusions fall under the following headings. 1. Distribution. During the night of July 2nd-3rd two of us (B.W.T. and W.B.A.) ascertained that numbers of Shearwaters were landing and calling from burrows at Puffin Slope on the northern promontory of the island (see Plate 5). Accordingly most of our attention was con- centrated at this place. However, with the idea in mind that there might still be a really large colony somewhere else, a considerable amount of time was also spent at other places. The evidence from these was entirely negative, but it is worth mentioning them in some detail in order to illustrate the scope of our observations. Throughout the whole of our stay, conditions were ideal for Shearwaters : the earliest time of moon rising was about 3.45 a.m. (D.B.S.T.), and as calling usually began about 12.45 a.m. this gave plenty of time for investigations. In addition the sky was rarely clear, so that the nights were particularly dark, as those of us can testify, who made the long and rough journey up the whole length of the island about midnight. (a) Slope on the west coast just south of the North Light. Visits were paid here by H.N.S., J.S.W. and B.W.T. on the night of July 4th-5th : just before midnight this slope was explored thoroughly for about an hour to see whether there were any likely burrows. Another visit was paid for a short while about 3 a.m. to find out whether any grunting birds could be heard. On each occasion results were negative. This is evidently the slope where Capt. Loyd found a few birds in the early nineteen-twenties. ( b ) Slope on the east coast between Mill Combe and the rhododendron thickets. This area is one of the three mentioned as breeding grounds by Perry. ✓ Night observations were conducted here on two evenings by W.B.A. (July 4th-5th and 6th-7th), who found that birds were passing by the whole time after 12.45 a.m., but were not landing. On the mornings of July 5th and 7th about three hours in all were spent by all four of us quartering this slope to find traces of nesting burrows. There was in fact great difficulty in finding any burrows here at all, certainly none that would support a substantial colony. On the second day every possible burrow was dug out, but nothing at all was found. Nevertheless, it should be noted that Mr. Gade’s observation of young birds in 1934 and 1935, mentioned on p. 123, shows that in those years some Shearwaters were breeding somewhere in this area. (c) Eastern Slopes from Mill Combe south to the Castle. These were visited by W.B.A. on the same nights as ( b ) above, and again, vol. xxxviii. ] MANX SHEARWATER ON LUNDY. 125 although birds were passing and calling continuously above and below him, there was no sign of any of them landing. (d) Slopes below the Castle, west of Lametry Bay. Several visits were paid here at various times, and the ground was carefully examined by B.W.T. and W.B.A. This is another area which Perry marks as the site of a large breeding colony in 1939. On no occasion could we find any trace of burrows, or even of birds. In fact W.B.A. particularly noted, during his night patrols of the cliffs above the Harbour that the Shearwaters seemed to go no further south than the Castle. (e) Slope on the west coast by the Battery. This point was visited on the night of July 7th-8th by J.S.W., who stayed making observa- tions from 12. 30-1. 30 a.m. Shearwaters were passing along the cliffs here, just as they were on the south-east side, but were not landing. (/) Slope on the east coast near the road to the quarries. This place is some distance south of the Gannet Rock, and was visited by B.W.T. on the same night and for about the same period as ( e ) above. This is the locality where Roberts’s colony is said to have been and where Capt. Loyd tells us that he has heard birds grunting. The area is of course a large one, densely covered with bracken, and it was impossible to work the whole of it, so a strategic point was selected for observation about half way along. The result was the same as elsewhere : birds were passing along at intervals the whole time, but there was no evidence of their landing. (g) Slopes between Puffin Slope and Gannet Rock. For about two hours on the afternoon of July 8th H.N.S. and J.S.W. combed these slopes and dug out a number of burrows (see Table), but no sign of Shearwaters was found. Thorough searches during the day are probably not as good as being present at night and watching for landing birds, but on Puffin Slope at least there was evidence in the shape of feathers lying around the holes, which would certainly have given away any large colony. Therefore, apart from possible odd birds or insignificant groups (Capt. Loyd mentions one bird inhabiting a burrow near the North Light steps) it is clear that during 1942 the Shearwaters were concentrated only at Puffin Slope and were only passing other parts of the island during their calling flights. 2. Numbers. It was impossible to arrive at any worthwhile estimate of the population which was circulating round the island, though it may be said that the general effect of the calling was far less noisy than at regular colonies. During the afternoon of July 8th, numbers of Shearwaters were observed at sea off the north end of the island. A count of those which were positively identifiable as Shearwaters, came to 230, but still greater numbers (of the order of 1,500-2,000) appeared to be present further out, though these were too far away to put their identification beyond doubt. Such flocks as these have 126 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. no doubt encouraged other observers ( e.g . Perry) to assume that there must be a large breeding population on Lundy, but Lockley (1942) has shown how far the feeding grounds of this species may be away from the nesting site. On Puffin Slope 19 holes were known to be occupied at night. If each of these represents two birds and a further 12 are added for single birds sitting about, we get a minimum figure of 50 for the numbers that were actually visiting the slope. It is of interest to notice that Mr. Gade informs us that variations in the number of birds heard calling in different years support the view that the numbers breeding, or at any rate visiting the island, fluctuate considerably. Thus, 1943 and 1944, on this basis, have been scarce years, whereas 1934 and the three succeeding years were years of abundance. Mr. Gade’s impressions would naturally be based principally on calling heard near his house at Mill Combe, and it may be recalled that 1934 and 1935 were the years in which he came across young birds in that area. He further informs us that notwithstanding what has been said above the number of birds seen off the island by day has been much as usual in 1944, viz. about 1,000-1,500, showing that there is no necessary relation between the number of birds seen on the water and those nesting. 3. Status of the Puffin SlopL Colony. Observations were made during the following periods : — July 2nd, 4-7 p.m. ; July 3rd, midnight-2 a.m. and 3-7 p.m. ; July 5th, midnight-2.45 a.m. and 3-5 p.m. ; July 7th, 2-4.30 p.m. ; and July 8th, 11 a.m. -5 p.m. Generally speaking we aimed to arrive at the colony just before the calling began. This was very regular during the short time > that we were on the island and odd birds had generally started by 12.45 a-m- J within a few minutes this had swelled to quite a chorus, and by 1 a.m. calling was at its height. On the night of July 7th, when H.N.S. waited until daybreak before returning from the colony the calling ceased almost as suddenly just about the time the moon rose. On occasions when observers were scattered over the island at different points, there was remarkable coincidence in the times at' which they reported the beginning of activity. As soon as calling was well under way occasional birds would start to land ; some of these remained just sitting in one place ; on rare occasions one was actually noted to disappear into a burrow. Such a burrow would be marked at once with a peg and a small square of white paper. Generally, however, the way of locating occupied burrows was by listening for the birds calling inside. The next day these burrows were excavated, or at least an attempt was made to excavate them, since, especially in the case of the holes higher up the slope, granite boulders sometimes defied any attempts to get to the depths of the burrow. Where digging was moderately straightforward each burrow was excavated to the end, which usually meant for a length of 9-12 feet, since there was commonly a long British Birds, Vol. XXXVIII., PI. 5 Upper — Site of Shearwater colony. Puffin Slope, Lundy. Lower — Nestling Manx Shearwater, Puffin Slope, July 3rd, 1942. (Photographed by H. N. Southern), vol. xxxviil] MANX SHEARWATER ON LUNDY. 127 extension behind the nest site, sometimes leading out to another exit. Of the burrows positively known to be occupied 13 were opened up completely and as this number constituted two-thirds of all holes known to be occupied, the results may be considered sufficient to give a proper picture of the stage of reproductive activity in the colony. A number of burrows were also chosen at random for excavation. The results are summarized in the Table. Number of burrows Locality How Traced Contents 3 Puffin Slope. By crowing. Old nest and two birds. I do. do. New nest, chick and one adult. I do. do. Old nest and fresh droppings. I do. do. Old nest and new feathers. I do. Dug at random. Dead ad. Shearwater. I do. do. Old nest and chick skeleton. I do. do. Puffin's sucked egg out- side ; nothing inside. I do. do. Two adult Puffins. 6 do. By crowing. ^Nothing. I do. Adult outside. do. 12 do. Dug at random. do. 2 Next slope to E. do. do. 5 Slope nr. Gannet Rock. do. do. 36 It will be seen from this summary that only one burrow was found to have a chick. Furthermore when we had become used to the characteristic noise made by this chick at night (a whickering “ swee-wee-wee ” noise), and to the persistence and carrying power af it, it is highly improbable that we should have missed any other cuch note on Puffin Slope. It looks therefore as if the proportion af Shearwaters which bred successfully on Lundy in 1942 was very 'small. In this case, of course, the main interest centred on the activity of the birds which were occupying empty burrows. Three such burrows retained their occupants during the day, and we were able do examine them and determine that in two cases the two occupying birds were in fact a male and a female. This does not, of course, nean that all the occupied burrows apart from the one with the :hick were being visited by a similar pair of birds, but it is probable :hat a good proportion were. The problem arises as to whether these birds were pairs, which had ittempted to breed and had lost their egg or chick (petrels lay only 128 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. once during the season), or whether they were immature birds, which were indulging in preliminary courtship activities before coming into full breeding condition in the following year. Lockley (1942) has shown that there is an interval of a year or two before the Shearwater starts to breed and also that, once started, it breeds every year ; therefore the above two possibilities seem the only ones to explain this curious state of affairs. On the material at present available to us it is probably impossible to settle the matter with complete certainty, but we wish to direct attention to the problem as one of very great interest from the points of view of ecology and reproductive physiology. Our detailed evidence, though incomplete, will be discussed in another publication. Two pairs of these “ unemployed ” birds were killed and taken back for examination ; the testes of the males and the ovaries and oviducts of the females were remarkably small, the former measuring about 7x4 mm., the latter about 9.5 x 5.5 mm., while the diameter of the oviducts at the base were 7 and 5.5 mm. This certainly strongly suggests that they were immature. It is known, however, that the reproductive organs of petrels, which lay only one egg during the season, regress at an extremely rapid rate even as early as during incubation, so the fact that these birds had such small gonads is not in itself proof that they were immature. Comparison with birds which are known to have bred would be necessary to settle this point, and we were not able to obtain any such. On the other hand the fresh-looking, sleek, unworn condition of the plumage and the clean, fresh colouring of the legs and feet lent no support to the idea that they had been engaged in nesting activities earlier in the season, and Mr. Alexander, who has had considerable experience of ringing Shearwaters, tells us that he considered they contrasted markedly in the above respects with typical nesting birds removed from burrows. We hoped also to obtain some information as to when the burrows inhabited by these “ unemployed ” birds were last used for breeding by examination of the nests. Both the new nest and several of the ones noted as “ old ” in the Table were brought back to Oxford and Mr. R. B. Freeman has kindly examined them for parasites. Un- fortunately neither category of nest contained any, so no light is thrown upon whether the “ old ” nests belonged to 1941 or 1942. The fact that the “ old ” nests were all made of bracken stems, while the new one was made of dry grass, suggests that the former, if they belonged to 1942, must have been abandoned early in the season. One further factor bearing on this problem must be mentioned, though we were unable to obtain any positive evidence about it. There are many Brown Rats (Rattus norvegicus) on the island, and these are known to move about from season to season. It is possible that the Lundy colony of Shearwaters is continually plundered by these animals, since one species or another is known to have been present on the island since at least 1775 ( teste Chanter, 1877). vol. XXXVIII.] MANX SHEARWATER ON LUNDY. 