31 JAN 2002 January 2002 Vol.95 No. I Crossbills From the Rarities Committee’s )J.u-e-crowned Parakeets t Swarovski birders and nature observ- s get the best perspectives: For our ■oduct manager Gerold Dobler is him- 1 :lf an enthusiastic nature observer and ee knows perfectly well what to expect om high-tech optics: reliability, less eight, high sturdiness and perfect eersatility. There-fore all our products ffer an extremely sturdy though light- weight housing made from aluminium or magnesium, high-precision made lenses and ergonomic design. Good examples are the new EL series with the unique wrap-around grip or our light- weight tripod with soft rubber leg wraps, which is easily carried and set up. You will also find it easy to choose the right binocular or telescope for your requirements. Because we manufacture binoculars for every application. For more product information please contact your local Swarovski authorised dealer or www.swarovskioptik.com or Swarovski UK. SWAROVSKI O P T I K WITH THE EYES OF A HAWK Swarovski U.K. LTD. • Perrywood Business Park • Salfords, Surrey R H 1 5JQ Tel. 01737-856812 • Fax 01737-856885 • E-mail: christine.percy@swarovski.com Kaikoura, locate^ - on the East Coast of the spectacular South Island of New Zealand offers wonderful tippartunitirr for nature lovers to enjoy a variety of marine wildlife A host of pelagic biros can be found just minutes offshore due to the close proximity of the deep Kaikoura Canyon. Enjoy close at hand an array of Albatross, Petrels, Shearwaters, Terns, Gulls and more. Trips 3 times daily. Duration 3 hours. Cost: Adult $60 -Child $35 Web: www.oceanwings.co.nz Email: info ^oceanwings.co.nz Fax 0064-3319-6534 Europe Africa & Middle East Ethiopia • Gambia • Israel • Kenya • Morocco Madagascar, Mauritius, Reunion & Seychelles Namibia • South Africa • UAE Asia & Australasia Australia • Bhutan • China & NE Tibet • India Japan • Malay Peninsula & Borneo • Nepal New Zealand • Siberia • Sri Lanka • Thailand 01263 578143 « Fax: 01263 579251 The Americas LOOKING FOR A GREAT SPRING GETAWAY? Call now for late space on our tours to: Costa Rica, Bhutan, Namibia Morocco, Lesbos, Florida, Hungary, Bulgaria, Lake Baikal... & more! Austria • Bulgaria • Canary Islands • Corsica Finland & Arctic Norway • France • Greece Hungary • Iceland • Lapland • Lesbos • Portugal Romania • Spain • Switzerland Brazil • Canada • Chile • Costa Rica • Cuba Trinidad • USA (Alaska, Arizona, Cape May, Florida, Rockies & Yellowstone, Texas) • Venezuela Must major t redit < anh Hi < rfih’ii e-mail: limosaholidays@compuserve.com Suffield House, Northrepps, Norfolk NR27 OLZ Don’t miss our £990 selection for 2001 & 2002 These action-packed, long-haul birding tours - each led by an expert local ornithologist - offer excellent value for money, and outstanding birding. CANADA’S BAY OF FUNDY 17-25 May 2002 ETHIOPIA 16-25 Nov 2001 08-17 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 ETHIOPIAN ENDEMICS 23 Nov -02 Dec 2001 1 5 Feb - 24 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 22 Nov -01 Dec 2002 FLORIDA 08- 1 7 Feb 2002 GAMBIA 26 Oct - 06 Nov 200 1 25 Oct - 05 Nov 2002 INDIA 16 - 24 Nov 2001 08- 16 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 06 Apr 2002 15- 23 Nov 2002 KAZAKHSTAN 09- 17 May 2002 16- 24 May 2002 23-31 May 2002 MALAWI 08- 1 7 Feb 2002 08-17 Mar 2002 NAMIBIA 09-18 Nov 200 1 18-27 Jan 2002 08-17 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 NEPAL Departs every Friday throughout Jan & Feb 03-12 May 2002 17-26 May 2002 NEPAL - THE IBISBILL TREK 1 0 - 1 9 May 2002 24 May - 02 Jun 2002 SOUTH AFRICA 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SOUTH AFRICA - CAPE BIRDING 02-11 Nov 2001 22-31 Mar 2002 23 Aug-0! Sep 2002 SOUTHERN MOROCCO 15-24 Feb 2002 0 1 - 1 0 Mar 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SRI LANKA 16 - 25 Nov 2001 08- 1 7 Feb 2002 15-24 Mar 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 THAILAND 26 Oct - 04 Nov 200 1 08-17 Feb 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 UAE & OMAN 07 - 14 Oct 2001 24 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 31 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 1 0 - 1 7 Nov 2002 WASHINGTON STATE 1 3 - 2 1 Apr 2002 ZAMBIA 02-11 Nov 200 1 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 Jjo kg Corporato / 2962 *P?Pj?L- V If you would like further details of a particular tour, please call us now! Or visit www.naturetrek.co.uk Naturetrek, Cheriton Mill, Cheriton, Alresford, Hampshire S024 ONG Tel: 0 1 962 73305 1 Fax: 0 1 962 736426 e-mail: info@naturetrek.co.uk web: www.naturetrek.co.uk ZEISS New Carl Zeiss Diascopes T* FL • 65 mm and 85 mm Objectives • Straight and Angled bodies. • 2 fixed magnification eyepieces and 1 variable eyepiece • Fluoride glass • Waterproof, Nitrogen filled For details of your nearest Carl Zeiss Dealer. Please contact our helpline 01707 871350. New Diascopes from Carl Zeiss British Birds Volume 95 Number I January 2002 2 Comment - the changing face of British Birds Roger Riddington 4 Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest, Highland Ron W. Summers 1 2 S3 From the Rarities Committee’s files: Mystery photograph or a first for Britain? Colin Bradshaw, on behalf of BBRC I 7 First nesting by Blue-crowned Parakeet in Britain Chris Butler, Grant Hazlehurst and Kristie Butler Regular features I ' Looking back 2 1 Conservation research news Compiled by Andy Evans, David Gibbons and Ken Smith 23 Notes Red-throated Divers feeding young in October R. C. Dickson Common Kestrel taking Canary from cage E. D. Ponting The call of Common Cuckoo Peter Woodruff Unusual flight behaviour of Common Swift Alan K. Dolphin Green Woodpecker chasing Eurasian Sparrowhawk Ken Capps Great Spotted Woodpecker feeding on apples Noel Elms Barn Swallows and House Martins taking grit P. J. Oliver Great Grey Shrike feeding on carrion Remo Probst Eurasian Jay stealing from Grey Squirrel /. T. R. Sharrock Carrion Crow catching hirundines Paul Baxter 27 News and comment Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches 3 1 Reviews The Red Kite by Ian Carter Pete Combridge Scottish Birds: Culture and Tradition by Robin Hull Mark Cocker Photographing Wild Birds by Chris Gomersall Richard Chandler Field Guide to the Birds of East Africa by Terry Stevenson and John Fanshawe Nik Borrow Birdwatching Guide to Oman by Hanne & Jens Eriksen and Paradda & Dave E. Sargeant Simon Aspinall Where to Watch Birds in Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight by George Green and Martin Cade Pete Combridge Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Lancashire and North Merseyside 1997- 2000 by Robert Pyefinch and Peter Golborn Tim Melling 34 Looking back 35 (§) Monthly Marathon Steve Rooke 37 Announcements 38 Recent reports Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan © British Birds 2002 COMMENT - the changing face of British Birds It is now nine months since I became editor of British Birds. In that time, the Directors and the Editorial Board of BB have under- taken a thorough appraisal of the journal, during which editorial policy and future direc- tion have been re-examined. Although our principles remain broadly unchanged, we have clarified our focus and will make a number of changes. Some of these are apparent in this issue, while others will follow in due course. Our key aims and objectives can be summarised in the following statement, which lays down a marker for the future progress of the journal: We aspire to make British Birds the leading journal for the modern birder in the Western Palearctic Underpinning this, we aim to: • provide a forum for high-quality contribu- tions of interest to all birdwatchers in the region; • publish material on the following key topics: behaviour, conservation, distribution, ecology, identification, movements, status, and taxonomy; • monitor changes in the environment and bird populations, and explore their impact - in effect, to embrace tomorrow’s history in the making; • maintain our position as the respected journal of record. We believe these to be relevant guiding prin- ciples for making decisions about BB in the future, but, of course, we should welcome com- ments or observations from our readers. At the heart of our editorial policy is the intention to present a diverse amalgam of contributions in every issue, each component well written and interesting in its own right, but all of them together encompassing sufficient breadth to sustain the support of a wide audience. By no means have we achieved all of our stated aims, but the basis for sound development has been created. A number of design changes to the journal have been introduced for this, the first issue of the 95th volume of British Birds. The new look incorporates a number of innovations by Mark Corliss, our designer: some of them immedi- ately striking, others more subtle, but all con- tributing to a cleaner, more streamlined and more modern appearance. Readers will also notice the redesign of the BB logo, the Red Grouse [Lagopus lagopus ], by Robert Gillmor. The simpler, bolder lines of the reworked design portray a more alert, and less ‘stodgy and unathletic’ grouse (these are the artist’s words!), which is an integral part of the new cover. The latest incarnation of the grouse is something of a milestone for Robert himself, since he has now been closely involved with BB for almost 50 years. His first contribution was in February 1952, an illustration for Max Nicholson’s paper on shearwaters, while in this volume, in addi- tion to the redesign of our logo, he has con- tributed the painting of a Parrot Crossbill Loxin pytyopsittacus which forms the heading drawing for our first paper. In terms of the regular team contributing to BB each month, Adrian Pitches, who joined us in November 2001, has already proved a very dynamic addition to the ‘News and comment’ team. Adrian is the environment correspondent for BBC Look North, and, as a keen birdwatcher living and working in northeast England, he brings a new balance to the regional coverage of the BB team. Adrian joined us as a result of the retirement of Wendy Dickson, who has been involved with ‘News and comment’ since 1994, and has provided enormous and unstinting support to the journal during that time. We thank her for her always enthusiastic contribu- 2 © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 2-3 tion, and wish her well. 2j}Qffiangirjg face of British Birds Many readers telhus that the tradition of publishing short Notes is one of BB’s great strengths. The opportunity for short contribu- tions on topics such as bird behaviour, diet and ecology is a unique feature of BB. Regrettably, a substantial backlog of material had built up by the beginning of 2001, but thanks to a huge amount of hard work by the Behaviour Notes Panel, in particular Angela Turner, the Panel’s co-ordinator, the backlog has almost been cleared, and we hope to publish more notes than usual in the coming months, to bring us right up to date. We should like to take this opportunity to encourage the submission of notes, on all aspects of birds and birding that come within the primary sphere of interest for BB, as outlined above. Two highly significant new partnerships have been established in recent months. The Natural History Book Service will operate a brand new service to provide bird books and other commodities to our readers, which will begin this month. NHBS’s expertise, and its service to purchasers of wildlife books, is excep- tional, while the creation of a dedicated website where BB readers can buy books will be one of the key pillars of our new partnership. Secondly, our advertising is now handled by Solo Pub- lishing, rather than being dealt with in-house, and we regard the closer links with Solo and Birdwatch magazine as a very positive step. Readers may also be interested to learn that British Birds is now effectively owned by a regis- tered charity, The British Birds Charitable Trust, the trustees of which are also the directors of the company which took over British Birds in July 2000. The Trust has been established for the benefit of ornithology, particularly in relation to research and education. Looking forward, it is perhaps appropriate to touch briefly on a rapidly changing aspect of birding, that of digital photography. More and more of the photographs submitted to BB, especially those for ‘Recent reports’, are digital images. In particular, the technique of ‘digi- scoping’ is one which gives field birders the opportunity to capture mementos of their best birds without having to carry a huge lens in addition to their telescope. Dick Newell recently commented to me that, as a result, one aspect of birding will return to where it was 100 years ago; that we shall return from the field having shot’ a bagful of trophies, which may be exam- ined at home in fine detail and will advance our knowledge and understanding. Video tech- nology is improving similarly quickly, and at a meeting last month I watched video footage of the putative Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris at Druridge Bay, Northumberland, in 1998, which forms critical evidence for the assessment of this, potentially the most startling find in Britain in the last 50 years. At the