129 However no signs of occupation by rats was found on Puffin Slope during our stay. The status of the Manx Shearwater on Lundy is therefore rather a curious one. The colony has been there for many years, but there is no evidence that it has ever been large, and in 1942 only one out of 13, and probably out of 19, burrows contained a chick. The situation is similar to that reported by Lockley (1942, p. 145) for Gt. Saltee Island, so it is clear that the condition is not unique. What makes it so remarkable is the length of time during which the birds have been known on Lundy, for this suggests that it is not merely a case of the early stages of colonization. References. Chanter, J. R. (1877). Lundy Island: a Monograph, Descriptive and Historical, with Notices of its Distinguishing Features in Natural History. London. Cummings, B. F. (1909). " Notes on the Fauna of Lundy Island.” Zoologist, 1909, pp. 441-446. D’Urban, W. S. M. and Mathew, M. A. (1895). The Birds of Devon. London. Lockley, R. M. (1942). Shearwaters. London. Loyd, L. R. W. (1925). Lundy, Its History and Natural History. London. Moore, E. (1837). “ On the Web-footed Birds of Devonshire.” Mag. Nat. Hist., new series, Vol. i, pp. 360-366. Perry, R. (1940). Lundy, Isle of Puffins. London. Roberts, A. J. R. (1903). The Bird Book. London. (130) SOME OBSERVATIONS ON A TAME ROBIN BY M. BROOKS-KING. The following observations on a tame Robin ( Eritliacus rubecula melophilus) , covering the period between fledging and breeding, were made in 1943 and 1944. I am indebted to my mother and sister for most of the notes, my own watching being done only during my holidays. At my home the birds are fed regularly, and several have in the past come into the house for scraps. In July 1943, a young Robin, referred to as C in future, began to come into the house for food. It became very tame, taking food from the table, and even from the plate of a person sitting at a meal. It never, however, became con- fident enough to take from the hand. The food preferred at this stage was cheese or butter ; the latter preference is important, as will be seen. Cake and jam were also favoured. The moult was very late. Even by September 17th, when I left home, it was not quite complete, some speckled head feathers remaining. But before this the bird had begun to sing ; mostly a very faint sub-song, though one or two bursts of full song were heard. At the beginning of September three Robins were attempting to establish territories round the house. These were A, an old cock, B, another adult, later almost certainly identified as a hen, and C, the young bird. A and B soon settled matters, A occupying the part of the garden south and west of the house, B that to the north and east. C, being so addicted to coming into the house for food (much more so than the other two, though both came in at times), made desperate attempts to remain in the neighbourhood, but was mercilessly chased by both A and B. At this time excellent opportunities were afforded of watching the display actions of the birds, which were so used to human beings that on one occasion A, B and C postured at each other in a group at my feet. While display seemed sufficient to settle the territorial differences of A and B, C was actually attacked, and lost most of its head feathers in consequence. Finally, in desperation, C retreated into the house, where it was artificially protected by keeping the windows shut. If a window was left open, or if C ventured outside, a furious fight with one of the adult birds ensued, the latter coming into the house in search of the youngster, when able to do so. The subservience of C appeared to be due to its backward state. Once it had completed its moult, and had attained full voice, its efforts to maintain its position became more successful, and even- tually it established a territory, this territory being the house itself, both upstairs and down. Within the house C was dominant, and intruders were driven out. vol. xxxviil] OBSERVATIONS ON A TAME ROBIN. 131 Throughout the autumn and winter C spent practically the whole day in the house, and even remained indoors at night on two occasions. Its food was therefore almost entirely human, though the bird became an adept at picking flies off die ceiling. Displays and fights continued till March, and the territory was extended to the part of the garden adjoining the house on the south and east sides. On occasions C was observed to display to its reflection in a mirror and a brass coal scuttle, though such posturing was feeble compared to that used before a real rival, as though the bird realized there was no intruder, but could not help reacting to the appearance of a red breast. While full song was used in the house only when C caught sight of another Robin through a window, sub-song was almost continuous. A quiet little “ conversation ” was kept up, as the bird hopped about in search of crumbs, or sat on a screen or other perch. About the middle of March C was seen to offer, on one occasion a piece ©f grass, on a second a dead leaf, to another Robin, and then, to quote my sister, to “ dance round the recipient.” Later it was found that he (his behaviour had at last distinguished him as a male) had mated with a small hen, probably an immigrant ; she was not a known visitor to the house till she appeared with him. Courtship feeding occurred, sometimes in the house. When he could get it, C always took butter for this purpose. He would come several times in rapid succession for it, during our meal times. Whether he was feeding his mate with natural food at other times is not known. He continued this feeding during incubation, as there was no pause between his carrying of food to the hen and to his young. The nest was discovered about three days after the young had hatched, in a tuft of grass at the foot of a tree, about twenty yards from the eastern side of the house. While the hen only came to the house, for food now and then, C worked very hard whenerver food was available. Again butter or margarine were exclusively taken, when he was allowed to help himself to it. It may be noted here that while C seemed not to discriminate between the two, A, the old cock, when presented with butter and margarine, invaria- bly took butter, being able to distinguish it by sight or smell without tasting. It is of course impossible to say what proportion of the total diet of the young was represented by this food ; but from the desperate speed at which C worked when taking it, it would seem that the exceptionally dry weather had seriously reduced the supply of natural food, and that he was making up for the scanty meals that he was able to supply at other times. It was noticed that he would eat a few pieces himself, before flying away with some for his young. I have oftened wondered how the parent birds find time to feed themselves in the stress of providing food for their nestlings. Perhaps C’s method is the one usually adopted. When the young Robins fledged, they were not brought to the house, to 132 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. introduce them to their food suppfy, as I had expected. Indeed, after a few days they disappeared; and soon afterwards C was noticed to be feeding his mate again. Evidently the breeding cycle was being repeated, and a second nest was contemplated. But the frequent appearance of the hen during the following weeks suggested that this event did not take place. Later, when C had ceased to offer food to his mate, she was seen on occasions to go up to him and take food from him. A few miscellaneous observations may be noticed in conclusion. C’s knowledge of the geography of the house was remarkable. For instance, if shut out of the kitchen, by the closing of the window, he would go to the back door and up the passage, or even to a bed- room window on the opposite side of the house, and down the stairway, to reach his goal. In the matter of food, his preferences have been stated ; but his interest in new diet led him into some dangerous situations. He was known to sample floor polish ; and once, when my sister was spraying plants, he took some of the sulphate of potash that she was using. Finally, it was from watching him that it was learnt how frequently birds bathe. Even in the coldest weather, when the water in the bath was almost freezing, C took two or three baths each day. At such times he would come into the kitchen, and dry himself on the airing line in front of the stove. / (133) NOTES. DISTURBANCE OF COITION BY ROOK. I have previously ( antea , Vol. xxxiii, p. 265) given examples from the Robin ( Erithacus rubecula) and the Blackcock (. Lyrurus tetrix) of a male attempting to disturb the coition of another pair. Similar behaviour is characteristic of geese and swans, as noted particularly by Heinroth ( Verb . V. Int. Orn. Kong., 1910, p. 658). It has also been recorded in the Rook ( Corvus frugilegus) by Yeates {The Life of the Rook, 1934), but he considered that such disturbances occurred only in the case of stolen matings. On March 18th, 1944, two pairs of Rooks were feeding about 50 yards apart from each other in a field in Sussex. After brief posturing, one pair copulated, at which one member of the other pair promptly flew the intervening 50 yards and tried to drive the male off the female’s back. The intruder then flew back to the bird it was associating with, and both pairs resumed feeding. A few minutes later the first pair left, and the other pair continued feeding. This suggests that disturbance of coition is not confined to stolen matings, as the first couple gave every indication of being a normal pair. The observation also shows that courtship sometimes occurs away from the rookery, which was out of sight from the field in question. David Lack. CURIOUS FEEDING BEHAVIOUR OF MAGPIES. On July 9th, 1944, near Athenry, Co. Galway, I watched a pair of Magpies ( Pica p. pica), on the trunk of a large ash tree. They were walking up the trunk (which is practically vertical) picking at the bark. On investigation it was found that there were many small wood-lice under the moss which covers a great deal of the bark, and the marks where the birds beaks had picked at the moss were visible. The Magpies were doing this on and off for an hour— managing to cling to the rough bark, walking up some 9 or 10 feet, and then fluttering down and walking up again. They also searched a rotten stump further up the tree. Kathleen Gough. A WILD-CAUGHT GOLDFINCH-LINNET HYBRID. Late in 1943, Mr. A. K. Gill, of Underwood, Notts, drew my attention to a bird which was caught from a flock of Goldfinches near that village on October 26th, 1943. Careful examination showed plumage detail intermediate between Carduelis c. britannica and C. c. cannabina and after it died this identification was confirmed by Mr. B. W. Tucker and Mr. W. B. Alexander. The complete absence of wear in plumage ^nd claws, and the bird’s responses to cage life, as well as its general alertness and feeding habits with the Goldfinches before capture, suggest that it had been bred in the wild state. The call-note was that of cannabina. J. Staton. BRITISH BIRDS. 134 [VOL. XXXVIII. OBSERVATIONS ON CRESTED LARKS’ NESTS IN SOUTHERN ITALY. At the end of June, 1944, I located on a rocky, shrub-covered heathland in the province of Apulia, Southern Italy, a small number of nests of the Crested Lark ( Galerida cristata) which appeared to differ structurally from the type generally recorded. The nests in question were sited under short, isolated plants of a species of aromatic shrub, and were composed of coarse heath- land grasses, lined with fine rootlets. Each nest was neatly domed with similar materials, the superstructure being roughly woven and incorporating a number of the lower, and generally dead, branches of the shrub. The dome was always so constructed as to give the nestlings the maximum protection from the fierce solar rays. The area in which the nests were found is extremely dry and arid, and is not infrequently swept by violent dust storms. Larks of other genera, Melanocorypha, Lullula, Calandrella, are found on the same stretch of heathland, but I was not able to observe their nidification. P. A. Clancey. [It should perhaps be noted that although the subspecific status of the South Italian Crested Larks is somewhat uncertain, they are probably of a different race from that on the British List ( G . c. cristata). — Eds.] STRANGE NESTING SITE OF BEARDED TIT. On August 31st, 1944, I showed Lord Gage a Bearded Tits’ ( Panurus b. biarmicus ) nest built half way up the side of a shooting butt, fenced in with reeds, which contained four fresh eggs. Lesser Reed Mace was growing all round the butt, but the nest was placed inside the butt on the fence. Also only 18 inches away on the same fence a Reed- Warbler ( Acrocephalus s. scirpaceus) had built its nest and hatched out. This is a very unusual site for a Bearded Tit. I think 1944 has been one of the best seasons I ever remember for this delightful bird. I saw fifty-two one morning this summer. Jim Vincent. CLIFF NESTING OF HOUSE-MARTIN IN N. DEVON. On Saturday, August 19th, 1944, I watched about fifteen House- Martins ( Delichon u. urbica) collecting mud at Watermouth Bay, about two miles up the Bristol Channel from Ilfracombe and was surprised to see them fly over a neck of wa§te land to the sea cliffs. On this occasion I was unable, on account of time, to locate the nests. The colony was found on August 22nd, but as the tide was running high, I was unable to count the number of nests except for six which were built on the cliff face over a cave. On August 24th, I climbed down to the cave and found a further fifteen nests in the roof of the cave, the farthest nest being about eight yards inside. The floor of the cave was under water at high tide, when the water also rose to within about two feet of the roof. Three of the nests were still occupied on September 10th, 1944. This is the only instance of cliff-breeding hirundines in N. Devon that I can trace. * N. V. Allen. VOL. XXXFlII.] NOTES. 135 SWIFTS SCAVENGING IN HOUSE-MARTINS’ NESTS. At about 8 a.m. (B.S.T.) on two successive mornings at the beginning of July, 1943, I noticed a Swift {Aftus a. apus ) clinging to the edge of a House-Martin’s ( Delichon u. urbica ) nest and apparently feeding on something there. Once it put its head inside the nest and pecked about. There were young in the nest at the time. Again this year I watched a pair of Swifts on several mornings flying about the Martins’ nests and one of these several times clung to a nest and seemed to be either pecking at the mud or devouring insects. Once it entered the nest and remained there for some time with wing protruding. No Swifts nest on the house where these observations were made, but there are two small colonies in the village nearby. I should be interested to hear whether any reader of British Birds has observed similar behaviour on the part of this species. That House-Martins nests are lavishly infested with parasites both winged and wingless is common knowledge and it would seem that the Swifts were attracted by these. Margaret V. Gilbert. GREAT SPOTTED WOODPECKER CLIMBING A MAN. With reference to Col. Ryves’s note upon Tree-Creeper ( Certhia familiaris britannica ) ( antea , pp. 74-75) my own experience in the case of the Great Spotted Woodpecker ( Dryobates major anglicus ) may be of interest. I had removed four fully fledged young from the nest-cavity in order to photograph them, and placed the birds on the ground while I was erecting the camera. One bird climbed my leg and another ascended the camera-case before any attempt was made to climb a tree. All four young eventually found their way to a tree by a series of vigorous hops, and this they climbed to a height of ten or twelve feet. No attempt was made at flight. Howard Bentham. OSPREY IN THE ISLE OF BUTE. On June 10th, 1944, an Osprey ( Pandion halicetus) was observed by Mr. R. McPhee and myself on Loch Fad in Bute. From then on until August 24th, when it was last observed, it was seen frequently by many people while it was diving for fish, flying around the loch and perched on the tops of larch, Scots pine and Douglas firs. This is the first record of an Osprey in Bute. By watching where it went to eat its prey I was twice able to identify the fish it had caught, and on both occasions it was a Pike ( Esox lucius). On one occasion the entrails it left contained a Roach five inches long. In The Handbook it is not recorded as taking Pike. Loch Fad contains Perch, Roach, Trout and Pike. I wTas never able to get close enough to it to satisfy myself whether it was a juvenile or an adult, but my impression is that it was an adult. It got very little peace from other birds and was being attacked a lot by Common Terns, gulls, Oyster-catchers and Lapwing. I am told that it fished in three other lochs in the island as well as in Loch Fad. David Stuart. 136 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. HERONS SWIMMING AND DIVING. Recently I witnessed an unusual occurrence in connexion with Herons (Ardea c. cinerea). I was observing a flock of these birds, numbering about five, when three of them stalked into deep water and swam. I could distinctly see, through binoculars, that the body was entirely in the water and the neck was held high, with the beak horizontal. The birds swam about for at least two minutes and then waded back to the shore. M. T. Hill. On October 23rd, 1938, I was watching a Common Heron ( Ardea c. cinerea) on a canal bank near Skipton, Yorks. The bird had spent some time walking stealthily along the bank peering into the water, which was about two feet below the level of the bank, but had not secured any fish. Eventually it walked away from the canal, then suddenly retraced its steps. Bending forward and stretching its neck full out, it peered over into the water, immediately withdrawing the neck, but thrusting it forward again after a short pause and then again withdrawing it. Now, as before, it walked, away from the canal and then returned to peer over the edjge into the depths of the water. This time it thrust its neck down suddenly and plunged head-first into the water with a great splash, disappearing right under the surface. It came up' again almost immediately with the bill pointing upwards, holding a Roach, and swam noisily to the bank, flapping its wings frantically on the water. Having scrambled on to the bank, it gulped down the fish, shook its feathers and returned to work again. It was seen to dive into the water once more, but did not return with a fish. M. W. Pickering. [For previous records of swimming, see antea, Vol. xxiii, pp. 39 and 99, also Waterton, Essays on Natural History (Edition of 1871, p. 386), and for diving antea, Vols. xxxvi, p. 246 and xxxvii, p. 37. — Eds.]. EARLY NESTING OF MUTE SWAN. I notice in The Handbook that the breeding season of the Mute Swan ( Cygnus olor) is the “ second half of April, exceptionally rather earlier.” It may be of interest that I found a Mute Swan’s nest on March 26th, 1944, six miles S. of Ludlow, Salop. It contained seven eggs, which were being incubated. M. J. W. Irwin. DISPLAY OF THE BLACK-NECKED GREBE. During the month of April, 1944, we had the opportunity of watching in Cheshire the display of the Black-necked Grebe ( Podiceps n. nigricollis) on several occasions ; Mr. R. C. R. Allen also watched the birds closely for some hours on April 28th, and kindly sent us his notes. A pair was first seen on April 10th, and gave an occasional half- hearted display, but the birds spent most of their time apart. From VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 137 April 22nd to the end of the month, however, the birds were dis- playing whenever the pool was visited. During this period there were always three birds present (and on the 2$th four). The third bird was evidently an intruding male and was frequently attacked by one of the pair, which rushed along the surface with outstretched neck, and on several occasions dived and torpedoed the intruder from below. Once the intruder gave a “ whitt whitt ’’alarm-note as it made off. The display of the pair consisted of several distinct, but in some cases related, actions : — (1) Habit-preening. — Mainly of the flanks and scapulars and also of neck and breast. When the flanks were preened it was noticed that the bird did so on the side nearest to its companion and tended to roll and expose chestnut flanks and white under- parts. This flank-preening was not done simultaneously, but alternately as they swam side by side, one apparently imitating the other bird’s actions each time. When the breast was preened the birds swam face to face and reared up in the water high enough to show the white lower breast. (2) Head-shaking. — This was done alternately as they swam side by side and also when they were facing one another. Actions (1) and (2) were closely associated and perhaps should be regarded as one display. The “ habit-preening ” was the predominant action and the head-shaking took place for a shorter time altogether. This is in contrast to the display of the Great Crested Grebe, where the reverse is the case. (3) Stretching out of neck low over water and raising of one wing on the side nearest to the other bird ; this was seen several times on one day only. (4) Billing. — This was done face to face after the manner of the Great Crested Grebe, and at the same time the crest on the crown was raised. This was observed only once. (5) Weed presentation. — One bird brought up a piece of weed and carried it to the other, but apparently it was not actually presented and the bird soon dropped it. At the end of the month the intruder on a number of occasions displayed to one of the pair by preening and head-shaking ; the bird to which the display was made did not respond, and the other bird of the pair drove it off with some violence. Once a bird, apparently the intruder, presented a small fish, which was refused with a hissing noise. Display was last seen in the second week of June and consisted of one bout of side by side head-shaking. It was noticed that the pair dived practically simultaneously when feeding. One, which came up with a fish, was attacked by a Black-headed Gull and immediately “ crash-dived,” but it was not possible to say what happened to the fish. The three birds were still present on June 28th, and no young birds were seen this year. P. J. Askey and A. W. Boyd. 138 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. LARGE CLUTCH OF STOCK-DOVE’S EGGS. The Handbook states “ four also recorded ” as an exceedingly rare clutch for the Stock-Dove ( Columba cenas), while c/3 is not un- common ( I have myself once found that number). On August 3rd, 1944, a young friend of mine, S. R. Glazebrook, collected and sent me a set of four, slightly incubated, eggs of this species, taken from a hole 25 feet from the ground, in an elm tree at his home in the Wrexham, Dehbighshire, neighbourhood. All four eggs were equally incubated and none showed any sign of staleness. Another pair was nesting about 100 yards away in an unclimable site and the birds were always present. The eggs were not particularly even in size, but evenness in size is by no means a marked feature with the normal c/2 of the Columbidce. In this four one might have divided them into a three plus one as regards size consistency. I am of opinion that this is a genuine lay of four eggs by the same bird, but, naturally, there must be some slight doubt. The presumed same hen bird laid again in the same hole and its first- egg appeared on August 27th, followed by the second next day. No more were laid. W. M. Congreve. TEMMINCK’S STINT IN SURREY. On August 23rd, 1944, we were able to identify a Temminck’s Stint ( Calidris temminckii), at the Guildford Sewage Farm, Surrey. Much of the time it kept company with Common Sandpipers, compared with which it was strikingly smaller. Identification was made on the following points : — The upper-parts were a uniform greyish colour, the breast and belly w6re white, with a distinct grey smudge on the pectoral region. The legs were dark. When it flew, it called frequently : the note was. a quiet, short high-pitched trill. It towered to a considerable height, flew around for a few minutes, and then pitched in a nearby pit. We could not get a view of the white outerTtail feathers on the 23rd, but we were in no doubt as to the identity of the bird. It was last seen on August 26th. Jeffery G. Harrison and David Seth-Smith. AMERICAN PECTORAL SANDPIPER IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE. On August 1st, 1944, in company with Mr. T. Bispham, of Wembley, and Thomas Smith, of the U.S. Army, I saw what was undoubtedly a Pectoral Sandpiper ( Calidris melanotos) at the sewage farm near Slough. We were looking over some waders when this bird came flying past. As soon as I heard the note I said that it sounded just like an American Pectoral Sandpiper. Moreover, as the bird wheeled around us and I checked its shape, size, darkness of the central tail feathers and rump, and the sharp demarcation between the dark streaked breast and whitish underparts I repeated several times that the bird looked exactly like our American Pectoral VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 139 Sandpiper. I have carefully checked every European species and I can see none that might be confused with this one. For twenty years I have studied birds in the United States, where the Pectoral Sandpiper is a common transient. No experienced observer in our region considers it a difficult trick to identify this species in flight, especially when it gives its diagnostic note. I realize that there is always a possibility of error in a sight identification, yet I cannot help feeling certain that the bird we saw on that day was a very familiar species that had strayed to England. Allan D. Cruickshank. SPOTTED REDSHANK IN PEMBROKESHIRE. On the evening of August 25th, 1944, when on the shore of Milford Haven near Dale we heard the call-notes of a Spotted Redshank ( Tringa erythropus ) and soon afterwards the bird flew close past us in company with a Common Redshank. Its larger size, darker colouring and the lack of white on the secondaries were all noted. Mathews ( Birds of Pembrokeshire, 1894) records the species as an occasional autumn visitor to the county, but this appears to be the first record for a definite locality and date. H. G. Alexander, W. B. Alexander and M. C. Radford. Late fledging of Goldfinches. — In The Handbook the late Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain states of the Goldfinch ( Carduelis c. britannica) : “ three [broods] at times, as young found in September.” Mr. G. M. King informs us that on September 16th, 1944, at West Hagley, Worcs, he captured and ringed a young Goldfinch which was evidently only just out of the nest and was still only able to cover 12-15 yards at a flight. Later he saw others of the brood with the parents. Tree-Creeper climbing a man. — With reference to the note under this heading by Col. B. H. Ryves ( antea , p..y 4) the Report of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union Committee for Ornithology for 1943 ( Naturalist , April-June, 1944), contains the following amongst notes on the Tree-Creeper ( Certhia familiaris britannica) : — “ Two of a family of young birds being watched by Miss E. Crackels and Miss Brayshaw alighted on the sleeves of the ladies ; one bird climbed up the sleeve and on to the lady’s shoulder where it re- mained for about one minute.” Dipper on seashore in August. — Corporal P. A. Humble informs us that he saw a Dipper ( Cinclus c. gnlaris ) flying about seaweed-covered rocks at the edge of the sea at St. Cyrus, Kincardineshire, on August 26th, 1944. Though Dippers occasionally visit the shore in winter this is, in our experience, exceptional at other times. Late fledging of Swifts. — Mr. N. V. Allen reports that two young Swifts ( Apus a. apus) successfully left a nest at Ilfracombe on August 28th, 1944. 