same time, printing technology is struggling to keep pace, with the result that what may look stunning on a computer screen does not always reproduce well in the pages of a magazine. At BB, we are keen to maximise the benefits of the digital age, but not at the expense of reproduction quality, so we shall continue to request images of the very highest quality for main papers and notes. In practice, therefore, transparencies and prints are still likely to give the best results in many cases, unless the digital equipment used (which includes both photographic and scanning equipment) is of professional standard. For ‘Recent reports’, however, it will inevitably be the case that sometimes the only shots available are relatively low-resolution images and, in such instances, accepting a lower-quality image is worthwhile. Please see our ‘Guidelines for con- tributors’, reproduced in full on the inside back cover of this issue, for more details. In addition, there is the matter of the ease with which digital images may be manipulated, and the potential consequences of this. Undoubtedly, the British Birds Bird Photograph of the Year competition will soon include a category for digital images, but, since the rules for this will require careful deliberation, we have, somewhat reluctantly, decided not to introduce such a category this year. We have, therefore, undergone a thorough review of the production of BB, and its editorial content. We believe that we are now in a posi- tion to build upon our traditional strengths, and look to the future, to make sure that BB is the journal for the modern birder, being suffi- ciently dynamic to adapt to changes in birding, yet sufficiently stable to maintain the high quality associated with our heritage. We hope that our readers will approve of these changes, and continue to enjoy our product. British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 2-3 3 Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest, Highland Ron W. Summers Robert Gillmor ABSTRACT The Parrot Crossbill Loxia pytyopsittacus is regarded as a rare breeding species in Britain. During a study in Abernethy Forest, Highland, from 1995 to 2001, it was, however, found to be the most abundant crossbill species nesting there. Of all crossbills trapped, 74% were Parrot Crossbills, while only 8% were Scottish Crossbills L. scotica. Parrot Crossbills were identified from their bill measurements and/or from sonograms of tape- recorded calls. They nested in Scots Pine Pinus sylvestris, almost exclusively in stands of ancient native pinewood. Nest trees had an average height of 14.2 m and a diameter at breast height of 57 cm, while the median stand density was 60 trees per ha. The average date of the onset of incubation was 20th March (including possible repeat layings), mean clutch size was 3.86 eggs, mean brood size when about ten days old was 3.2 chicks, and average nesting success (to fledging) was 50%. Chick growth was also measured. The potential presence of Parrot Crossbills in Highland pinewoods should be borne in mind by birdwatchers when identifying crossbills. 4 © British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest Two species of crossbill are known to breed commonly in Scotland, the Common Crossbill Loxia curvirostra and the Scottish Crossbill L. scotica (Knox, in Gibbons et al. 1993). Common Crossbills are widespread, and are associated primarily with Sitka Spruce Picea sitchensis and Lodgepole Pine Pinus contorta plantations (Summers et al. in press). The Scottish population may vary enor- mously, depending on sporadic influxes from the Continent, while the number remaining to breed depends on seed availability, linked to conifer cone crops (Newton 1972). The Scottish Crossbill is resident and endemic in Britain (Voous 1978; BOU Records Committee 1980). It is found mainly in the northeast Highlands and is often associated with Scots Pine Pinus sylvestris forests, although it will feed from a range of conifer species (Summers et al. in press; Marquiss & Rae in press). Records suggest that the Parrot Crossbill L. pytyopsittacus is a rare breeding species in Britain. The first confirmed breeding record was in Norfolk, in 1984 (Davidson 1985). Since then, there have been a number of confirmed and unconfirmed breeding records in England (Moore 1985; Gibbons et al. 1993; Lunn & Dale 1993). The first accepted breeding record in Scotland was in 1991, in Abernethy Forest, Highland (Ogilvie et al. 1994), although a cross- bill captured in Abernethy in 1987, and a dead one in Abernethy in 1988, had bill measure- ments within the range of those of Parrot Crossbill (Proctor & Fairhurst 1993). There were several invasions of Parrot Cross- bills into Britain during the latter half of the twentieth century (Thom 1986; Cramp 8c Perrins 1994). It is possible that some of these invaders settled and bred, and that this went unnoticed in the Highlands because of the species’ similarity to the Scottish Crossbill and the difficulty of identifying crossbill species (Knox 1990). This paper deals with observations in Aber- nethy Forest, where a study of crossbills started in 1995, and summarises data collected on the breeding biology of Parrot Crossbills. Study area and methods Abernethy Forest (57° 15’ N, 3°40’ W) lies on the northern slopes of the Cairngorm Mountains, between 200 m and 500 m above sea level. The trees are almost entirely Scots Pine, and the stands are predominantly of ancient native woodland but also with plantations (Summers etal. 1997). Searches for crossbill nests were made between February and May, during 1995-2001, and were focused on areas where the birds were British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 5 Ron W. Summers Ron W. Summers Ron W Summers Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest 2. Female Parrot Crossbill Loxia pytyopsittacus, Abernethy Forest, Highland, April 200 1 . 3. Male Parrot Crossbill Loxia pytyopsittacus, Abernethy Forest, Highland, April 2001. seen regularly in winter. Crossbills tend to favour the ancient native parts of the forest, and the plantation areas were less frequently searched (Summers & Proctor 1999). Conse- quently, all but one of 56 crossbill nests found was in ancient native woodland. Birds were trapped by using a mistnet or a clap-net, and were then ringed, weighed and measured. Bill depth and length (to the feathers on the crown; Svensson 1992) were measured with dial callipers to the nearest 0.1 mm, and maximum wing length was measured with a stopped ruler to the nearest 1 mm. Mass was recorded to the nearest 1 g, using a Pesola spring balance. Species identification was deter- mined from bill measurements and/or from sonograms of tape-recorded calls. Measure- ments of the bill depth of museum specimens of Parrot Crossbills and Common Crossbills from Fennoscandia formed the baseline against which the Abernethy birds were compared (Summers et al. in press). Female crossbills with bill depth greater than 12.3 mm and males with bill depth greater than 12.5 mm were considered to be Parrot Crossbills, while female crossbills with bill depth less than 11.2 mm and males with bill depth less than 1 1 .3 mm were classed as Common Crossbills (based on 95% confi- dence limits). The bill depth of Scottish Crossbill overlaps with that of both Parrot and Common Crossbills (Knox 1976), but further work is required to deter- mine the degree of overlap. It is, therefore, possible that some indi- viduals in the overlap zones were classified incorrectly. All measure- ments of the Fennoscandian and Abernethy birds were made by the author, eliminating the risk that differences in technique between observers could lead to non-com- parable values. Work on the vocalisations of Loxia species has shown that Common, Scottish and Parrot Crossbills have different excite- ment calls. In most cases, this allows crossbills to be identified from the sonogram of a taped call (Summers et al. in press). Each crossbill trapped was fitted with a unique permutation of colour rings, so that individuals could be recognised in the field and tape-recorded after release. The date of the onset of incubation was determined by one of several methods: (1) checking the nest during egg-laying; (2) checking the nest at hatching, and then sub- tracting the incubation period (15 days: Cramp & Perrins 1994); (3) estimating the age of the chicks from growth curves (see below), and subtracting the age of the chicks plus the incu- bation period. Nest success was determined using the Mayfield method (Mayfield 1975). Results Sixty-two post-juvenile crossbills were captured in Abernethy in late winter and spring, and identified to species. Two further individuals were not identified specifically. The frequency distribution of bill depth showed that the 6 British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest Table I . Numbers of crossbills Loxia of different species captured in Abernethy Forest, Highland, 1 995-200 1 . Figures in parentheses refer to individuals trapped close to the nest. Year Common Crossbill L. curvirostra Scottish Crossbill L. scotica Parrot Crossbill L. pytyopsittacus Unidentified 1995 0 2(2) 8(4) 0 1996 0 0 0 0 1997 0 0 20 (6) 0 1998 0 0 5 0 1999 1 0 1 2 2000 10 (10) 3(3) 8(7) 0 2001 0 0 4(4) 0 Total 11 (10) 5(5) 46 (21) 2 Fig. I. Frequency distribution of bill depth of crossbills Loxia measured in Abernethy Forest, Highland, 1995-2001. Shaded bars indicate those individuals classed as Parrot Crossbills L. pytyopsittacus. majority (74%) of these were Parrot Crossbills (fig. 1, table 1). Eleven Common Crossbills were caught, most of them in 2000, when the spruce cone crop was poor elsewhere in Scotland and the Scots Pine crop was good in Abernethy (personal observations). Only five individuals were classed as Scottish Crossbills. Many of the birds were caught close to their nest and many females had well-developed brood patches, con- firming that all three groups were breeding (table 1). Biometrics Table 2 shows the biometrics of the captured Parrot Crossbills. The bill and wing measure- ments were slightly larger for males than for females. Although smaller, the females were, on average, heavier than the males. They also showed greater variability in mass, and it is pos- sible that some of the females were carrying developing eggs. Table 2. Biometrics of Parrot Crossbills Loxia pytyopsittacus caught in Abernethy Forest, Highland, 1995-2001. Male Female Sample size 25 21 Wing length (mm) Mean 104.9 102.7 Standard deviation 1.34 1.42 Range 103-108.5 100-105 Bill length (mm) Mean 20.7 19.9 Standard deviation 0.64 0.51 Range 19.6-22.2 18.8-20.7 Bill depth (mm) Mean 13.3 13.0 Standard deviation 0.25 0.30 Range 12.8-13.7 12.5-13.6 Mass (g) Mean 51.0 52.3 Standard deviation 1.8 3.6 Range 48-55 46.5-59.5 British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 7 Ron W Summers c Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest > 4. Female Parrot Crossbill Loxia pytyopsittacus brooding young, AbernetFiy Forest, FHighland, June 2001. Nest sites The mean height of 22 Scots Pines used for nesting was 14.2 m (standard deviation 3.7, range 6.1-20.1 m), within which the Parrot Crossbills nested at a mean height of 10.3 m (range 2.8-15.0 m), usually out on lateral branches (77% of cases). The mean diameter at breast height of these trees was 57 cm (standard deviation 2.2, range 16-99 cm), while the median tree density within 15-25 m of the nest tree was 60 trees per ha (range 17-242 per ha). Composition of nests Two Parrot Crossbill nests were dismantled at the end of the breeding season. Each had a base of pine twigs, which made up about half the dry mass of the nest (fig. 2). The lining was of lichens, moss, grass, strips of bark and pine needles. Many tiny fragments were unidentified. Lichens comprised 10-20% of the dry mass of nests. In 1997, the lichens in 1 1 Parrot Cross- bill nests were examined, and Bryoria capillaris was the most abundant of the nine species iden- tified (S. Street in lift.). Bryoria capillaris grows towards the top of Scots Pine trees and, being filamentous, il probably helps to bind the nest, as well as providing camouflage. Only one of the 1 1 nests had no Bryoria, and in this the ground-living lichens Cladonia arbuscula and C. portcntosa were the main species. This nest was only 2.8 m from the ground, perhaps explaining the preponderance of Cladonia lichens. Time of breeding For 16 nests, the median date of the onset of incubation was 20th March, with the range being from 24th February to 14th May. This sample probably includes repeat nestings after Unidentified (1 1 .8%) Pine needles (2.5%)- Bark (7.6%) -y Moss (1 .9%) Lichen (20.3%) Grass (4.8%)- Pine twigs (51.0%) Pine twigs (61 8%) Fig, 2. Composition (percentage dry mass) of two Parrot Crossbill Loxia pytyopsittacus nests, Abernethy Forest. Highland. 