140 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Osprey in North Devon. — Mr. N. V. Allen sends us details of an Osprey [Pandion h. halicetus) which he saw at Watermouth Bay, Ilfracombe on August 26th, 1944. He informs us that an Osprey, probably the same bird, was reliably reported near Ilfracombe on August 24th, September 18th and 19th. Grey Phalaropes in Dorset, Somerset and Cornwall. — Capt. A. C. Fraser informs us that on September 2nd, 1944, he and Lt. D. Rowston watched a Grey Phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius) on the Fleet between Abbotsbury and Weymouth after a strong westerly gale had been blowing for many hours. One was also seen by Mr. H. H. Davis at Blagdon Reservoir, N. Somerset, on September 5th, another by Mr. P. J. R. Clifton at Bude, N. Cornwall, on September 7th, and one, which may well have been the same bird, by Mr. A. C. Leach at Bude on October, 19th. Spotted Crake and Great Snipe in Norfolk. — Mr. Jim Vincent writes to us that he has examined a Spotted Crake ( Porzana porzana ) which was caught in, a wire cage at Dilham, Norfolk, on September 16th, 1944, and killed in mistake for a young Moorhen. It proved to be a female and a bird of the year. On September 18th Mr. Vincent had a good view of a Great Snipe (Capella media) a^ Hickling. The bird flew past within 10 feet of him and settled about 10 yards away. When disturbed it only flew a short distance before settling again. REVIEW. « The Meaning of the Names of Some/ British Birds and Their First Use in British Ornithology. By Sir Hugh Gladstone. Dumfries : Printed for Private Circulation, 1943. This pamphlet of 35 pages contains the substance of a paper read to the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society on 23rd April, 1943. The names discussed are those commonly used for the British representatives of the Pigeon, Grouse and Pheasant families, but in addition to the particulars referred to in the title various other historical facts are included, especially the various alternative names used for the species in the past and the history of the introduction of those game-birds which are not indigenous. In a prefatory section the author gives a brief account of early books in which lists of the names of British birds appear. We note that Thomas Muffett’s Health’s Improvement contains descr iptions and observations of over one hundred wild British birds. Though not published till 1655 (fifty-one years after the death of its author) it was probably completed in 1595. Some of the names used by Muffett antedate the earliest citation by H. Kirke Swann in his Dictionary of English and Folk-Names of British Birds, 1913. It is noteworthy that he clearly distinguished the four species of pigeons, though even two centuries later they were still confused by professed ornithologists. Sir Hugh Gladstone mentions that he had considered writing a book on the subject, but has abandoned the idea on discovering that the Rev. Laurens Sargent had also made notes for a work on the English nomenclature of birds from the aspect of their etymology. Perhaps we may express the hope that these two authorities will co-operate in a work of which the present paper may be considered a sample chapter or chapters. We feel sure that Mr. Sargent will not wish to deprive us of the results of Sir Hugh’s prolonged researches on the bibliography and history of British birds and their English names. W.B.A. BIRD LOVERS’ MANUALS BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. “ remarkable for its clarity of statement and distinction of style.”— The Times Lit. Supp. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6/- net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. “ It is impossible here to do justice to the painstaking research and wide knowledge revealed in this book.” — The Field. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7/6 net. 4 SONGS OF WILD BIRDS BY E. M. NICHOLSON and LUDWIG KOCH. Introduction by JULIAN HUXLEY. With two double-sided 1 0-inch gramophone records featuring the Nightingale, Cuckoo, Blackbird, Song Thrush, Pied Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker, Robin, Wren, Hedge- Sparrow, Turtle-Dove, Wood-Pigeon, Chaffinch, Willow Warbler, Whitethroat and Great Tit. “ Wonderfully successful gramophone records of British Birds singing in their natural Haunts.- — Nature. 30s. net. Postage 8d. By the same authors MORE SONGSOFWILD BIRDS 30s. net. Postage 8d. With three double-sided 10-inch gramophone records featuring the Skylark, Woodlark, Curlew, Tree Pipit, Wood- Wren, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, Rook, Carrion Crow, Jackdaw, Magpie, Jay, Little Owl, Redstart, Chiffchaff, Mistle- Thrush, Heron, Stock-Dove, Nightjar and Blue Tit. “ The gramophone records give the results with a clarity and a grandeur that is beautifully impressive.” — Edinburgh Evening News. " All the birds are remarkably true and clear.” — The Field. “ To have the haunting cry of the Little Owl and the wild cry of the Curlew in one’s study of a night in London has been for me a fantastic piece of pure magic.” — News Chronicle. BRITBHBIRDS With which was Incorporated in January, 1917, “The Zoologist.” EDITED BY BERNARD W. TUCKER, M.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. ASSISTED by Norman F. Ticehurst, o.b.e., m.a., f.r.c.s., m.b.o.u. and A. W. Boyd, m.c., m.a., f.z.s., m.b.o.u. Contents of Number 8, Vol. XXXVIII, January i, 1945. Summary of a Report on the Distribution and Status of the Corn- Crake (Crex crex). By C. A. Norris PAGE 142 Some Observations on a remarkably coloured Heron. By Kathleen Gough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Departure of Swifts. By H. N. Southern . . . . . . . . 151 Obituary : — Jim Vincent 153 Notes : — • Bullfinch hovering when feeding (Mrs. Kathleen Gough) . . 154 Display of Chaffinch (Dr. C. J. F. Coombs) . . . . . . 154 Waxwings in Great Britain .. .. .. .. .. 154 Red-Spotted bluethroat seen in Worcestershire (Mrs. C. J. Newbery) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Oyster-catcher far from land in the Atlantic (Sub-Lieut. E. A. Duffey) ..' .. .. .. .. .. .. 155 Black Tern victimizing Coot (J. Staton) . . .. .. .. 156 Iceland Gull in Kent in July (Surgeon-Lt. M. N. Rankin) .. 156 Short Notes : — Early nesting of summer migrants in 1944. Wood-Lark on the Isle of May. Tree-Pipit eating Rowan berries. Blue-headed Wagtail breeding in Leicestershire. Nest of Tree-Creeper near ground. Nuthatch’s unusual method of attacking nut. Song-Thrush rearing two broods in same nest. Early Song-Thrush’s Nest ... ... ... ... ... 156 Reviews : — The Duck Decoys of Essex. By W. E. Glegg . . The Art of Bird Photography. By Eric Hosking and C. Newberry Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservation Society : Thirteenth Annual Report, 1943 Sixteenth Report of the Devon Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, 1943 The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist : Notes on the Local Fauna and Flora for 1943 Report on Birds observed in Hertfordshire in 1942 Ornithological Report for the County of Hampshire, 1943 London Bird Report for 1943 Report of the Cambridge Bird Club, 1943 158 158 158 159 159 159 160 160 160 (142) SUMMARY OF A REPORT ON THE DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS OF THE CORN-CRAKE (Crex crex)* BY C. A. NORRIS. Introduction. In the summers from 1933 to 1937 Corn-Crakes were present near Stratford-on-Avon, where they had not been heard since about 1920. In 1935 and 1936 they also re-established themselves in certain areas in Worcestershire. This suggested the possibility that the long decrease which was known to have occurred in many parts of England might have come to an end and it was decided early in 1938 to carry out a national inquiry under the auspices of the British Trust for Ornithology as to the past and present distribu- tion and status of the species, and the probable causes of the decreases and fluctuations in numbers. Appeals for information were published in a large number of papers and a short talk was given in the wireless News Bulletin on July 14th, 1938. Questionnaires were also circulated with a number of ornithological journals. In 1939 a special effort was made to fill gaps in the information received in the previous year, to obtain additional information from certain critical areas and to get particulars from the Continent. In 1938, 1,180 questionnaires were filled up and returned and in addition over 800 letters and postcards were received. In 1939 a further 650 questionnaires and nearly 400 letters were received. This does not include the reports from abroad, but owing to the outbreak of war these were unfortun- ately few, though, as will be seen, they provide valuable information as to the position in several continental countries. The present report deals only with the past and present status and distribution of the Corn-Crake in the British Isles and its present status in parts of western Europe. It was urged, especially by the late H. F. Witherby, that this information should be summar- ized and published before it became too much out-of-date. The organizer of the inquiry, having joined the army, had comparatively little time in which to compile a report, but with the help of his wife and W. B. Alexander a fairly complete survey of the literature of the subject was made and a report was completed before he left England. With his permission it has been revised and con- densed for publication by W. B. Alexander. It is hoped that after the war a further report on aspects of the life-history of the Corn- Crake and a discussion of the causes of its decrease in numbers will be prepared by Major Norris. The accompanying map which was prepared by him for The Handbook gives a general view of the present status of the Corn- Crake in the British Isles. It divides the country into three areas, though it will be understood that the differences between the status ♦Publication of the British Trust for Ornithology. ffivvffivw £3 still) found in isolated instances in most counties, occasionally re-establishing itself in some numbers but USUALLY Eg LOCAL DISTRIBUTION OF VARYING INTENSITY. CONSIDERABLE DECREASE. | FOR SHORT PERIODS ONLY. ^NUMEROUS. LITTLE OR No| CHANGE OF STATUS BEYOND LOCAL FLUCTUATIONS vol. xxxviii.] REPORT ON CORN-CRAKE. 143 of the Corn-Crake in these areas are not in reality separated by hard and fast lines. In most of the northern and western Scottish islands and north-west Ireland the Corn-Crake is still numerous and there appears to have been little or no change of status beyond Map to show Distribution of the Corn-Crake in the British Islands. {Compiled and Drawn by C. A. Norris). local fluctuations. In the greater part of Ireland, Scotland, northern and north-west England and most of Wales the Corn-Crake still occurs locally, but has greatly decreased. From eastern, central and southern England and south-east Wales the Corn-Crake has R 144 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. practically disappeared as a regular breeding species, though in most counties pairs or small colonies occasionally establish them- selves and breed for a year or two. Historical. The earliest mention of the Corn-Crake in the British Isles is that of Turner (1544), who called it the Daker Hen and wrote : “ I have not seen or heard it anywhere in England, save in Northum- berland alone.” In 1602 Carew said it was found in Cornwall and in 1603 Owen recorded that it bred in Pembrokeshire. In 1667 Merrett wrote that though Turner only knew of it in Northumber- land “ I remember to have seen and heard it at Wheatley five miles from Oxford whilst in 1677 Charleton wrote that it “ has scarcely ever been observed by more recent observers ” than Turner. In 1678 Ray wrote that it was “very common in Ireland but more rare with us ” in England and in his Synopsis published in 1713 after his death he added : “ Tancred Robinson tells us he has often found Land Rails in northern Yorkshire.” In 169S Martin stated that it bred at St. Kilda and in 1700 Leigh in his Natural History of Lancashire, Cheshire and the Peak said it was “ common in these parts.” The foregoing statements suggest that in the 16th and 17th centuries the Corn-Crake was very uncommon in the greater part of England south of Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Cheshire, but was much commoner in the north (and perhaps also in Wales), and very plentiful in Ireland. During the 18th century we have records that it was “ pretty often met with ” in fields in Northamptonshire (Morton, 1712), “ very common in summer ” in Co. Cork (Smith, 1750), “ frequent in vale-meadows ” in Northumberland (Wallis, 1769), abundant throughout Caithness (Pennant, 1771) and frequent in summer in Co. Dublin, though rare in England (Rutty, 1772). In 1776 Pennant wrote that “ they are in greatest plenty in Anglesea, where they appear about the 20th of April, supposed to pass over from Ireland, where they abound. They are found in most of the Hebrides and the Orkneys.” In 1785 he added that they were found in summer in the Shetlands. Latham in the same year quoted Pennant’s statements and added : “ Few places in England are destitute of them in summer ; but no where what may be called common.” His contemporary Gilbert White states that at Selborne they were only occasionally met with in autumn, but adds : “ Land-rails used to abound formerly, I remember, in the low wet bean fields of Christian Malford in North Wilts, and in the meadows near Paradise Gardens at Oxford.” In 1794 Heysham recorded that they nested in Cumberland and Lambert that they bred in Wilts “ and I believe everywhere in England.” It is clear therefore that in the 18th century, their breeding range in England extended south to North- amptonshire, Oxfordshire and Wiltshire, though they were obviously local, and much less common than in Ireland, Scotland and Anglesey. In Sussex Markwick only knew of them as autumn visitors, giving the vol. xxxviil] REPORT ON CORN-CRAKE. 145 average of 26 years’ observation as: First seen Sept. 1; Last seen Oct. 20. Writers in the first half of the 19th century did not provide much additional information as to the status of the Corn-Crake. In 1806 Neill stated that it was “ exceedingly abundant in Orkney, and also pretty common in Shetland.” About 1814 Lamb wrote that in Berkshire it was “ common in the summer and autumn,” whilst in 1816 Polwhele said that in Cornwall it was “ never abundant.” In 1824 Latham wrote “ nor is this bird at all plentiful in England, though in some parts much more so than in others.” In 1826 Sheppard and Whitear wrote that it “ occasionally breeds in Norfolk and Suffolk ; is most common in autumn, but is by no means abundant.” In 1831 Rennie said ; “I have never heard it in the vicinity of London, nor in Wiltshire, though it is said to be plentiful in the west of England but in 1834 Jesse said they were “ far from being scarce ” in the neighbourhood of Hampton Court. Remarks such as this may mean only that they were frequently shot by sportsmen in autumn, not that they nested in the vicinity. Hays in 1831 said they were “ rather scarce in the neighbourhood ” of Shepscombe, Glos. Selby wrote in 1833 : " They are very plentiful throughout Wales, the north of England, and Scotland. In the Highlands of Scotland and the Hebrides, they also abound, and their migration extends to the Orkney and Shetland Isles.” He also stated that “ upon the banks of the Trent below Newark, the meadows are annually visited by great numbers ; and I have, in the course of an hour, killed 8 or 10 in a single field.” This statement presumably refers to the autumn. In 1835 Jenyns wrote that the Corn-Crake “ is pretty generally distributed throughout the kingdom, though said to be most plentiful in the northern parts of it, and in Ireland.” Statements as to the status of the species during the last 100 years are quoted in the subsequent accounts of the former status in the various provinces. Present Distribution and Status. General Considerations. No attempt was made in the present inquiry to estimate the actual Corn-Crake population. Reports were grouped under 5 categories : — A. None ; B. Isolated reports (i.e. ones and twos) ; C. A few (i.e. threes to sixes) ; D. Generally distributed ; and E. Numerous. In the present summary reports under B and C have been treated together as “ Few ” whilst those under D and E have been treated together as “ Numerous.” Practically all reports refer to the number of birds heard and it has been assumed, in the light of available evidence, that it is the male bird that produces the once familiar call. The number of birds heard calling regularly has been assumed to indicate the number of breeding pairs. The fact that birds have not been heard in a district does not necessarily indicate that they are 146 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. completely absent. A number of reports have been received of isolated pairs successfully rearing their young in the vicinity of houses and farms where no indication of their presence had been observed until the mowing of hay revealed, in one case, a nest and eggs, and in a number of cases a brood of young that must have been reared in the immediate vicinity. The instances reported have all referred to isolated birds remote from any district where the species is at all common. In preparing the following notes on distribution in the breeding season reports of birds seen after the second week in August have generally been omitted, as these may refer to migrants. 1. Peninsula (Cornwall, Devon and Somerset). Former status. Carew included the Corn-Crake in his list of birds found in Cornwall in 1602. There is no evidence that it ever nested commonly in that county, where it was described as never abundant in 1816, of rare occur- rence in 1856, never abundant in 1880 and not uncommon though somewhat local in 1902. In Devon it appears to have been numerous though fluctuating considerably in numbers throughout the nineteenth century, whilst in Somerset it was described in 1869 as a well known and fairly common summer visitant. Change of status. In Devon there appears to have been a general and widespread decrease from about 1900 onwards ; especially rapid before 1920. In Somerset the Corn-Crake was becoming scarce in some districts by 1906, whilst in Cornwall it appears to have remained fairly plentiful up to 1920-25 but a decrease has since occurred. Present status. A very scarce summer visitant in Somerset. Of the 23 returns for 1938 only 3 reported birds heard, though many of the other recorders had heard birds within the last few years. Only one was reported as heard in 1939 and no recent evidence of nesting was received. A scarce summer visitant in Devon, where out of 29 reports received in 1938 only 8 recorded the presence of the bird and these only isolated instances chiefly in the south, except on Lundy where Mr. F. W. Gade reported 6 to 12 birds in 1938 but none in 1939. In Cornwall a few birds still nest annually in widely separated localities. In 1938 their presence was reported from 7 localities but in all these except Penzance they were said to have decreased within the last few years with a considerable drop in 1938 on the 1937 numbers. In Devon, the Corn-Crake is still fairly numerous on migration, especially in autumn, and in Somerset an uncommon passage migrant. 2. Channel (Dorset, Wilts, Hants and Sussex). Former status. In 1788 the Corn-Crake was recorded as a summer bird of passage in fair numbers in Hampshire, but in the following j^ear White called it a rare bird at Selborne, stating that it was more plentiful near Battle, in Sussex and formerly abounded near Christian Malford, N. Wilts. In 1794 it was recorded as breeding neat Heytesbury, Wilts. In 1855 it was said to bp rarely found in Sussex in the breeding season, but in 1863 was considered common in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. In Wiltshire and Dorset the species was described as very common or plentiful throughout the 19th century. Change of status. In Dorset a decrease was noted before the end of the 19th century and by 1914 it was regarded as a vanishing species. In Wilts, decrease was noted in the early years of the present century and gradually intensified, though there was a reappearance about 1917-20 which did not continue. Marlborough College reports mention the finding of the nest in 20 years from 1865 to 1910 but not since. In Hampshire 1904 was a poor year, though the birds were again common throughout the county in 1905, but in 1907 none were met with. In 1914 it was very scarce but in 1917 some nests were found. In Sussex there was a slight decrease at the beginning of the 20th century, which became more marked by about 1910. Large numbers vol. xxxviii.] REPORT ON CORN-CRAKE. 147 were present in East Sussex in 1915 and it was again fairly numerous near Harling in 1926, but these were probably local fluctuations. Present status. In all these counties the Corn-Crake is now very rare as a summer visitor. In Dorset out of 16 records only 3 recorded birds in 1938 and only near Puddletown, where 6 were located, does breeding seem probable, Of 19 records from Wiltshire only 3 reported birds in 1938 and these were seen in autumn, two in August and one in September. In Hampshire out of a total of 36 reports, 27 were negative, though a number of these report birds as present in earlier years and a nest is recorded for 1937. In 1938 one nest with 3 chicks was destroyed in N.W. Hants and there are records of birds heard in the N.E., as well as one in the Isle of Wight. In Sussex 27 of the 1938 reports were negative, but 6 record isolated birds and one states that the Corn- Crake has been heard regularly near Bognor for the last 40 years. The species is met with as an autumn migrant near the coast in this region, being only scarce in Sussex, but sometimes common in the Isle of Wight (20 were shot at Shanldin in 1935) and regularly common in the Isle of Purbeck. In the autumn of 1913 76 were shot in one day on an estate 3 miles from Swanage, and in the years from 1932 to 1937 the average bag was over 10, varying from 5 to 20. 3. Thames (Kent, Surrey, Essex, Herts, Middlesex, Berks, Oxon and Bucks.). Former status. In 1667 Merrett stated that he had heard the Daker-hen (an old name for the species) at Wheatley, four miles from Oxford, and in 1783 the Corn-Crake was recorded as abundant in the meadows round Oxford. Writers during the 19th century recorded it as numerous, plentiful, common or not uncommon in all the counties of this province except Essex, where there is no evidence that it was ever common. Change of status. Decrease is said to have begun in Essex about 1850, about 1875 in Middlesex, 1885 in Oxon, 1895 in Kent, Berks and Bucks and 1900 in Surrey and Herts. Within a comparatively short period the bird became rare in most parts of all these counties, surviving longest in the water-meadows near the Thames. , Present status. Out of about 150 reports from this area in 1938 only 17 recorded the occurrence of the Corn-Crake in that year. Only near Hatfield, Herts, was it fairly numerous and the only other pair suspected of breeding was near Amersham, Bucks, but no nests were reported. Records of nests in 1936 and in 1939 come from Kent. It is probable that a few pairs still breed sporadically in most of the counties. At Camb, near Newbury, Berks, no sound of the birds was heard either in 1938 or 1939, yet in both years they were seen during mowing. Corn-Crakes still occasionally occur on migration, chiefly in autumn, throughout the area. » 4. Anglia (Suffolk, Norfolk, Cambs, Beds, Hunts and Northants.). Former status. Sir T. Browne recorded the Corn-Crake as a Norfolk bird in 1668 and Sheppard and Whitear said in 1826 that it occasionally bred in Norfolk and Suffolk, but there is no evidence that it was ever a common breeding species in either of those counties. In 1712 Morton said it was pretty often met with in Northants. In the other counties of the area it is described by nineteenth century writers as common. Change of statks. Decrease was noted in Norfolk about 1886, in Cambridge- shire about 1890 and in Bedfordshire about 1897 and the species had become rare throughout the area by about 1910. There is no definite record of breeding in Norfolk’since 1900. Present status. In this province the species now only breeds occasionally. In 1938 one nest with eggs, destroyed at Towcester, Northants., was the only one reported, but near Grantchester, Cambs, several pairs were present and probably nested. Other reports were received of isolated birds heard in various localities. In 1939 Mr. G. R. Mountfort found 8 or 9 breeding pairs in the vicinity of Brancaster Staithe, Norfolk, where the species was almost unknown four years earlier. 148 BRITISH BIRDS. [vol. xxxviii. The Corn-Crake passes through the area on migration, especially in autumn, when it is chiefly observed in Norfolk. 5. Severn (Glos, Mon, Hereford, Worcs, Warwick, Staffs, and Salop). Former status. The Corn-Crake is included in Dickenson's list of birds of Staffordshire, 1798. It appears to have been common throughout the area during the 19th century. Change of status. A decrease began in Worcestershire before the end of the century and in Warwickshire about 1900. In Staffordshire, Shropshire and Gloucestershire decrease began about 1911 or 1912, in Monmouthshire about 1914 and in Herefordshire about 1918. In most of these counties birds remained in certain areas, especially along the Severn and other river valleys, after they had disappeared from most districts and there are several instances of the re-occupation of areas for a few years after they had once been deserted. For instance at Stratford-on-Avon the Corn-Crake was common before 1914, decreased till 1920 and re-established itself in 1933, remaining till 1937 but again absent in 1938. Present status. Of 129 reports for 1938 only 39 observers record the presence of the Corn-Crake in that year, but about half the others had heard it within a few years before. In Warwickshire, Shropshire and Herefordshire the only reports were of isolated birds, but in the other four counties it still occurs regularly in certain areas. In Monmouthshire in two areas near Cardiff ; and in the Wye Valley near Monmouth and Chepstow ; in Gloucester- shire in the Forest of Dean and in the Severn valley near Tewkesbury ; in Worcestershire in the Avon valley near Evesham and also near Stourbridge ; and in Staffordshire near Newcastle and in the Trent valley near Burton. In the last-named region the numbers are reported to be slowly decreasing, but at Stourbridge, Evesham and other localities in Worcestershire a con- siderable increase is said to have occurred in recent years. From this county 6 reports were also received in 1939 and in the 6 areas concerned the number of pairs was 23 in 1938 and 13 in 1939. 