8 British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 c Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest the failure of an initial attempt. Excluding two late attempts, the median date becomes 18th March. Clutch and brood sizes Mean clutch size from seven nests was 3.86 (standard deviation 0.69, range 3-5). Mean brood size from 15 nests was 3.20 (standard deviation 1.01, range 1-5). Since brood sizes were largely determined around the time when the chicks were ringed, when they were 8-12 days old, it is likely that brood size at fledging was smaller. Chick growth The growth of the chicks, measured in terms of their increase in mass and the length of the outer primary and vane (fig. 3), was determined at one nest in 1995. At this nest, three chicks were measured every second day from two days of age to 16 days. The nest was not visited after the chicks reached 16 days, because chicks older than this may leave the nest prematurely if dis- turbed. They usually fledge when about 22 days old (Cramp & Perrins 1994). The three chicks grew at a similar rate (fig. 3). At other nests, however, there was often great variation in the size of the chicks, which showed differential growth within the brood. In one nest, the lightest chick (the last to hatch) was less than half the mass of the heaviest, and was the first to die. It is likely that brood reduc- tion comes about through starvation of the smallest chicks. Nest failure Of 16 nests monitored for a combined total of 199 days during incubation, two failed. This is a failure rate of 0.01005 nests per day. Extrapo- lated over the incubation period of 15 days, an estimated 85.9% of clutches will survive to hatching. Seventeen nests were monitored for a total of 243 days when chicks were present, and six of these failed, a daily failure rate of 0.02469. Extrapolated over the fledging period of 22 days, an estimated 57.7% of broods will survive to fledging. Combining the success rates during the incubation and fledging periods, the overall nest success rate was 50%. Three nests (two with eggs and one with chicks) failed after snowfalls. Some crossbills are, however, able to withstand heavy snowfall during incubation (Summers & Donald 2001). Two nests with young were deserted in early June, when the chicks died through starvation. At one, the four chicks, which were about 15 days old, were found dead with empty crops. At the other, the chicks died when between seven and 11 days old. As with many studies of breeding biology, there were further cases (three) in which the cause of the loss of chicks was unknown. No predation was recorded. Dependence of young When young crossbills leave the nest, the bill is not fully developed and the mandibles meet at the tip (Olsson 1964), so they are less able to obtain seeds from cones than are the adults. As Fig. 3. Changes in mass (left) and the growth of the outer primary (right: A represents total length, B represents vane) for three Parrot Crossbill Loxia pytyopsittacus chicks, Abernethy Forest, Highland, 1 995. Vertical lines show the ranges. British Birds 95 • January 2002 •4-11 9 Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest Scots Pine cones open in April, around the time of fledging, it will, however, still be possible for them to feed from cones. Nevertheless, the young do associate with their parents during this period, and are fed by them. It is typical for young to remain quietly in a tree where a parent is foraging, and then to beg with loud calls as the parent approaches to feed them. In 1995, one colour-ringed Parrot Crossbill was seen with its young on 24th July. The estimated fledging date was 12th June, six weeks earlier. Site fidelity There have been several sightings in Abernethy Forest which suggest that some breeding birds are faithful to the site. The longest period involved an adult Parrot Crossbill seen three years after it was first trapped. Discussion The Scottish Crossbill is generally believed to be a relict species associated with the ancient native pinewoods, fragments of the Caledonian forest (Nethersole-Thompson 1975). Conse- quently, there has been a tendency for bird- watchers and ornithologists to assume that crossbills in these woods are of that species. Clearly, this is not always the case. Common, Scottish and Parrot Crossbills may all breed in Abernethy Forest in a given year, depending on food availability within and outside the forest. In 2000, all three species bred; and during the period 1995-2001, the Parrot Crossbill was the most abundant. It is not known for how long Parrot Cross- bills have been nesting in Abernethy, nor how widespread they are in the Highlands. Other sites in the region where Parrot Crossbills have been found recently in spring include Glen- more, Rothiemurchus and Curr Wood (Inver- ness-shire), Culbin Forest (Morayshire), and Glen Tanar, Ballochbuie and the Mar Lodge woodlands (Aberdeenshire) (Summers et al. in press; Marquiss & Rae in press). Parrot Cross- bills are uncommon among museum specimens (identified by bill measurements), suggesting that their current presence in the Highlands may be a recent development. The documented invasions in the twentieth century took place in 1962, 1982 and 1990 (Thom 1986; Cramp & Perrins 1994), so it is possible that there were no invasions coincident with the main period of bird-collecting in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. There are, however, two specimens in Perth Museum, collected in 1884, which are documented by the collector as breeding Parrot Crossbills (Millais 1884). The bill measurements of these specimens (bill depth 13.0 mm and 12.5 mm, for a male and female respectively) lie close to the lower end of the range for the Parrot Crossbill, and, in the absence of unbiased estimates of the biometrics of Scottish Crossbills, we cannot yet be com- pletely sure that these Perthshire birds are not Scottish Crossbills. Nevertheless, it is possible that Parrot Crossbills have bred sporadically in Scotland for many years. The bill and wing measurements of Parrot Crossbills trapped in Abernethy correspond very closely with those given by Knox (1976) and Summers et al. (in press), and both wing length and bill depth are only about 1 mm shorter than those reported in Cramp & Perrins (1994). A slightly different measuring tech- nique may account for the different values. The mean mass given in Cramp & Perrins (1994) ranges from 52.8 g to 55.0 g for males and 50.3 g to 53.8 g for females. The Abernethy males were lighter, at 51.1 g, and the females similar, at 52.3 g. All the nests found in Abernethy were in Scots Pines, the only conifer available there. Elsewhere, Parrot Crossbills will also nest in Norway Spruce Picea abies (Olsson 1964). Olsson described the nest as being composed of thin conifer twigs, moss, lichens, grass, bark, needles and hair. All these items, apart from animal hair, were found in the two Abernethy nests examined. Cramp 8< Perrins (1994) give a clutch size ranging from 3.7 to 4.0 eggs, similar to this study. The development of the young was described by Olsson (1964), but my own study is the first in which growth was measured (fig. 3). Olsson did, however, weigh the chicks on day 24, close to fledging, when they were 38 g. This figure is not much greater than that for day 16 reported in the present study (fig. 3). Nesting success of Parrot Crossbills has rarely been investigated. One study in the Mur- mansk region of the Kola Peninsula, in north- west Russia, reported 15 of 24 nestlings fledging from six nests, giving a productivity of 2.5 young per nest (Kokhanov & Gaev 1970, in Cramp 8< Perrins 1994). In the present study, 50% of nests were successful, giving an esti- mated productivity of 1.6 chicks per nesting attempt. Losses were due to snow, starvation 10 British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 Parrot Crossbills breeding in Abernethy Forest and unknown causes. The loss of two broods as a result of starvation in June was surprising, and may be related to a decline in the food supply. Scots Pine sheds most of its seed in May in Abernethy (personal observations), so there may be little food available in June, before the next cohort of cones develops. Given that there is a resident population of Parrot Crossbills nesting in the Scottish High- lands, birdwatchers should be particularly careful with crossbill identification. The bill size and shape of the Parrot Crossbill are so similar to those of the Scottish Crossbill that visual identification is extremely difficult. Sonograms of tape-recorded birds will assist in their reli- able identification (Summers et al. in press). Acknowledgments The following people helped with fieldwork: R. Dawson, C. Donald, I. Ellis, E. Humphreys and M, Newell. S. Street identified the lichens.The drafts were commented upon by R Edelaar; D. Gibbons, D. jardine, M. Marquiss, S. Taylor and J. Wilson. References BOU Records Committee. 1 980. Records committee: tenth report. Ibis 122: 564-568. Cramp, S., & Perrins, C. M. (eds.) 1 994. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.Vol. 8. Oxford. Davidson, C. 1 985. Parrot Crossbills: a new breeding species. Norfolk Bird Report 1 984: 99- 1 02. Gibbons, D.W., Reid, J. B., & Chapman, R. A. 1993. The New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland: 1 988- 1991. London. Knox, A. G. l976.The taxonomic status of the Scottish Crossbill Loxia sp. Bull. B.O.C. 96: 15-19. - 1990. Identification of Crossbill and Scottish Crossbill. Brit. Birds 83: 89-94. Lunn.J., & Dale, J. E. 1993. Breeding activities of Parrot Crossbills Loxia pytyopsittacus in south Yorkshire in 1 983. Naturalist I 1 8: 9- 1 2. Marquiss, M., & Rae, R. In press. Ecological differentiation in relation to bill size amongst syrmpatric, genetically undifferentiated crossbills Loxia spp. Ibis. Mayfield, H. F. 1 975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson Bull. 87:456-466. Millais, J. G. 1884. Note on the occurrence of the Parrot Crossbill in Perthshire, and probable nesting. Proc. Perthsh. Soc. Nat. So. 1 88 1 - 1 886: 1 82. Moore, D. R. (ed.) 1985. Review of the year Suffolk Birds 1984: 4-6. Nethersole-Thompson, D. 1975. Pine Crossbills. Berkhamsted. Newton, I. 1972. Finches. London. Ogilvie, M., & the Rare Breeding Birds Panel. 1994. Rare breeding birds in the United Kingdom in 1991. Brit. Birds 87: 366-393. Olsson, V. 1 964. Studies of less familiar birds 1 26. Parrot Crossbill. Brit. Birds 57: I 1 8- 1 23. Proctor R.. & Fairhurst, D. 1993. Identification forum: the Scottish Crossbill problem. Birding World 6: 145-146. Summers, R. W„ & Donald, C. 2001 . Scottish Crossbill nest covered by snow. Scottish Bird News 62: 5. — , Jardine, D. C., Marquiss, M., & Rae, R. In press.The distribution and habitats of crossbills Loxia spp. in Britain, with special reference to the Scottish Crossbill Loxia scotica. Ibis. — & Proctor R. 1 999. Tree and cone selection by crossbills Loxia sp. and Red Squirrels Sciurus vulgaris at Abernethy forest, Strathspey. For. Ecoi. Manage. I 1 8: 173-182. — , — , Raistrick, R, & Taylor S. l997.The structure of Abernethy Forest, Strathspey, Scotland. Bot. J. Scot/. 49: 39-55. Svensson, L. 1 992. Identification Guide to European Passerines. 4th edn. Stockholm. Thom.V. M. 1986. Birds in Scotland. Calton. Voous, K. H. l978.The Scottish Crossbill: Loxia scotica. Brit. Birds 71:3-10. Ron IT Summers, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Etive House, Beechwood Park, Inverness IV2 3BW Looking back Twenty-five years ago: ‘The Birds of the Western Palearctic Volume 1 is now at an advanced stage, with page proofs expected shortly. It will be published by the Oxford University Press, it is hoped in May 1977 at £25, under the double title Handbook of the Birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa — The Birds of the Western Palearctic.' (Brit. Birds 70: 40, January 1977) ‘The Wildfowl Trust at Arundel The seventh Wildfowl Trust Centre was opened on 6th November 1976, in grounds about 1 km north of Arundel, Sussex, between Swanbourne Lake and the river Arun. The Centre contains a number of attractively landscaped stretches of water, the main feature being Swan Lake, sited opposite the entrance building. Special attrac- tions, among the thousand or so wildfowl, include a colony of Black Swans [Cygnus atratus } from Australia and many diving and sea ducks. One of the observation hides over- looks some reed-beds and a wader scrape. (Brit. Birds 70: 42, January 1977) British Birds 95 • January 2002 * 4-11 From the Rarities Committee’s files: Mystery photograph or a first for Britain? Some of the more interesting records submitted to BBRC have been featured in British Birds in the series ‘From the Rarities Committee’s files’. Those published so far have tended to deal with identification criteria for difficult species. Occasionally, we receive a submission which not only increases our knowledge of a particular species but also raises fundamental questions about the process of record assessment.The record discussed below is just such an example. While much of the Committee’s deliberation concerned the identity of the bird, it also helped to develop our views on the nature of the evidence required for acceptance of a record of a species new to Britain. ZEISS The morning of Saturday 3rd May 1998 was clear and bright in northwest England, but with a cold northerly wind. A large raptor, seen approaching from the northwest, drew the attention of two local bird- watchers (who wish to remain anonymous), since its underparts appeared strikingly pale and its identity was not immediately apparent. The raptor passed close to a small wood, which elicited a response from one of a pair of Common Buzzards Buteo buteo nesting there. A brief bout of sparring between the two raptors ensued, during which time a third observer managed to photograph them, using a camera attached to a tripod-mounted telescope. The unnamed raptor subsequently flew off, heading southeast, and the whole incident was over in seconds, having occurred too quickly for the observers to concentrate fully on the precise details of the mystery bird, so that no field notes were made. At the time, the observers reluc- tantly accepted that it was simply ‘one that had got away’. I he issue was, however, revived when the photographs were developed. The observers were immediately intrigued, and showed the best photograph to a number of other birders for comment. The reaction of many was ‘Mmm, looks like a Short-toed Eagle [ Circaetus gallicus] to me. Where did you take it?’ Realising the implication of that possibility, that the bird which they had seen was a potential ‘first’ for Britain, the observers sent the photograph, together with an account of the circumstances of the sighting, to BBRC for its opinion of the raptor’s identity (rather than as a formal sub- mission). They confirm that the photograph gives a fair representation of the comparative colours of the two birds involved. Identification of the mystery raptor Having studied the photograph, BBRC members were in no doubt that it showed a pale, medium-sized, long-legged raptor, and that it was possible to determine a smudgy, dark trailing edge to the wing and a pale tail (plate 5). Some members expressed their concern that only five ‘fingered’ primaries were visible, and that the unidentified raptor did not seem to be much bigger than the accompanying Common Buzzard. They raised the possibility that it might simply have been a Common Buzzard, captured in an atypical pose. There was, however, a consensus that (i) since the observa- 12 © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 12-16 Mystery photograph or a first for Britain? 5. Common Buzzard Buteo buteo (below) and unidentified raptor northwest England, May 1998. tion occurred in northwest England, and (ii) because the photograph lacked any supporting documentation in the way of field notes, it was simply not sufficient to apply the argument that ‘the only Western Palearctic eagle which looks like this is Short-toed, so that is what it must be’. We felt that we had to prove that it was a Short-toed Eagle, rather than identifying it as such simply by a process of elimination. The need to consider similar species that could potentially occur in Britain as escapes from cap- tivity, examples being various other Circaetus snake-eagles and such species as Ferruginous Hawk B. regalis, was also recognised. During its assessment of the record, BBRC consulted a number of individuals who were internationally acknowledged raptor experts, or were very experienced at identifying species from single photographs (as in such competi- tions as ‘Monthly Marathon’), and the argu- ments of some of those consulted are reproduced here. Explaining the situation, we asked: ‘Given that we have only a single photo- graph as evidence, can we definitely rule out all possibilities other than Short-toed Eagle? As this observation involved a potential first for Britain, the Committee felt that, as a starting point, we would have to be absolutely certain ot the identification of this raptor. Even if it was proven beyond doubt to be a Short-toed Eagle, we would still need to resolve the debate as to whether the documentation was adequate for a ‘first’. Once our experts had been given a chance to study the photograph, it became clear that there were differences of opinion, not only about the identification, but also concerning which fea- tures were visible on the photograph. All agreed that the lighting in the picture was a problem; the tail and one wing were very pale, whereas the other wing showed more pattern and detail and was, therefore, the one on which to focus. Bill Clark thought that it was a Short-toed Eagle, and cited as supporting evidence the wing shape, the fact that the tail showed sharp corners at the tip and that the underwing- coverts showed at least two dark bands. The other experts felt that these bands were prob- ably due to photographic grain. Dick Forsman considered that the raptor was most likely not a Short-toed Eagle. He thought that it was too similar in size and structure to a Common Buzzard, in addition to which the wing formula, as shown in the photograph, clearly shows a wingtip with five ‘fingers’ (typical of members of the genus Buteo, whereas all ‘true’ eagles show at least six clearly emarginated pri- maries). Since there are no signs of wing moult, 13 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 12-16 F. Worthington c Mystery photograph or a first for Britain? the wing formula is presumably accurately depicted in the photograph. The birds dangling legs also reveal fairly dark ‘trousers’, which is another feature in favour of a Buteo but against Short-toed Eagle. Killian Mullarney commented: T suspect that both birds are, in fact, Common Buzzards. I don’t see how it is possible to make any accu- rate assessment of the birds’ relative sizes since we have no way of judging how far each bird is from the camera. Assuming, from their interac- tion, that they are approximately the same dis- tance from the camera, I think it quite possible that they are about the same size. The apparent larger size of the pale bird might simply be due to the fact that its wings, legs and tail are almost at full stretch. My gut reaction is that the shape and structure of this bird is not right for a Short-toed Eagle. The bird in question has only five “fingered” primaries, like a buzzard, rather than Short-toed Eagle’s six. It is difficult to determine very much in terms of plumage detail, and the extremely contrasting illumina- tion adds to the problems. The width and apparent strength of the dark trailing edge to the bird’s left wing do not look right for Short- toed Eagle, but are perfectly OK for Common Buzzard. The impression of darker thighs is also very reminiscent of Common Buzzard, and entirely wrong for Short-toed Eagle.’ Bill Clark later commented that, despite the healthy difference in opinion of our experts, this raptor was more likely a Short-toed Eagle than a buzzard: T have studied the photo again, keeping in mind the points raised by DF and KM. They mention five characters that are against Short-toed Eagle: size, structure, five fingers on the wingtip, dark trousers, and a dark band on the trailing edge of the wing. T still think that the mystery raptor is clearly larger than the accompanying Common Buzzard. I estimated the wingspan of the two birds in the photo, judged as if the wings were stretched flat, and compared the two; the ratio was 0.83. Using published measurements of the wingspan of both species, I get the same ratio for a small Short-toed Eagle compared with a large Common Buzzard. Structurally, I think that we all agree that the photo could easily be misleading. The corners of the tail tip do, however, appear to me to be very square, a feature of Short-toed Eagle which is not shared by buzzards. The difference in the shape of the tail between snake-eagles and buzzards, which I believe is a reliable fieldmark, is due to the rela- tive lengths of the outer tail feathers. In buz- zards, the two pairs of outermost tail feathers are slightly shorter than the rest. This results in a somewhat more rounded appearance to the corners of the tail tip, as shown in plate 25 and by photo 6 (page 325) in Clark (1999). In snake- eagles, on the other hand, the outermost pair of tail feathers is usually the same length, or even slightly longer, than the other rectrices, giving the corners of the tail a more square, less rounded appearance, as depicted by figure 1 [k] in plate 5 and by photos 2-3 (page 309) in Clark (1999). T agree that five fingers are visible on the wingtip. But the relative lengths of those pri- maries are just the same as those in several photos of Short-toed Eagle. It is possible that the sixth finger could be behind the fifth, since the bird in the photo is almost head-on, rather than directly above the photographer. Several of my own photographs of Short-toed Eagle in a similar attitude show five fingers rather than six because the spread between primaries five and six is small. ‘Both the dark trousers and the apparent dark band on the trailing edge could be explained by their being in shadow. Several of my photos of distant Short-toed Eagles show just such a dark border on the trailing edge of the wing. Furthermore, if the two more-or-less distinct dark bands on the underwing-coverts of the left wing are real, that is another char- acter of Short-toed Eagle. Finally, look at the carpal area. There is no dark “comma” on the mystery bird, which a buzzard would show. Pale examples of Common Buzzard or Long-legged Buzzard B. rufinus all show a contrasting dark comma on the underwing at the wrist. Simi- larly, Rough-legged Buzzard B. lagopus and even European Honey-buzzard Pernis apivorus would show dark carpal patches.’ Killian Mullarney responded to this: ‘BC suggests that the apparently square corners to the tail are a feature of Short-toed Eagle not shared by buzzards. I am sure that I have seen buzzards’ tails appear every bit as “square-cor- nered” as this, especially when viewed from this angle; see, for example, plates 316 and 318 in Forsman ( 1999). ‘I agree that the apparent lack of any sort of dark carpal comma militates against a Buteo solution. I would expect, even in a photo like this, that there would be a more obvious sug- gestion of a carpal comma on the bird’s left 14 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 12-16 c Mystery photograph or a first for Britain? Strong light striking the wings has obliterated all pattern (which is even more apparent on the opposite wing); perhaps this is why there appears to be no carpal patch? MYSTERY RAPTOR an ‘enhanced view’ Is the apparent spotting here really sufficiently distinct to be interpreted as 'dark bands'? Tip of p5 appears to be just visible, not hidden or missing, and corresponds in length with that of a buzzard. Many photographs of buzzards viewed from a similar angle show the tail with this shape. If the apparent darkness of the thighs is due to shadow, because the light is coming from behind the bird, then the head (which is over-lapping the bird's right thigh, and at approximately the same angle) would be at least as dark. The fact that the head appears rather pale suggests that, in fact, the thighs really are dark. Fig. I . Enhanced and annotated sketch of unidentified raptor, northwest England, May 1 998. wing. Given the way the light is striking the tail, the right wing and the “inner hand” of the left wing, it has, however, effectively “burned out” whatever markings may be there. I wonder if this might explain the apparent lack of a carpal comma, too? ‘BC suggests that a sixth finger (P5) could be hidden behind the fifth finger (P6), or perhaps that P5 is missing; I believe that P5 is actually visible (see fig. 1) but that it is not prominent, as is normal in a Buteo. As already mentioned, there is no indication of moult in the primaries, or missing feathers. BC suggests that the dark legs could be explained by their being in shadow. The sun is coming from behind the bird, and the legs certainly are in shadow, but so, too, is the head, which appears to be aligned along a similar axis to the legs, in front of the bird’s right thigh (see fig. 1, where I have taken the liberty of slightly enhancing this part of the image). Given that the head, which is in much the same degree of shadow as the legs, appears lighter than the legs, the apparent darkness of the legs cannot simply be attributed to their being in shadow. To conclude, the case for this bird possibly being a Short-toed Eagle requires too much explaining-away of certain critical features (i.e. wing formula, dark thighs) and relies too heavily on tenuous or unreliable fea- tures (i.e dark bands on the underwing, square corners to the tail, and the larger size). I admit that I have had to resort to a little bit of explaining-away myself (i.e. lack of “carpal commas”), but, on balance, I believe that the evidence, such as it is, points much more solidly to the bird being a species of buzzard rather than a Short-toed Eagle.’ All our experts were agreed that, given the circumstances, BBRC should not regard this observation as having been of a Short-toed Eagle. The observers were happy to accept the consensus view, and re-emphasised that the photo had not constituted a formal submission in the first place, but was submitted merely for advice and opinion. Implications for record assessment This record was instructive not only in terms of raptor identification, but also with respect to the analysis and assessment of photographs as part of the documentation of rarity records. It certainly stimulated a keen debate about the level of evidence which is required for a British ‘first’. BBRC relies on the honesty of observers to describe accurately the circumstances of their observation, as well as the bird itself, and we feel that this is appropriate in the overwhelming majority of cases. Should we demand more than this in the case of a putative first for Britain? We should not be alone if we did, since the American Ornithologists’ Union states that for ‘inclusion in the main text [list], records of British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 12-16 15 Killian Mullarney Mystery photograph or a first for Britain? > occurrence must be documented by a specimen or an unequivocally-identifiable photograph. A recording of vocalizations diagnostic for a species could constitute equally valid documen- tation, but no species are included on that basis.’ We have no such stipulation in Britain, although BBRC is in the process of developing guidelines to be employed when assessing a first for Britain. We are fortunate in being able to use this record to open the debate to a wider audience. On this occasion, we have absolutely no doubt that the photograph is genuine, and was taken exactly when and where stated. In this case, the photographic evidence does not prove the identi- fication conclusively. But what if it did? There is no accompanying description or field notes, nor is there any identifiable background in the shot that would allow us to place it in the UK. If we did accept a record such as this, would we be setting a dangerous precedent? It is possible that, with a firm statement from observers that a pho- tograph was taken in Britain, plus a recognisable image of the bird, we could have species such as Crab-plover Dromas ardeola or White-rumped Swift Apus caffer on the British List. When the photo of the mystery raptor discussed here was circulated, BBRC made it quite clear that there were no question marks over its authenticity. Our experts differed in their response. Bill Clark felt that a photograph, ‘even if we had all agreed that it was [of] that species, should not be the only validation for the first record of Short-toed Eagle for Britain’. Killian Mullarney agreed with this, but was less sure of the prin- ciple involved: T appreciate the difficulty of having to make a decision of such potential sig- nificance as accepting a “first” for Britain on the evidence of just one or two photographs, with virtually no material description to go on. In principle, I don’t think that there should be a significant obstacle to accepting a rarity, even one of this calibre, on photographic evidence alone, provided of course that there is absolutely no doubt that the photos were taken at the time and place claimed [as they were in the case dis- cussed here], and that they establish the identifi- cation of the bird beyond doubt. In this case, while there is no reason to doubt the honesty of the observers and the photographer, the identi- fication of the pale bird in the photo as a Short- toed Eagle is, however, very much open to ques- tion, in my opinion.’ The ideal ‘first for Britain’ would be seen by a number of independent observers, and be supported by photographs or video evidence. Even in these circumstances, we would expect detailed independent notes from at least two of the main observers. In the absence of photos, the quality of description and, particularly, the field notes become of paramount importance. It would also be naive to disregard the experience and past track record of the observers involved. But what of the case where there is a photo- graph showing the claimed species? Should we still expect to see field notes? If it is captured on video, should we expect the observer to pan from the bird to a recognisable field mark? Should we consider the previous reliability of an observer, or should we simply accept such photographic records at face value? And should we discriminate between records from non- birders and those from keen birdwatchers? If, for example, a non-birder sends in a photo- graph of an unnamed species in his or her garden, and the bird depicted is clearly a Siberian Accentor Prunella montanella , is this more reliable than a similar claim from a birder who knows the significance of the find but whose photo shows only the bird itself, with no recognisable landscape feature to place it in this country? While BBRC and BOURC eventually have to make these decisions, we should do this with some knowledge of what British birders con- sider to be appropriate. Should we follow the American model and demand exhaustive proof, or should we maintain a less rigorous but more birder-friendly attitude? We should welcome debate in British Birds on this subject. Acknowledgments BBRC is indebted to the observers concerned for allowing their record to be the focus of this article, and to Bill Clark, Dick Forsman, Killian Mullarney and Steve Votier for their input and opinions. References Clark, W. S. 1 999. A Field Guide to the Raptors of Europe. The Middle East, and North Africa. Oxford. Forsman, D. 1 999. The Raptors of Europe and the Middle East. London. Prof. Colin Bradshaw, on behalf of BBRC 9 Tynemouth Place, Tynemouth, Tyne & Wear NE30 4B] The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd 16 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 12-16 First nesting by Blue-crowned Parakeet in Britain Chris Butler ; Grant Hazlehurst and Kristie Butler Dan Powell ABSTRACT Four species of parrot (Psittacidae) have bred in the wild in the UK: Rose-ringed Parakeet Psittacula krameri, Alexandrine Parakeet Reupatria , Monk Parakeet Myiopsitta monachus, and Budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus. In April 200 1 , a fifth species of parrot, the Blue-crowned Parakeet Aratinga acuticoudoto, was discovered breeding in Britain, when a nest with four eggs was found in a park in Lewisham, Kent. This provided an opportunity to observe the species’ breeding behaviour in the wild, about which there are few published data. By 6th May, the nest had been abandoned and the eggs were missing, possibly taken by a Grey Squirrel Sciurus carolinensis. Blue-crowned Parakeets were first reported in Bromley in 1997, when two were recorded coming to a feeder and by 1 999 a flock of 1 5 was observed. Although their numbers are still low, this relatively rapid rate of increase may presage the establishment of another feral parrot species. © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 1 7-20 17 First nesting by Blue-crowned Parakeet Discovery of the nest On 15th April 2001, while studying Rose-ringed Parakeets in a park near Bromley, Kent, the authors’ atten- tion was caught by a metallic, grating ‘grrawwwkk’, which sounded louder and quite different from a Rose-ringed Parakeet’s typical rapid ‘kew-kew-kew’ call. The source of In England, parakeets (Psittacidae) are now a familiar sight at many locations in Berk- shire, Buckinghamshire, Surrey and Kent, the vast majority of them being Rose-ringed Parakeets Psittacula krameri. The first family group of this species was reported in 1969, in Gravesend, Kent, and it was confirmed breeding in 1971 near Croydon, Surrey (Lever 1977). It is estimated that there are now approximately 5,000 feral Rose-ringed Parakeets in Britain. Recent roost counts have included 3,684 at Esher, Surrey, 800 at Lewisham, Kent, 277 at Reigate, Surrey, and 435 at Ramsgate, Kent, in addition to several smaller roosts (pers. obs.). Small numbers of two other parakeets are also known to breed in Britain. Alexandrine Parakeets P. eupatria bred successfully from 1997 to 1999 at Fazackerley, Merseyside (Ogilvie et al. 2000, 2001), and a pair at Foots Cray Meadows, Kent, fledged at least one young in 2001 (pers. obs.). A colony of Monk Parakeets Myiopsitta monachus present at Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, since at least 1993 now consists of up to 32 individuals, and nests have been seen since at least 1996 (M. Campbell and B. Kerstein in litt.). A population of similar size existed near Tiverton, Devon, from 1987 to 1998, but has since died out (Claves & Darleston 2000). During the spring of 2001, a pair of Blue-crowned Parakeets Aratinga acuticaudata, a species which has not previously been reported breeding in Britain, was discovered nesting in Lewisham, Kent. Infor- mation on this parakeet’s breeding behaviour in its native South Amer- ican range is scant, and such data are entirely lacking for introduced populations. We took the opportu- nity, therefore, to document the breeding behaviour of this pair. relatively short tail. Although it was predomi- nantly green, its face was suffused with blue and it had a white eye-ring, while the upper mandible was pale ivory and the lower mandible blackish. The basal portion of the underside of the tail feathers was brick-red, most clearly visible when the tail was fanned. The bird was undoubtedly a Blue-crowned Parakeet. Shortly after, another Blue-crowned Parakeet emerged from a nearby tree hole and flew across to join the first one. Since the Blue- crowned Parakeet, unlike the Rose-ringed, shows no obvious sexual dimorphism, it was impossible to determine the sex of each indi- vidual with certainty. The two engaged in allo- preening and allofeeding behaviour for ten minutes, before the second individual returned to the cavity. The cavity was 10.5 m above the ground, in a 24-m Ash Fraxinus excelsior. Using a ladder and a miniature video camera fixed to a pole, we were able to view the contents of the cavity, which contained four eggs. While we did so, both of the Blue-crowned Parakeets perched only 5 m from the camera-operator, where they continued to call loudly. This contrasts with the the call was an unfamiliar parrot, larger than Rose-ringed and with a 6. Blue-crowned Parakeet Aratinga acuticaudata. Lewisham, Kent, April 200 1 . 18 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 1 7-20 Chris Butler Chris Butler First nesting by Blue-crowned Parakeet C 7. Blue-crowned Parakeets Aratinga acuticaudata, Lewisham, Kent, April 200 1 . behaviour of Rose-ringed Parakeets, which typ- ically fly up to 50 m away from the nest when disturbed, before alighting to voice their distress. Behaviour during incubation During three hours of continuous observation on 21st April, the eggs were incubated for about 50% of that period, in bouts lasting from 12 to 28 minutes, separated by periods of two to 33 minutes. By 29th April, the parakeets spent only 36% of the observation period inside the nest cavity, and both were seen inspecting other holes on that date. Although, on one occasion, both birds were in the nest cavity together for 25 minutes, the eggs appear to have been incubated primarily by one member of the pair, presumably the female. While one of the pair was incubating, the other was typically close by outside the hole, and usually silent. If an incubation stint continued for more than 20 minutes, the individual outside sometimes called softly, whereupon the partner, apparently in response, emerged from the cavity. Loud calling resumed once the two were reunited. When the nest was next inspected, on 6th May, no eggs were present, and predation by Grey Squirrels Sciurus carolinensis was sus- pected. Although the Blue-crowned Parakeets were often seen subsequently in the park, no further nest was located. Mating behaviour The pair regularly engaged in allopreening, mainly of the vent and head. These bouts lasted up to 30 minutes, and on three occasions they led to mating displays and copulation. There were three components to the display: Head-dipping: both individuals lowered the head to branch height. • Head-nodding: both rapidly raised and lowered the head (with much greater frequency than head-dipping). • Ailofeeding: this appeared to be ritualistic; for example, food was seemingly not always regurgitated, although it was impossible to be sure. It appeared that it was only one of the pair, presumably the male, that fed its partner, but lack of obvious sexual dimorphism prevented confirmation of this. These behaviours were repeated in short bouts of up to ten seconds’ duration, with no obvious pattern. They would climax in short periods of copulation. Mating did not entail the male mounting the female, but involved a side-by- side copulation, similar to that described by Levinson (1981) for the White-fronted Amazon Amazona albifrons. One individual, presumably the male, held on to the flank of the other with one of its feet, and the cloacas were then brought together for no more than five seconds. Once copulation was completed, the displays were sometimes continued, resulting in up to two further copulations. Foraging behaviour The Blue-crowned Parakeets foraged together, often calling loudly, particularly just before taking flight. Their preferred food items were similar to those of Rose-ringed Parakeets, and included, for example, tree buds, shoots and blossom. Blue-crowned Parakeets in the Bromley area have also been observed feeding on peanuts, sunflower seeds and commercial seed mix in nearby gardens (M. Williams in litt.). Reactions to other parakeet species The Blue-crowned Parakeets nested within 25 nr of three Rose-ringed Parakeet nests. The former were clearly dominant, presumably because of their larger size. On several occasions, they chased away intruding Rose-ringed Parakeets which approached the immediate vicinity of their nest cavity. Blue-crowned Parakeets do not join the Lewisham Crematorium roost site, which is believed to contain all the Rose-ringed and Alexandrine Parakeets living in southeast London. The location of their roost remains unknown. British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 1 7-20 19 First nesting by Blue-crowned Parakeet c > Behaviour in South America and in captivity Blue-crowned Parakeets are native to South America, where they occur in three disjunct populations: from northeastern Colombia to northern Venezuela; in northeastern Brazil; and from Bolivia and southern Brazil south through Argentina (Forshaw 1989; Juniper & Parr 1998). Five subspecies are recognised ( Juniper & Pan- 1998). This parakeet’s disjunct distribution reflects an avoidance of rainforest, as it prefers less densely wooded deciduous areas and arid scrub (Forshaw 1989; Hilty & Brown 1986). Although generally a lowland species, it occurs at up to 2,650 m in Bolivia (Fjeldsa & Krabbe 1990). Little information exists on the Blue- crowned Parakeet’s breeding habits in the wild. Like most parrots, it nests in a tree cavity (Forshaw 1989; Juniper & Parr 1998). Two nests located in Argentina, both in December, each contained a clutch of two eggs (Hartert & Venturi 1909; Forshaw 1989). In captivity, three or four eggs are laid, at three-day intervals, and incubation begins after the second egg is laid (Arndt 1980; Low 1977). Incubation lasts for 23 days, and the young fledge after 50 days (Arndt 1980). A Blue-crowned Parakeet population in Lewisham and Bromley? These are not the first observations of Blue- crowned Parakeets in Bromley. A pair was seen at a feeder in 1997, and by 1999 numbers at this location had increased to eight, including juveniles (Williams 1999). A flock of up to 15 parrots, believed to be of this species, was seen in the area at that time (John Iberson in lift.). Blue- crowned Parakeets were also observed in 2001 in local gardens 750 m from the nest in Lewisham, and in another park 1.5 km away in Bromley. Although only one nest was located in 2001, another pair of Blue-crowned Parakeets was discovered in the same park on 21st April. The two pairs occasionally associated with each other, but we were unable to follow the second pair to a nest. Blue-crowned Parakeets also appear to be establishing feral populations in the USA and in Spain. The species has been present since the early 1980s in the upper Florida Keys, and it is thought that a small population may breed there (Robertson & Wooltenden 1992). In addi- tion, a population of fewer than 50 individuals may be established in the greater Los Angeles area of California (Garrett 1997). In Spain, it is possible that a feral population of this parakeet has become established in Barcelona, as flocks of 20-30 individuals can be encountered in the city (Brit. Birds 94: 208-209). Given the Blue-crowned Parakeet’s ability to survive at high altitudes, it is not unreasonable to suppose that British winters would pose few difficulties for this species. Although its numbers are still quite low, the fact that they have apparently increased relatively rapidly sug- gests that this parakeet may be yet another exotic parrot to become established in the British Isles. The population is, however, cur- rently small and ot limited distribution, and its future is, therefore, uncertain. References Arndt, T. 1980. Zucht des Blaukopf- oder Spitzschwanzsittichs ( Aratinga a. acuticaudata). Die Gefiederte Welt 104: 181-182. Fjeldsa. J.. & Krabbe, N. 1990. 8 irds of the High Andes. Copenhagen. Forshaw, J. M. 1989. Parrots of the World. London. Garret, K. L. 1 997. Population status and distribution of naturalized parrots in southern California. Western Birds 28: 181-195. Gibbons, D.W., Reid. J. B.. & Chapman, R. A. 1993. The New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland: 1 988- 1991. Calton. G laves, D. J., & Darlaston, M. 2000. Devon Bird Report. Hartert, E., & Venturi, S. 1909, Notes sur les oiseaux de la Republique Argentine. Novi t. Zool. 1 6: 1 59-267. Hilty, S. L., & Brown, W. L. 1 986. Birds of Colombia. Princeton. Lever; C. 1 977. The Naturalized Animals of the British Isles. London. Levinson, S.T. 1 98 1 .The social behavior of the White- fronted Amazon ( Amazona albifron s). In: Pasquier, R. F. (ed.), Conservation of New World Parrots. Proceedings of the ICBP Parrot Working Group Meeting St. Lucia, 1 980. ICBP Technical Publication I. Low, R. 1 980. Parrots: their care and breeding. Poole. Ogilvie, M„ & the Rare Breeding Birds Panel. 1999. Non- native birds breeding in the United Kingdom in 1996. Brit. Birds 92: 176-182. — & — 2000. Non-native birds breeding in the United Kingdom in 1 998. Brit. Birds 93: 428-433. Robertson, W. B., & Woolfenden, G. E. 1992. Florida Bird Species. Gainesville. Stevenson, H. M„ & Anderson, B. H. 1994. The Birdlife of Florida. Gainesville. Williams, M. 1999. Parrot Puzzle. BBC Wildlife 17: 42. Chris Butler, Edward Grey Institute of Field Ornithology, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OXI 3PS; e-mail: Christopher.butler@zoo.ox.ac.uk (corresponding author) I)r Grant Hazlehurst, 10 Apex Close, Beckenham, Kent BR3 57 U Kristie Butler, Wolfson College, Linton Road, Oxford 0X2 6 UD 20 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 1 7-20 Conservation research news Compiled by Andy Evans, David Gibbons and Ken Smith Arable ‘pockets’ and bird numbers There is little doubt that the enormous declines in UK farmland bird populations since the mid 1970s have been driven by changes in farming practices. There have been many such changes, mostly interrelated, but they can be broadly divided into two categories: the intensification of both arable and livestock systems in the search for increasing yields, and the simplifica- tion of agricultural enterprises into either arable or livestock, as a result of business ratio- nalisation. The latter process has brought about a large reduction in the number of mixed farms, and a polarisation of agriculture on the landscape scale, with pasture dominating in the west and arable in the east. A great deal of research into the decline of individual species has focused on the changes associated with intensification, such as increased pesticide use and the reduction of spring tillage. A joint study, by the British Trust for Ornithology and the RSPB, has now examined, for the first time, the effect on bird numbers of the presence of arable habitat in pastoral regions. Bird density was measured on 1,350 ‘farm- land’ Breeding Bird Survey squares, and then related to the existence of arable habitat within each square. After controlling for regional and landscape effects, the authors showed that the numbers of Grey Partridge Perdix perdix, Sky Lark Alauda arvensis , Tree Sparrow Passer mon- tanus, Yellowhammer Ember iza citrinella , Reed Bunting E. schoeniclus and Corn Bunting Mil- iaria calandra increased in tandem with an increase in the amount of arable land in the survey square. All of these species, with the exception of Yellowhammer, are red-listed and included in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. This association with arable land was strongest where the habitat was rare in the surrounding area. These results are extremely important, since they suggest that any design for a new agri-environment scheme for pastoral regions should include a mechanism for supporting or reintroducing pockets of arable land. Robinson, R, A., Wilson, J. D„ & Crick, H. Q. R 2001 . The importance of arable habitat for farmland birds in grassland landscapes.]. Appl. Ecol. 38: 1059-1069. Agricultural intensification and the collapse of farmland birds in Europe A number of studies have demonstrated that agricultural intensification in the UK has had deleterious effects on its farmland bird popula- tions. If this finding could be applied to other European countries, then we would predict that those countries with more intensive agriculture should have suffered more severe declines in their bird populations. A recent study by Donald et al. (2001) provides an excellent test of this prediction. The authors obtained popula- tion trends of 52 farmland species from the European Bird Database, and calculated the mean trend across all farmland birds in each country. The results showed that farmland bird populations were declining in most European countries, but more so in some than in others. The authors then sought to explain these differ- ences in terms of several measures of agricul- tural intensity, principally cereal yield per unit area. As predicted, population declines were sig- © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 2 1 -22 21 Conservation research news nificantly greater in countries with more inten- sive agriculture, with cereal yield explaining a substantial proportion of the variation. Popula- tion declines were greater in EU countries, subject to the Common Agricultural Policy, than in former Communist countries, and the authors predict that the introduction of EU agricultural policies into the latter countries will result in similar declines there. The UK has one of the greatest cereal yields and, perhaps unsurprisingly, the steepest decline in farmland bird populations. Donald, R F„ Green, R. E., & Heath, M. F. 200 1 . Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe's farmland bird populations. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. 8. 268: 25-29. Little Bustards need a little farming of the right kind The Crau, an area of semi-natural steppe in Provence, southeast France, is well known to birdwatchers as a place in which to see good numbers of raptors, Stone-curlews Burhinus oedicnemus and Little Bustards Tetrax tetrax. The area is a large (600 km2) alluvial plain, once a river delta, which has been managed by tradi- tional sheep grazing for perhaps 2,000 years. During the last few centuries, there has been an increasing usage of the land for hay meadows, and, more recently, intensive horticulture and urbanisation have become important. Only 100 km2 of the original steppe now remain. Little Bustards were first reported breeding in the Crau in the 1950s, and their population has subsequently increased enormously, in con- trast to the generally downward trend elsewhere in their range. Axel Wolff and his colleagues (Wolff et al. 2001) have censused male bustards in the area, and related their distribution to landscape features and the type of agriculture. They estimate there to be between 473 and 539 male Little Bustards in the Crau, which repre- sents over 40% of the total French population. The results of the analysis of habitat selec- tion are particularly interesting. Although the bustards were present on the remaining steppe grasslands, by far the highest densities were found in areas of extensive agriculture or where this type of farming was mixed with traditional steppe. Extensive agricultural habitats such as fallows, grazed crops and legumes were strongly favoured, while intensive crops such as cereals and irrigated hay meadows were shunned. Although they were unable to determine exactly the reasons for their findings, Wolff et al. speculate that extensive agricultural habitats in the Crau may provide resources which are scarce or absent in traditional steppe. This has been beneficial for the bustards and has allowed them to become established in such good numbers. The authors put the Little Bustard in a group of species which probably benefit from extensive agricultural regimes. These contrast with ‘pure steppe species’ such as Pin-tailed Sandgrouse Pterocles alchata and Dupont’s Lark Chersophilus duponti, which require natural grasslands with no cultivation. It is also clear from this study that, like many other declining farmland birds of northwest Europe (Donald et al. 2001; see above), male Little Bustards avoid intensively managed agricultural land. The key to the recovery of the Little Bustard elsewhere in France, and throughout the rest of its range, seems to be to ensure that a significant part of cultivated land is managed extensively. In the Crau, the 30% of arable land under extensive management appears to be sufficient. Can this be achieved elsewhere? Wolff, A., Paul, J.-P, Martin, J.-L., & Bretagnolle.V. 2001. The benefits of extensive agriculture to birds: the case of the little bustard.]. Appl. E col. 38: 963-975. Dr Andy Evans, Dr David Gibbons and Dr Ken Smith, Conservation Science Department, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SGI 9 2DL This feature, contributed by the RSPB's Research Department, reports the most interesting recent scientific news relevant to the conservation ofWestern Palearctic bird species. 