6. Trent (Lines, Rutland, Leics, Notts and Derbyshire). Former status. There is no evidence that the Corn-Crake was ever generally common in Lincolnshire, though in some localities it appears to have been frequent at certain periods, for instance at Great Cotes from 1864-67 and again in 1872. In the other four counties of the area it was apparently common up to the first decade of the 20th century. Change of status. In Lincolnshire decrease began about 1890 and by 1915 the species had almost disappeared from the county, though still occurring in a few localities. In Rutland decrease occurred before 1907 at which date, it still bred sparingly. In Leicestershire decrease began about 1915, in Derbyshire about 1917 and in Nottinghamshire about 1920. Present status. In Lincolnshire the species is now only a scarce passage migrant, noted in two localities in 1938. Probably the same is true of Rut- land from which no information was received. In Leicestershire the only report of its occurrence came from Charnwood Forest, where it is said to have been common till 1928, but 5 other observers had heard birds within the previous five years. In Nottinghamshire the species is now absent from many districts where it was formerly common, but still occurs in some numbers near Mansfield and near Worksop, in both which areas it is stated to have increased recently. In Derbyshire the Corn-Crake is still to be found in many parts but is nowhere plentiful and would seem to be rapidly decreasing. Of those who reported in 1938 five had last heard the bird in 1936 and nine in 1937. 9 areas from which reports were received both in 1938 and 1939 there had been a decrease of nearly 45% in the latter year. I (To be concluded). (149) SOME OBSERVATIONS ON A REMARKABLY COLOURED HERON BY KATHLEEN GOUGH. On March 26th, 1944, I was watching with glasses some Herons (. Ardea c. cinerea ) in a small heronry near Athenry, Co. Galway, Eire. There were two birds on a newly started (late) nest. The nest was in a beech tree, and at that time the trees were bare so that it was in full view. The sun was behind me and the light excellent. One bird had just alighted and was presenting the other bird with a stick. This bird that presented the stick I presumed to be the male (cf. Handbook, Vol. iii, pp. 128 and 129). After presentation and some bowing, the two birds started “ billing," or “ fencing ” — their two bills close against and touching each other. It was then I saw to my great surprise that the one bill was yellow, the other bright red, the red-billed bird, being the one that presented the stick, the presumed male. I went again the next day and again had a very good view of the red-billed bird. The third day my husband came with me, and with glasses and in a good light we both saw it, as did also a neighbour who was with us. I then looked at its legs and saw they were bright red too. My husband remarked that the other bird’s yellow bill had a pinkish tinge, and when I compared it with a Herons on neighbouring nests, I decided it certainly had a pinkish tinge. Moreover two days later I had a view of this same bird’s legs and they were pinkish too. My husband and I took into careful con- sideration the chance of reflected light, etc., but decided without doubt that the colour was not caused in that way. At first, I thought that the red-billed, red-legged bird was an aberration, but I found on reading through the descriptions of other herons in The Handbook that some species such as the Buff-backed Heron ( Ardeola i. ibis) and Night- Heron ( N'ycticorax n. nycticorax ) have seasonal colour changes in their bills and legs. Reading of these seasonal changes, I wondered if there could be the possibility that the same occurs in some of our Common Herons ? I decided to watch the birds in hope of collecting further data. Unfortunately I did not see as much of them as I had hoped to, but enough to be of interest. On April 4th I saw a Heron arranging sticks on the nest ; it was the same pink-tinged female (?) bird. Soon after this, the nest was completed and the bird started to sit, and was difficult to see. Once or twice I had a view of its bill, and it was always the same female (?) bird. I went at different times of day, morning and evening, in hopes of seeing the “ change over ” and the other bird, but I never succeeded in doing so. If I am right in thinking that the red-billed bird (that presented the stick) was the male, it apparently sat at night and the female by day. 150 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. I was away from May i8th-25th and after my return very busy and could not go often. By now there were two young birds, but the nest was entirely hidden by the full foliage of the trees from all sides except the north, and as most of my visits at the time were in the evening this meant a difficult light, looking into the sun. Several times I spent an hour watching and on several occasions saw a parent bird bringing food, but each time the light was bad and the bird’s visit very fleeting, so that I could not be certain of the colour of bills or legs. On other visits I drew blank entirely and did not see either of the parent birds. However, on June 21st I was at last- lucky and had a good view of a parent bird just leaving the nest as I arrived. I was able to see it in a good light, with my glasses, and I distinctly saw that its bill was an orangeish-red — not so bright and deep a red as in March, but certainly not the normal yellowish colour (and not the colour of the pink-tinged bird). It seemed to me as if the bright red had faded to an orange-red. Since then I have not seen either of the parent birds for certain and the young birds have now flown. Watching the other Herons in the heronry I have not seen any other with abnormal colouring. I was disappointed at not seeing more of the red-billed bird, but feel I was very fortunate in having the three good views of it in March. [I think it inconceivable that if the remarkable colouring described by Mrs. Gough was developed regularly in even a very small per- centage of Herons it could possibly have been overlooked But this striking abnormality, as 1 should regard it, is of special interest _ in view of the regular colour change which, as Mrs. Gough has noted, takes place in a certain proportion of individuals of some other herons. The yellow and red pigments of birds are evidently closely allied 'chemically, belonging to the class known as carotenoids (cf. E. Lonnberg, Proc. 8th Internat. Ornitliol. Congress, 1934, pp. 410-424), and I have myself shown ( antea , Vol. xxx, pp. 70-73) that in a number of individuals of the Buff-backed Heron ( Ardeola i. ibis) a change from yellow to red takes place in the bill, iris and legs in the breeding-season. Mrs. Gough has kindly forwarded me a sample of the approximate colour of the bill of the bird described, as seen in March and on June 21st respectively. The former is a scarlet-red near the “Nopal Red” of Ridgway’s Color Standards and Color Nomenclature (1912) and the latter near “ Bittersweet Orange ” of the same work. — B.W.T.]. * DEPARTURE OF SWIFTS BY H. N. SOUTHERN. The arrival and departure of migrants are usually recorded by the dates upon which the first and last birds are seen. The arrival date of the first bird of any migrant species is usually fairly close to the arrival of the main bulk of that species : even so a particularly early bird may give a distorted view of the actual course of the migration. In the autumn records of this • kind are far more unsatisfactory. Southward movements are known to be less concentrated and the result is that dates given are more often than not merely those of stragglers, which may have lingered on weeks after the main body of birds has departed. To rectify this state of affairs is no easy matter because quantita- tive observations are necessary, and many species do not lend themselves to this form of treatment without a lot of trouble expended by the observer. In some cases, however, this can bq arranged fairly simply and the short observations given below were carried out (a) as a prelimin- ary test to see whether satisfactory and informative results could be obtained in this way, and ( b ) to find out whether the species chosen, the Swift {Apus a. apus), did leave within a short period of time (this is usually the impression given to casual observation), or whether there was a gradual diminishing of numbers through August. Observations were made from the top storey of a house in Oxford giving a view over a large part of the city lying between the centre and Port Meadow. This part usually contains a fair number of breeding pairs, and since from this observation point about 50 per cent, of the sky to the west of Oxford is visible, the evening gathering of Swifts can be watched for a constant sample of the Oxford population. Since these gatherings during and just after the breeding season are usually too great to be sure of accurate counts, watching was not started until August 8th, when numbers had begun to diminish to manageable proportions. The convention was adopted of recording the greatest number each night which could be counted at once. This is a minimum number, but is the safest standard to take. Watching was done from 5 minutes before sunset to 10-15 minutes after sunset, and the two most marked features of the gatherings at this time of year were their regularity and their shortness. One or two birds appeared about 1-2 minutes after sunset, the maximum number _ was seen about 5 minutes after, and by 15 minutes after all had disappeared. 152 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Date. Greatest number W eather Wind direction. seen at once. August 8. 11 Fine, clear sky. W » 9- 13 yy yy >> W „ 10. 14 yy y> yy W „ 11. 14 Overcast with W high cloud. » 12. 5 yy yy N » I3- 6 Fine, clear sky. NE „ 14- 4 yy yy yy NE » 15. 6 y y y y y y W „ 16. 3 y y y y y > W Observations made on August I7th-20th were negative, so it was presumed that all but stragglers had departed. The figures suggest that birds leave in batches, over half of those that were left going between August nth and 12th, when the wind changed, and the rest going on August I5th/i6th and i6th/i7th. On the whole, therefore, this is a fairly quick and concentrated departure, but in its details it is definitely progressive. The Swift obviously lends itself to this kind of observation, especially as the evening gatherings lasted a shorter time than was suspected. Nevertheless there are other species, such as swallows and martins feeding at their favourite ponds and lakes, which might yield interesting comparative figures. (153) OBITUARY. JIM VINCENT (1883-1944). Many of our readers will have learned with deep regret of the death of Jim Vincent, which took place at Norwich after a short illness on November 4th. As head keeper on Lord Desborough’s Whiteslea estate at Hickling, Vincent was known to ornithologists all over the country, as well as, before the war, to not a few visitors from abroad, and was something of a national character in ornithological circles. Certainly he deserved well of British ornithology and ornitho- logists ; it was largely due to him that the Bittern and Marsh-Harrier, after having been extinct as British breeding birds for many years, were able to re-establish themselves in Norfolk and that that most characteristic of Broadland species the Bearded Tit has been able to maintain itself ; a whole succession of photographers beginning with Miss Turner owed much of their success amongst the birds of the Broads to his assistance, and many more held observers have benefited by his guidance and genial company in this ornithologist’s paradise. Vincent was not only a highly successful practical protectionist; he was also — or perhaps one should rather say he was successful in that respect because he was — an excellent held ornithologist, and he had a good knowledge of plants and insects as well. He added materially to our knowledge of the breeding habits of the Bittern and the harriers, and few of the rare migrants which appeared at Hickling escaped his watchful eye or failed to be accurately identihed. A number of his notes have appeared in British Birds, and two, received no more than a few weeks ago, only in our last number. Most observers who have been out with him, the writer included, have been impressed by the way in which he would correctly identify some unusual bird at long range without the use of glasses and the facility with which he found nests was no less surprising. “ On the Hickling estate,” to quote Mr. Riviere, “ he was given by Lord Desborough for many years an almost free hand in its management and he devoted all his energies to making it a reserve and a sanctuary. Long experience and unequalled knowledge of the habits of ducks, waders, bitterns and harriers enabled him by a planned system of flooding, draining, grazing and cutting to enhance and maintain its attractiveness until it has become to-day world famous and a sort of “ Mecca ” for bird lovers from far and near.” The maintenance of this Broadland reserve which he did so much to establish will be Jim Vincent’s best memorial, but we can only echo Mr. Riviere’s words that “ Hickling can never be quite the same without him.” B.W.T. (154) NOTES. BULLFINCH HOVERING WHEN FEEDING. With reference to Capt. A. C. Fraser’s note on this subject ( antea , p. 94), I have the following note in my diary for December 10th, 1943 : — Watched three Bullfinches (one male and two females) They were low down on Snowberry ( Symphoricarpus ) shrubs and at times just balancing on dead weed stems not a foot from the ground, and every now and then took little short fluttering, hovering flights, apparently catching some minute insects on the wing. Kathleen Gough. [A note in the Report of the Devon Bird-watcliing and Preservation Society for 1943 records “ A cock and hen [Bullfinch] feeding alternately on the wing on blackberries ; the bramble spray being too frail to support them.” — Eds.] DISPLAY OF CHAFFINCH. On the afternoon of April 22nd, 1944, 1 watched a pair of Chaffinches ( Fringilla ccelehs gengleri) displaying on the ridge of a tiled garden wall. y The performance appeared to fall into three phases : 1. The male with tail lowered and wings drooping so as to expose the raised rump feathers, and with white wing patches very conspicuous, in a kind of hunched shoulder position was sitting facing the female at about 18 inches distance. The male was facing along the wall and the female perched traversely. The male kept up a thin shrill note while he lurched his body from side to side. / 2. The male approached the female slowly in series of slow hops and very short fluttering, almost hovering, flights, and all the while made a rattling noise sounding as if it came from rapid snapping of the beak. 3. Coition took place with the male half-holering and continuing the bill-rattling noise, the female with head and tail raised uttering a shrill note. She assumed this posture only when coition began, but a few seconds later she resumed it when the male was just beginning phase 1. He continued through phase 2 as before and then coition again took place exactly as on the previous occasion. Soon after this they flew into the bushes and were lost to sight. C. J. F. Coombs. WAXWINGS IN GREAT BRITAIN. The following Waxwing records have reached us additional to those already published (antea, pp. 34-35 and Vol. xxxvi, pp. 196-7, 213-4). All dates are 1944 unless otherwise stated. Surrey. — Four about a mile and half south-west of Farnham, January 2 1st (D. T. G. Carter). Hertfordshire. — Five or six in Grove Road, Harpenden, February 26th ; reported to have been in the district about a week (K. C. Fowler). Oxfordshire. — One at Arncott, February 27th (Pte. G. A. Todd). Norfolk. — Two in a clearing in woods on the Salhouse road about a mile outside Norwich, February 17th (W. Deacon). Two at Stoke Holy Cross, VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 1 ] 55 Norwich, on February 20th ; they had arrived about February 10th and remained till the 21st (M. J. Seago). Bedfordshire. — Flock of about twenty at Shefford on March 23rd and half-a-dozen in same place next day ; also reported at the neighbouring village of Clifton on March 25th (Rev. A. Kingsley-Lloyd per Dr. G. A. Metcalf) . Warwickshire. — One at Northfield, Birmingham in January (T. W. Gray). Derbyshire. — About six to ten birds at Newton Solney, near Burton-on- Trent, about January 20th (K. Shorthose). Durham. — About six near West Stanley railway station on December 17th and four again on December 20th, 1943 (D. Davies) ; one. King George Street, South Shields, November 25th, 1943 (J. S. Ash) ( Vasculum , Vol. xxix, p. 4). Nairn. — Two at Nairn, December 25th, 1943, to January 16th, 1944 ; three seen by another observer (A. Smith). RED-SPOTTED BLUETHROAT SEEN IN WORCESTERSHIRE. In the second week of April, 1944, at Arley, near Bewdley, Worces- tershire, my attention was attracted by a low, sweet whistle outside my caravan, which was just below a wooded bank, a favourite haunt of many birds. Looking out of the window I saw through field-glasses, perched on a fence about ten feet away and facing towards me, a small bird with a bright blue bib covering the whole throat region. The size was about that of a Chaffinch, but it had an insect-eater’s bill. The blue bib was interrupted by a reddish band not extending quite across it and was outlined by a pale, narrow yellowish band followed by a reddish colour, gradually paling towards the tail. As I only had a full face view before the bird flew I could not see the colour of the upper-parts. C. B. Newbery. [In spite of the exceptional date and the fact that the species has never been recorded in the Midlands, Mrs. Newbery’s accurate description of the throat pattern leaves no doubt that the bird was an example of Lnscinia s. svecica. After more than four years of war it seems very unlikely that it was an escape from captivity, and it may be noted that a somewhat analogous occurrence of an undoubted Red-spotted Bluethroat in an inland county at an exceptionally early date is recorded in British Birds, Vol. xxxv, p. 273.— Eds.] OYSTER-CATCHER FAR FROM LAND IN THE ATLANTIC. With reference to my note on an Oyster-catcher (Hcematopus ostralegus) seen far from land in the Atlantic on April 4th, 1944 (antea, p. 57), I have since seen another one in position 550 48' N, 240 4' W, about the same latitude as Islay and 540 miles from the nearest land, i.e. Ireland. The bird appeared at 7.30 a.m. on July 29th, 1944, and finally left at 12.30. It was obviously tired and when disturbed merely flew to the other end of the ship. When left alone it sat hunched up often with its beak open as if suffering from thirst. Its feathers were generally sleek and tight, but those round the vent were bedraggled, possibly indicating intestinal trouble. Weather at the time was good and conditions for the previous two or three days had been stable, but with a moderate easterly 156 BRITISH BIRDS. ( [vol. xxxviii. wind. The bird finally left the ship on being disturbed and as it flew away gradually lost height, settling on the sea about 250 yards away. E. A. Duffey. BLACK TERN VICTIMIZING COOT. On September 18th, 1944, I witnessed feeding behaviour of a Black Tern ( Chlidonias n. niger) which is, I believe, unusual. On a large gravel pond near Netherfield, Notts, numbers of Coot ( Fulica a. atra) were diving, when a Black Tern flew over from the nearby Trent, and began to beat regularly to and fro over the water. Presently a Coot emerged from the depths with its usual bunch of weed just below the flying tern, which immediately dropped to the water close to the Coot. The latter then scurried away, leaving its bunch of weed floating, whereupon the tern made a series of rapid pecks at the disintegrating mass for three or four seconds, doubtless picking out entangled small life, after which period the bird resumed its regular patrolling. Again and again, whenever an emerging Coot sufficiently close presented opportunity, the same procedure was enacted, the spontaneity of the action leaving no doubt in the mind of the observer that in this Black Tern, at least, it was a regular habit. J. Staton. ICELAND GULL IN KENT IN JULY. ' On the afternoon of July 16th, 1944, I noticed an Iceland Gull (Larus glancoides) on the shore just to the east of Ramsgate harbour. Though there was a small number of other gulls around, it kept very much to itself. It was in a very bedraggled state and allowed of fairly close approach. The plumage showed no brown mottling, but the outer primaries seemed to be tinged with brown on the outer webs. The wings were very pointed and when at rest projected well beyond the tail. The bill was a whitish-flesh colour with a conspicuous black tip and the legs were a light flesh-pink in colour. The plumage was in a very worn state. The tail-feathers when spread showed very little webbing, as did the inner primaries and most of the secondaries. The head and neck had a very shaggy appearance. M. N. Rankin. Early nesting of summer migrants in 1944.— We have received the following notes from correspondents : — Chiffchaff ( Phylloscopus c. collybitaf. — Building at Bartley, Hants, April 16th ; first egg, April 24th (R. E. Williams). Wood-Warbler ( Phylloscopus sibilatrix). — Nest found with six eggs at Kingswood, Surrey, on May 20th. Young fledged on June 4th, so the last egg must have been laid on or about May nth (Howard Bentham). Swallow ( Hirundo r. rustica). — Young 7-9 days old at West Willow, Hants, on May 23rd (R. E. Williams). A young bird seen on the wing with two adults on June 3rd in a garage at Rodborough, Glos., where a pair have nested for many years. This would indicate that eggs were laid before April 27th (J. B. Watson). Cuckoo ( Cuculus c. canorus). — Juvenile outside Hedge-Sparrow’s nest, which it had flattened out, at Romsey on June 10th ; tail protruding beyond wing-tips about i£ ins. (R. E. Williams). VOL. XXXVIII.] NOTES. 157 Wood-Lark on the Isle of May. — Mr. Seton Gordon informs us that he saw several Wood-Larks ( Lullula a. arborea) on the Isle of May, Firth of Forth, on October 30th, 1944. The first one seen permitted a near approach, and when it flew several others rose from the rough grass near by. There are several previous records for the island. Tree-Pipit eating Rowan berries. — The Rev. J. E. Beckerlegge writes that on September 27th, 1944, on the edge of the woods at Bolton Priory, Yorks, he watched, through binoculars at close quarters, a Tree-Pipit ( Anthus t. trivialis) eating berries of the Rowan or Mountain- Ash ( Sorbus aucuparia). The bird was seen to take three or four berries before leaving the tree. Blue-headed Wagtail breeding in Leicestershire. — The type-written bulletin issued by the Ornithological Section of the Leicester Literary and Philosophical Society for July, 1944 records the breeding of a pair of Blue-headed Wagtails ( Motacilla f. flava ) near Croft. The female was seen by Capt. Pochin on June 29th and the pair were watched by the same observer and Mr. A. E. Jolley on the 30th, the distinctive characters being well seen. A day or two later they were watched feeding fledged young and on July 4th a nest was found with a second clutch of eggs. This nest was very closely watched and it is noteworthy that the male “ took an almost greater share in incubation ” than the female. Three eggs hatched on July 16th, but unfortunately the young came to grief. This is the first record of breeding, and indeed of the occurrence of this sub- species, in Leicestershire. Nest of Tree-Creeper near ground. — Mr Hubert E. Pounds informs us of a nest of the Tree-Creeper ( Certhia familiar is bri- tannica ) found by Mr. W. E. Busbridge, at Blackmoor, Hants, only two feet from the ground in a hole in the base of a tree. Nuthatch’s unusual method of attacking nut. — Mr. W. L. Colyer sends us an account of an unusual procedure by a Nuthatch (Sitta europ'cea affinis ) at Sidmouth in attacking a nut which it had failed to crack in the ordinary way. It made five or six vigorous forward thrusts with the point of its beak against the nut, first from a position above the groove in which it had wedged it and then from below it. The beak, head, neck and back were in a straight line and rigid ; the toes gripped the bark while the legs carried the body forward to deliver each battering-ram like blow. Finally the bird prised up the nut and ran with it up the tree out of sight, but it is not certain whether it had been broken. Song-Thrush rearing two broods in same nest. — Mr. Howard Bentham reports a case of a pair of Song-Thrushes ( T urdus e. ericetorum) at Tadworth, Surrey, which reared two broods in the same nest. The first brood were fledged about April 25th, 1944, and the second clutch of eggs was not laid until early June. A long period of drought may possibly have accounted both for the long 158 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. interval and for the fact that no new nest was made, as nrud would have been difficult to obtain. This habit appears unusual in the Song-Thrush, but has been observed occasionally. Early Song-Thrush’s Nest. — Mr. T. W. Arnold informs us that on February 6th, 1943, at Frieth, Buckinghamshire, he found a Song-Thrush’s (Turdus e. ericetorum) nest with two eggs. The bird laid its fourth egg on February 8th, but then deserted. REVIEWS. The Duck Decoys of Essex. By W. E. Glegg. Essex Naturalist, Vol. xxvii, 1943-4, pp. 191-207 and 21 1-225. Mr. W. E. Glegg in this scholarly paper brings up to date his extefisive knowledge of the Essex decoys and includes an interesting account of the art of decoying, drawn largely from an article written on an Essex decoy in The Field of 1868. Payne-Gallwey's well-known book on decoys gave a list of 29 for Essex ; in Mr. Glegg’s History of the Birds of Essex (1929) the number of used and disused decoys was shown to be 35 ; and now research has raised the number to 37. A glance at the map in the History shows that the majority were placed round the estuary of the Blackwater and that the only two now in use lie close to the sea a few miles south of that estuary. Pipe decoys were not known till the end of the XVIIth century, and the XVIIIth and early XIXth centuries were the period of their greatest success. Gradually during the XIXth and later, many fell out of use. J. Whitaker in his account of British Decoys of Today (19x8) showed that of some 200 only 28 were then being worked, and since then the number has been further reduced. Mr. Glegg’s wish that an Essex decoy may be used for ringing is at present unfulfilled, but the out- standing success of the ringing at Orielton in Pembroke makes one hope that an east coast decoy may before long be worked in the same way. A.W.B. The Art of Bird Photography. By Eric Hosking and C. Newberry. 