22 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 21-22 Notes Red-throated Divers feeding young in October The observation of an adult Red-throated Diver Gavia stellata feeding a juvenile on the sea in Northumberland in October {Brit. Birds 91: 231) reminded me that this behaviour has also occurred in Dumfries & Galloway. It was observed in Luce Bay on 20th October 1987 and at Loch Ryan on 2nd October 1991. On both occasions, the young diver was accompanied by only one adult (in winter plumage), which fed the youngster on the sea. From these observa- tions, and the one already reported, it would seem that the feeding of young on the sea may not be particularly unusual for this species, and that the juvenile is typically accompanied by just one parent. BWP (Vol. 1) states that ‘some pairs continue to feed young on the sea in autumn’. Since Red-throated Divers last bred in this area in 1975 (Dickson 1992, The Birds in Wigtownshire), the young divers were presum- ably not locally bred, and perhaps came from the breeding population in the west of Scotland. R. C. Dickson Lismore, New Luce, Newton Stewart, Dumfries & Galloway DG8 OAJ Common Kestrel taking Canary from cage On 12th December 1998, in Los Cristianos, Tenerife, Canary Islands, I saw an adult male Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus take a Canary Serinus canaria from a cage suspended on the outside wall of an apartment block. The kestrel held the Canary in its right talon, while plucking the finch through the bars of the cage. I watched this activity for about five minutes, and eventually the kestrel let the Canary, by then dead, fall to the bottom of the cage. After hanging upside-down on the bars of the cage, the kestrel swooped up to perch on a similar nearby cage, which contained another, terrified Canary. The latter was saved by the appearance of the occupant of the first-floor flat, causing the kestrel to fly off. E. D. Pouting Langley Cottage, Langley Upper Green, Saffron Walden CB11 4RY EDITORIAL COMMENT Although a caged songbird is perhaps irresistible to a raptor such as a Common Kestrel, this kind of behaviour is rarely documented. The call of Common Cuckoo On 14th June 1997, at Barbondale, Cumbria, I watched a male Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus at close range, through a telescope. I had superb views of the bird, which was calling almost continuously, for several minutes before it flew off. During the observation, I soon Peter Woodruff 50 Avondale Road, Lancaster LAI 4BY realised that the call was produced nasally, since the bill remained closed throughout. Further observations on 8th June 1999, in similar cir- cumstances, seemed to confirm that the Common Cuckoo does indeed call with its bill closed. EDITORIAL COMMENT BWP (Vol. 4) states that the first syllable of the familiar advertising-call of the male Common Cuckoo is delivered with the bill open, whereas the second syllable is uttered with the bill closed. The Handbook states that the cuckoo’s call is ‘usually uttered with its bill closed or almost so, but sometimes with bill opened and shut at each call. As demonstrated by the observa- tions reported here, there does appear to be some variation in the manner in which the call is deliv- ered. © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 23-26 23 Notes Unusual flight behaviour of Common Swift On 5th September 1997, near Walsall, West Midlands, I noticed a Common Swift Apus apus flying almost overhead, apparently searching for prey. Suddenly, the bird went into a vertical, ‘corkscrew’ dive, spinning rapidly with wings outstretched. The manoeuvre lasted only two or three seconds, before the swift pulled out of the dive and resumed normal flight. Shortly after- Alan K. Dolphin 27 Stencills Road, Walsall, West Midlands WS4 2H / wards the dive was repeated, and I observed it twice more thereafter. The weather was sunny, with light to moderate westerly winds and a temperature of 16-18°C. 1 have watched Common Swifts in flight on very many occa- sions, but had never before witnessed this behaviour. Green Woodpecker chasing Eurasian Sparrowhawk On 8th August 1998, at my ringing site on the outskirts of Leeds, West Yorkshire, I was aware of at least two Eurasian Sparrowhawks Accipiter nisus and a Green Woodpecker Picus viridis in the immediate vicinity. 1 had trapped and ringed one of the sparrowhawks, a juvenile, earlier in the morning. At 11.00 hours, my attention was drawn by strident calls from the Green Woodpecker and one of the raptors. I expected to see a sparrowhawk pursuing the woodpecker, but, in fact, the reverse was the Ken Capps Cuckoostones, 9 Old Lane, Bramhope, Leeds LS16 9AY case: the Green Woodpecker was in hot pursuit of a Eurasian Sparrowhawk, flying about 3 m behind the hawk and calling loudly. The chase continued for about 20 m from the point at which 1 first saw it, until the sparrowhawk took refuge among birch Betula scrub. BWP (Vol. 2) mentions anti-predator strategies of Green Woodpeckers as ‘giving excitement calls from a safe distance’. I can find no other reference to this behaviour, nor have 1 experienced it in the past. Great Spotted Woodpecker feeding on apples In late June and July 1998, up to two juvenile Great Spotted Woodpeckers Dendrocopos major made daily visits to peanut feeders in a garden at Guist, Norfolk. The feeders were sited in an apple Mains tree. On 9th July, one of the wood- peckers dropped to the lawn beneath the tree and began pecking at small, fallen apples. More than once, an apple became impaled on the woodpecker’s bill, which the bird removed by placing a foot on the apple. Through binocu- lars, I observed the woodpecker detaching small pieces of apple by a twisting movement of the bill, and these were subsequently swallowed. Later examination of the apples revealed that some contained the larvae of an unidentified invertebrate, which may have been the real olaject of the woodpecker’s efforts. BWP (Vol. 4) does not mention apples in the list of fruits recorded as eaten by Great Spotted Wood- peckers. Noel Elms Poplars, Watery Lane, Guist, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 5PL EDITORIAL COMMENT Although it is not clear whether the young woodpecker was targeting invertebrates in the apple or the fruit itself, this observation is unusual and of interest. 24 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 23-26 Notes Barn Swallows and House Martins taking grit A previous note described Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica and Sand Martins Riparia riparia apparently, but not certainly, taking grit {Brit. Birds 78: 455). On 10th May 1989, in Lucerne, Switzerland, I watched two Barn Swal- lows pecking at damp gravel. Through binocu- lars, 1 observed one of them picking up small items, which it clearly swallowed. A subsequent inspection of the ground revealed only fine, damp grit, and I concluded that at least one, and probably both, of the swallows were delib- erately taking grit. The observation lasted for about a minute before both birds flew off. On 15th July 1989, at Shellness, Kent, I watched up to about six House Martins Deli- chon urbica also swallowing grit. As I approached a dry, dusty gravel area beside the sea wall, I saw a few House Martins settle on the gravel and then take off. Closer observations, again with the aid of binoculars, showed that the entire group was picking up small pieces of matter, which were swallowed. The behaviour lasted no more than 15 or 20 seconds before all of the martins flew off. I considered whether they were collecting dried mud for nest- building but, apart from the fact that the gravel was extremely dry and dusty, I clearly saw a swallowing action performed by at least two individuals. Once again, 1 found no inverte- brates on the gravel when I inspected it closely. P. /. Oliver The Briar Patch, Limpsfield Chart, Oxted, Surrey RH8 OTL EDITORIAL COMMENT Angela Turner has commented that the presence of grit in the diet of hirundines is well documented, but direct observation of their taking grit is rarely recorded. Great Grey Shrike feeding on carrion The note on Common Kestrels Falco tinnunculus feeding on carrion {Brit. Birds 92: 366-367) prompted me to report details of another species which is rarely seen feeding on carcasses. On 12th December 1998, approximately 80 km south of Vienna, Austria, I watched a first- winter female Great Grey Shrike Lanius excu- bitor picking at a piece of skin. On closer inspection, this proved to be from a Brown Hare Lepus europaeus, and was about 20 cm in length and 4 cm wide. It was impaled in typical shrike fashion, but it was unclear how the skin had been removed from the hare. On the following day, I returned to photo- graph the shrike with its ‘prey’ but, instead of the piece of skin, I found a freshly shot Common Buzzard Buteo buteo beneath the bush (still warm, and with the breast ripped wide open by the bullet). As I approached, the Great Grey Shrike flew from the bush and perched nearby. I assumed that it had been feeding on the flesh of the dead buzzard. There have been previous reports of win- tering Great Grey Shrikes eating carrion (e.g. Griinwald 1983; Oeser 1974; Schmidt 1973), but this incident is interesting because of the fol- lowing additional details. For about seven days before my observation, the area was covered with at least 15 cm of snow. During this time, the shrike was observed on five days, for a total of five hours and 25 minutes. Altogether, 34 hunting attempts were recorded, 27 targeted at small mammals (probably voles Microtus ) and the remaining seven at small birds, but none of these was successful. It seems likely, therefore, that the shrike was forced to feed on carrion to avoid starvation. Within a few days, most of the snow cover had disappeared, and the shrike stayed for the rest of the winter without any obvious shortage of food supply. References Griinwald, H. 1983. Ober Gewolle des Raubwiirgers ( Lanius excubitor) aus Oben/vinterungshabitaten in Sudwestfalen. Die Vogelwelt 1 04: 20 1 -208. Oeser; R. 1974. Ein Ernahrungsbild des Raubwiirgers (Lanius excubitor ) bei gehauftem Auftreten der Feldmaus ( Microtus arvalis). Beitr. Vogetkd. 20: 1 6 1 - 1 72. Schmidt, A. 1973. Zur Aufbewahrung und Bearbeitung der Beute durch den Raubwiirger ( Lanius excubitor L.). Abh. u. Ber. Naturkundl. Mus. Mauritianum Altenburg 8: 67-76. Remo Probst Radetzkystr. 21/11, A-1030 Vienna, Austria; e-mail: a8960178@unet.univie.ac.at British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 23-26 25 Notes C Eurasian Jay stealing from Grey Squirrel On 10th March 1999, a Grey Squirrel Sciurus carolinensis was engaged in searching for and retrieving nuts which had been buried (presum- ably by the same squirrel during the previous autumn) in the lawns of my garden in Blunham, Bedfordshire. The squirrel was closely followed by one of several Eurasian Jays Garrulus glan- darius which had frequented the garden throughout the winter. The jay usually perched about 20-25 cm above ground level, on the lowest branch of a nearby bush or tree, or occa- sionally stood on the lawn, behind and a little to one side of the squirrel. As soon as the squirrel retrieved a nut, the jay swooped in, stole the nut and flew off, returning after a minute or so to resume its lurking vigilance behind the squirrel. This association continued for at least an hour, and I estimated that the squirrel lost about 80% of the approximately 40 nuts which it extracted. The jay was always successful when it tried to rob the squirrel, which seemed to take the bird’s activities as inevitable, the mammal showing no other reaction than to move on to a new site. Instances of birds taking advantage of the activities of mammals are not uncommon, and 1 have seen a Blackbird Turdus merula feeding at excavations made by Grey Squirrels during hard weather in January 1963 (Brit. Birds 56: 222), and Blackbirds and a Robin Erithacus rubecula following a shallow-burrowing Mole Talpa europaea (Brit. Birds 75: 90). This latest obser- vation is, however, interesting since both the jay and the squirrel were intent on feeding on the same food items. It is, therefore, an instance of kleptoparasitism, rather than, as in the two pre- vious cases quoted, one of commensalism. Dr J. T. R. Sharrock Fountains, Park Lane, Blunham, Bedfordshire MK44 3NJ Carrion Crow catching hirundines The note by Will Cresswell concerning Carrion Crows Corvus corone catching waders (Brit. Birds 90: 366) reminded me of a similar, and more successful, hunting method adopted by a single Carrion Crow in Cleveland some years ago. Hemlington Lake is a small recreational lake on the outskirts of Middlesbrough, built for watersports activities. It offers little in terms of breeding birds, but regularly attracts migrants, particularly hirundines. On 5th June 1996, a group of about 60 Sand Martins Riparia riparia was present above the lake. As I watched them, one of the local Carrion Crows flew across the lake, and I was amazed to see it take a Sand Martin in flight, quite casually as it flew past. It carried its prey to the bank, where it began to pluck the unfortunate victim. A few minutes Paul Baxter 64 Langdykes Drive, Cove Bay, Aberdeen AB12 3HW later, the crow again headed across the lake, took another Sand Martin in similar fashion, and returned to exactly the same spot on the bank. During the following ten minutes, no fewer than three further Sand Martins were caught. Each ‘hunting trip’ made by the crow was successful, and the hirundines were caught with seemingly little effort. I walked around the lake to the spot where the crow was feeding, and found the grass scattered with about 20 hirun- dine corpses, comprising both Sand Martins and House Martins Delichon urbica. Presumably, the martins did not recognise the crow as a potential threat. This was in con- trast to their reaction when a Eurasian Spar- rowhawk Accipiter nisus was in the area, when the hirundines would spiral high into the sky, giving frequent alarm calls. EDITOIHAL COMMENT Angela Turner has commented that crows are known to stoop at hirundines, and have been recorded killing House Martins, but this observation is remarkable. A number of Notes, submitted to British Birds in the late 1990s were, most regrettably, lost. If you submitted material at that time, and received an acknowledgment but then heard no more, please contact the Editor. The assessment of individual notes should now be completed within four months of receipt, which means that the delay between observation and publication will be far shorter. 