96 pp., 49 half-tone plates. (Country Life, Ltd., 1944). 8s. 6d. This book is written, as the authors state explicitly in the foreword, “ to interest the ordinary man and woman who would like to watch more closely, and sometimes photograph, the fascinating life of the feathered throng.” It should have no difficulty in attaining this limited objective, for it is written in a straightforward style and is profusely illustrated with first- class photographs. There is no claim to offer any serious ornithological observations, and yet there are many of the more scientific ornithologists who would derive benefit from the pi’esence of this book on their shelves. Many of the scientific and semi-scientific articles dealing with field studies are illustrated with photographs, and one can very rarely say that they attain even a moderate standard of excellence. A careful perusal of this book, even if the more expensive types of apparatus recommended are out of the question, will show what is the best type of equipment and how it should be used to the best advantage. A special mention should be made of the highly successful use of flash- light, both for photographing at night and for reinforcing poor light. Mr. Hosking’s studies of owls are already well known, and the illustrations include some of the best of them. The observations on food brought to the nest could not have been made by any other method, and it is a test of the excellence of the photography that the prey can be identified so often. H.N.S. LOCAL REPORTS. Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservation Society : Thirteenth Annual Report, 1943. Edited by B. H. Ryves, D. Valentine and H. M. Quick. The Cornwall Report again contains much excellent material, but it remains the most difficult of all the local reports to refer to on account of the multiplicity of minor sections, in addition to the main ones, which we have VOL. XXXVIII.] REVIEWS. 159 commented on already ( antea , p. 20). The two main sections, on status and habits, have, however, been amalgamated. Perhaps the chief ornithological event was the proof that at least five pairs of Roseate Terns bred in Scilly, though owing to high seas apparently only one hatched off. The Choughs, so far as information goes, had unfortunately a bad year : of two pairs definitely reported on neither reared any young. We may note : a Hobby at Newquay, July 6th, a Rough-legged Buzzard, the remains of which were found at a Raven’s nest — a surprising occurrence — - a Barnacle Goose on the Camel on November 7th, Spoonbills in both spring and autumn, an Avocet at Trevone Bay, December 7th, a Scandinavian Lesser Black-backed Gull at Trewornan, March 27th, and more than thirty Little Auks in Swanpool Bay in February. The Little Egret at Lelant has already been recorded in British Birds, as has the definite nesting of a pair of Dartford Warblers (in 1940) in the addenda to the new impression of The Handbook. Col. Ryves has a special article on observations at a Goldfinch’s nest and Dr. R. H. Blair reports on the further progress of the nest sanitation enquiry. Sixteenth Report of the Devon Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, 1943. This report contains a number of noteworthy records, mostly satisfactorily authenticated, but two or three not above criticism. We may mention (amongst those not already recorded in British Birds) : a Chough at Budleigh Salterton on August 14th, the breeding of Crossbills at Minehead (W. Somerset) and Woodbury Common, a Willow -Warbler with combined Chiff chaff and Willow-Warbler song, a Firecrest at Lifton in late July, an unusual date, a Cuckoo reared by Song-Thrushes at Ashburton, three pairs of Short-eared Owls breeding in N. Devon, a Kestrel’s nest with young at Manaton on February 20th, a Rough-legged Buzzard near Dartmouth on November 28th, an adult White-tailed Eagle at Wigford Down on July 3rd, and two Ospreys in December. A Killdeer Plover on the Exe Estuary has already been reported in the Ibis. Records which suffer from the lack of any accompanying evidence are those of a Marsh-Harrier on June 14th, a Kite at Cheriton Bishop on April 9th, 1941, and a Nutcracker at Wrangaton in July. These are probably correct — indeed the last is stated to be vouched for by an experienced observer, notwithstanding the highly abnormal date — but we cannot insist too strongly that in all records of rare birds the evidence should be published. We also note that the pair of Harriers thought to be Hen-Harriers, which bred in 1942,' did so again in 1943. It seems a great pity that this renewed opportunity of making certain which species these birds were was not taken. There is also a special report on selected migrants and we notice no less than three records of Cuckoos, not merely heard but seen, in March, which are evidently considered reliable. The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist : Notes on the Local Fauna and Flora for 1943. By N. F. Ticehurst. The outstanding event recorded in the bird section is the successful breeding of a pair of Kentish Plovers at Dungeness for the first time since 1931. The breeding of Black Redstarts at St. Leonards and probably also at Hastings has already been recorded in British Birds. Reference is made to the effect on bird-life of the flooding of Pett Level, now in its fourth year. The breeding of a small colony of Black-headed Gulls here in 1942 and 1943 is of considerable local interest, since this is known to have been a breeding place as long ago as 1638, but prior to the recent re-colonization had been deserted for a great many years. Amongst various visitors of interest a Tawny Pipit shot in September may be mentioned. Report on Birds observed in Hertfordshire in 1942. By H. H. S. Hayward (Reprinted from Trans. Herts Nat. Hist. Soc. & Field Club, Vol. xxii, pt. 2). This report, as usual, contains many interesting notes carefully edited, but most of the more important seem already to have been reported to British Birds. A Little Stint was seen at Tring on June 10th and nth, the only previous spring occurrences recorded at the reservoirs having been in 1938. The low level of the water attracted a considerable variety of waders in autumn, including another Little Stint, Curlew-Sandpiper, Knot, Turnstone, 1 GO BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XXXVIII. Spotted Redshank, Whimbrel and others, but the level continued excessively low throughout the winter, which naturally had an adverse effect on the numbers of waterfowl. It seems a pity that publication of this excellent report is so arranged that it is always a year behindhand. Ornithological Report for the County of Hampshire, 1943. By F. H. Haines (Reprinted from Proc. Hampshire Field Club & Archaol. Soc., Vol. xvi). Noteworthy records are those of the Red-breasted Snipe already recorded in British Birds and a Golden Oriole near Alton about April 20th. A Yellow- browed Warbler is reported at Ringwood on October 24th. It is stated that it was observed at about three yards’ range and that the wing-bars and superciliary stripe were seen, but more detailed evidence than this is desirable. Several of the most interesting records, including references to Buzzard, Osprey, Quail, etc. and a melanistic Red-legged Partridge, are hidden away in a section called “ General Notes.” These would be far better distributed in the systematic section. We can again hardly avoid commenting on the large number of completely trivial records, of which twenty-five Rooks flying over, a Greenfinch singing on April 17th (a male Greenfinch not singing on this date would be more noteworthy), and Great Tits visiting a bird table are fair samples. The report would benefit by more critical blue-pencilling. London Bird Report for 1943. Edited by R. S. R. Fitter and E. R. Parrinder. (Supplement to The London Naturalist), is. 6d. Crossbills were seen carrying nesting material at Reigate in March. It is not clear why this is described in the introductory notes as “ attempted ” breeding, implying lack of success, as it appears from the systematic notes that the further history of the pair is not known. A Blue-headed Wagtail was seen at the Brent Reservoir on September nth, a Montagu’s Harrier in Middlesex on April 16th, a Little Stint at the Lonsdale Road Reservoir on September 17th, up to 15 Scandinavian Lesser Black-backed Gulls on the Thames at Hammersmith in October, at least two Iceland Gulls on the Thames, and an Arctic Skua passing over South Harrow on May 21st. Other notes of interest refer to the display of the Willow-Tit and Stock-Dove, mimetic song of Goldcrest, and Fieldfares at Chingford (Essex) on August 9th. . Most of the essential data about the Black Redstart in London, on which there is a special article, have already appeared in British Birds. There is also a short but interesting account by T. L. Bartlett of recoveries of Black- headed Gulls in Inner London, showing how particular gulls seem to frequent the same precise localities year after year. Finally there is a new “ Check- List of the Birds of the London Area,” giving “ a very brief summary of the status of all birds observed within 20 miles of St. Paul's Cathedral from 1924 to 1943, both dates inclusive.” Report of the Cambridge Bird Club, 1943. Edited by P. S. Burns, is. 6d. In the systematic notes a Marsh-Harrier is recorded at Fulbourne Fen on October 8th, Whooper Swans at Earith Washes in January and February, and a Bewick’s Swan on March 12th. A Bewick’s Swan was also recorded (for the first time) at the Sewage Farm on November 22nd and 23rd, a Temminclc’s Stint on September 17th, a Kentish Plover on September 14th to 17th, a Little Ringed Plover on April 26th and four Glaucous Gulls (passing over) on November 18th, in addition to most of the scarcer waders that visit sewage farms. There are also special sections devoted to the breeding birds of Fulbourne Fen and to the Wash, to which members paid several visits. We note that the particulars given about Black Redstarts in Cambridge do not altogether coincide with those supplied to British Birds in connexion with Mr. Fitter’s paper, and it is a pity that no explanation of this is given : it appears that there is now considered to have been at least one more male present than was thought at first. The scientific nomenclature in this report has been extraordinarily carelessly treated. There are few pages without one or more errors, and so far as these names are concerned it would seem that the proofs have not been corrected at all. But not all the errors are the printer’s : the Common Sandpiper appears as A ctitis macularia ! BIRD LOVERS’ MANUALS BIRD MIGRATION (New Edition) revised and brought up-to-date BY A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON, C.B., D.Sc. This book gives a general account of the subject, written in simple language, but at the same time fully authoritative. It begins with mention of ancient knowledge and beliefs, and passes to describe modern methods of study — including especially that of marking individual birds. « Particular aspects such as directions, seasons and methods of migration, its speed and altitude, nocturnal and diurnal flight, etc., are then considered in more detail. “ remarkable for its clarity of statement and distinction of style.” — The Times Lit. Supp. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 6 - net. THE LIFE OF THE ROBIN BY DAVID LACK. A few of the points discussed are : — are birds happy, female song, is song inherited or acquired, the red breast and threat display, territory and its significance, fighting, courtship, pair formation, bigamy, nests and young, migration, the robin as food and medicine for man, age to which it lives, adventures with a stuffed robin and how live ones attacked it, and when it was taken away attacked the empty air, tameness, posturing at a man, and a digression upon instinct. “ It is impossible here to do justice to the painstaking research and wide knowledge revealed in this book.” — The Field. Illustrated. Small Cr. 8vo. 7 6 net. SPORTS AND PASTIMES LIBRARY A New Volume now ready FISHING FOR TROUT AND SALMON BY TERENCE HORSLEY Fishermen whether members of the Fleet Air Arm or not are likely to enjoy Lt. Cdr. Horsley’s ease of manner when imparting the lessons of experience in waters of the kind open to sportsmen with limited purses. A theory is seldom stated in this book without its immediate relation to practice. Tackle, seasons, temperature, the habits of fish, and ways of water, directly or indirectly are illustrated by diagrams or photographs to help along the information. I 0/6 net. Reprints are ready of three other volumes in this series. 10/6 net each FLY FISHING by W. KEITH ROLLO. CARD GAMES by H. PHILLIPS & B. C. WESTALL. LIFEBOATS AND THEIR CONVERSION by C. E. TYRRELL LEWIS. Reprints of other titles will be available shortly. Please give the name of the Bookseller whom you would like us to advise. H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., 326, HIGH HOLBORN, W.C.l BIRDS ANEUSTKaromo^ziriE DEy^TITDCratllYT^THEBIRDS '^.c'NTnEBrmsnusT^' MONTHIY ls9