26 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 23-26 News and comment Compiled by Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches Opinions expressed in this feature are not necessarily those of British Birds Great Bustard Group The Great Bustard Otis tarda has not nested in Britain since 1832, although there have been several efforts to re-establish the species. The most recent attempt took place on Porton Down, Wiltshire, in the 1970s and 1980s but, although eggs were laid, no young were reared. The final captive bird from this programme died in Whipsnade Animal Park, in 1999. In 1998, The Great Bustard Group was established (Brit. Birds 91: 331), and it is now working with other organisations to investigate the chances of successfully re-estab- lishing the Great Bustard in Britain. The re-establishment of lost breeding species is widely debated and often open to criticism. Successful projects in recent years have been few and far between. The most notable concerns the White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus alhicilla, while the work on Red Kites Milvus milvus and Ospreys Pandion haliaetus has significantly extended the range of those species far more rapidly than would have been achieved by natural recolonisation. As part of its campaign, the Group has produced a small booklet entitled The Great Bustard’, by Estlin Waters, which covers the history of the species in Britain and contains a wealth of fascinating detail. It is available (price £2.00) from The Great Bustard Group, Orchards, Brox- more Park, Sherfield English, Romsey, Hampshire S05 1 6FT. Ibis online Biologists look at Birds and Agriculture There is no doubt that bird popu- lations associated with farmland are receiving more than passing interest (see, for example, Conser- vation research news, on page 21). And quite rightly so, with the con- tinuing declines reported for so many ‘familiar’ farmland species. This marked decline, which has been taking place since the mid 1970s, is widely considered to be one of the most pressing issues in UK nature conservation. In 2002, the Association of Applied Biolo- gists (AAB) will be holding a ‘Birds and Agriculture’ conference at Herriot-Watt University, Edin- burgh, on 18th- 19th March. It is currently inviting contributions on all topics relating to the interaction between birds and agriculture throughout the UK and conti- nental Europe. We cannot help but wonder about the value of another meeting at which scientists and research workers will debate this topic. It now seems to be a feature of many centres of research that ornitholo- gists are disappearing and being replaced by biologists. Surely we now know what needs to be done, and the time has come for political action. It was at the BOU confer- ence on Lowland Farmland Birds, in March 1999, that Graham Wynne, Chief Executive of the RSPB, stated that the facts were known and that advocacy and political pressure were lagging behind. With organisations such as the Game Conservancy Trust (Allington Farm Project), Country- side Restoration Trust (Lark Rise Farm and other sites) and the RSPB (Hope Farm) all showing the way, let us get past the talk and get the advocacy moving. We hope that the AAB conference will move in that direction. Further details of the conference are available from Nigel Boatman, Central Science Labora- tory, Sand Hutton, York Y041 1LZ; e-mail: n.boatman@csl.gov.uk From 2002, the British Ornitholo- gists’ Union’s (BOU) journal Ibis will, once again, be published in the UK by Blackwell Science, in Oxford. As part of the new pub- lishing arrangements, Ibis will now also be available online. Ibis Online will appear identical to the printed copy, following the same design and layout, but will include an ongoing online supplement with extra papers, available only to online subscribers. By registering free on Blackwell’s ‘Synergy’ website (www.blackwell- synergy.com), members of the BOU (and non-members) can view Ibis Online free of charge during January and February 2002. It is possible to register immediately and peruse other journals available through ‘Synergy’. Ibis Online will cost £7.50 in addition to the normal annual subscription to the BOU, but members may eventually be able to receive Ibis Online instead of the normal published version in return for their current annual subscription. Further details are available from the BOU website (www.bou.org.uk) or the Ibis website (www.ibis.ac.uk). Birds on the web Several journals and magazines (including British Birds ) have, over recent years, tried to keep their readers up to date with the latest and best web- sites. In most cases they have failed. Help is now at hand, with the latest, and much-improved, The Birdwatchers Yearbook and Diary 2002 (BYB). This latest edition contains a new section, 'The Top 150 Birding Internet Websites’, by Gordon Hamlett, an incorrigible net-surfer. BYB and British Birds have recently forged closer links, and many of the entries to the BB Bird Illustrator of the Year competition now illustrate the new BYB. Con- gratulations are due to Hilary and David Cromack on the latest BYB. Foi further details, contact Buckingham Press, 55 Thorpe Park Road, Peterbor- ough PE3 6LJ; email: buck.press@btinternet.com © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 27-30 27 News and comment Snowy Owls offered wizard new homes Two unrelated events made the news in western Europe in late autumn 2001, but serendipity almost brought them together. The ornitholog- ical phenomenon was the simultaneous arrival of Snowy Owls Nyctea scan- diaca in England, the Netherlands, Belgium and Sweden in October/November. Some nifty detective work by Belgian birder Dominique Verbelen established that the owls had originated in North America, were blown off- shore by severe storms, and then hitched a ride on cargo ships across the Atlantic. On 21st October, an oiled female arrived at Ghent, Belgium, on the Federal Saguenay , where it was cap- tured and taken into care, it was part of a flock of no fewer than 12 Snowy Owls which boarded the ship during a severe gale near Deception Bay in Quebec, Canada. Nine owls left the ship on 18th October, close to the coast of Scot- land, while the other two left on 19th October, in the English Channel. Three more Snowy Owls landed on the Menominee near Newfoundland, Canada, on its way to Terneuzen, in the Netherlands. 8. Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca, Trimley, Suffolk, November 200 1 , Bill Boston Two of these left the ship on 24th October near Vlissingen, Nether- lands, while the third had departed earlier. The latter individual may have been the oiled male found at Felixstowe docks, Suffolk, on 24th October (and present until mid December; plate 8), the arrival of which coincided with that of two owls found in the Netherlands and taken into care. A further two Snowy Owls, which landed on the Lithuanian trawler Neringa south of Greenland during a severe gale in early October, were captured and kept alive by the crew and subsequently taken into care on 31st October at Eemshaven, Nether- lands. Two more owls were found in Belgium, and another arrived in Gothenburg, Sweden, on board a banana boat. After the Snowy Owls’ arrival came the second event: the blockbuster film Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. The eponymous hero has a pet Snowy Owl called Hedwig, and this species became the ‘must-have’ pet for children on both sides of the North Sea. Seven of the owls which made landfall in Belgium and the Netherlands had been taken into care, pending repatria- tion to Canada. But the Canadian authorities refused them re-entry, and Birdprotection Flanders was inundated with calls from young filmgoers keen to give the birds a home. Happily for the birds, if not for the Harry Potter fans, the Finnish authorities stepped in and said that the owls would be welcome in their Arctic tundra. It is not clear if they will be transported north by boat. . . Eric Hosking Charitable Trust The Eric Hosking Charitable Trust still has a few copies of ‘Eric Hosking’s Classic Birds’ for sale. Containing over 180 black-8(-white photographs, this special limited edition is boxed and comes with a blue leatherette binding, and cele- brates the early work of this pio- neering bird- photographer. Copies are available at £.25.00, including post and packing, and the proceeds help to fund the bursaries which are awarded by the Trust each year. Contact David Hosking, Pages Green House, Wetheringsett, Stow- market, Suffolk IP 14 5QA; e-mail david@hosking-tours.co.uk World Bird Festival fulls in the crowds BirdLife International has expressed justifiable delight that its first ever World Bird Festival surpassed expectations by attracting over 300,000 people to more than 1,200 events in 88 countries during October 2001. Dr Mike Rands, BirdLife International Director and Chief Executive, called the festival ‘the largest ever global celebration of birds’ and ‘an inspirational success’. The largest individual event was the Taipei Bird Fair, organised by the Wild Bird Federation of Taiwan, which attracted 43,000 people. A further 20,000 attended the opening of a conservation exhibition about the glob- ally endangered Black-faced Spoonbill Platalea minor near Tainan, also in Taiwan, on 4th November. Did you remember to send in your October sightings to NTT-ME, the Japanese company offering to pay 1,000 yen (£5.00) to BirdLife Interna- tional for every species logged in the world during October 2001 (Brit. Birds 94: 553)? Birders in southern Africa amassed a staggering 760 species, which represents £3,800 going to BirdLife. For more details, visit the website: www.birdlife.org.za 28 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 27-30 News and comment New RSPB reserve in southeast England After decades of negotiation, the RSPB has finally secured Cliffe Pools, near Rochester, Kent, and a new ‘flagship reserve’ has been opened in the southeast. Bill Oddie was patron of the Cliffe Project, a consortium of local interest groups in the Medway towns, which worked for six years to make the reserve a reality. The work to estab- lish Cliffe Pools as a protected area actually started more than 20 years ago. Set in the wildlife-rich North Kent Marshes, Cliffe Pools make up a tenth of all the UK’s saline lagoons. Birders have always been drawn to the area, most notably perhaps in July 1990, when the site hosted a summer-plumaged Stilt Sandpiper Micropalama himan- topus. The purchase of Cliffe Pools was made possible with donations from the Heritage Lottery Fund and Bretts Gravel, and by the RSPB working in partnership with the Westminster Dredging Company. Existing footpaths and byways remain open across the site, but there are not yet any visitor facili- ties on the reserve. Now that the RSPB has secured another reserve in the southeast, perhaps the society will finally address the problem of its woeful lack of reserves in northeast England. There is a vast area of land between Blacktoft Sands and Bempton Cliffs, in East Yorkshire, and the Scottish border without an RSPB reserve. Members in the region deserve their own flagship reserve now. Annual publications from BTO: BBS 2000 If you are not one of approximately 1,500 observers taking part in the British Trust for Ornithology’s annual Breeding Bird Survey (BBS), you will not have seen the recently published report on the results from 2000. A total of 1,696 randomly selected 1-km squares was surveyed, and 215 species were recorded. In the report, the results are analysed nationally and regionally, and changes from 1999 are shown. Overall in the UK, the biggest losers were Willow Tit Pams montanus (down 54%), Common Shelduck Tadorna tadorna (down 47%) and Wood Warbler Phylloscopus sibilatrix (down 43%). The biggest gains were by Common Stonechat Saxicola torquata (up 1 15%), Goldcrest Regulus regulus (up 87%), Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula (up 83%), Greylag Goose Anser anser (up 69%) and Common Raven Corvus corax (up 64%). If you would like a copy of the report (price £5.00) or, more importantly, if you would like to participate in the survey, contact BTO, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU; e-mail: bbs@bto.org... . . . RSPB: Birdcrime 2000 The extremely saddening annual publication from the RSPB that sum- marises the year’s bird crimes has just landed on the N8cc desk. The cover photograph depicts a Lear’s Macaw Anodorhynchus leari, a species involved in a well-publicised smuggling prosecution when three were brought into the UK recently (see Brit. Birds 94: 552). The report con- tains sections on poisoning, shooting, trade, egg-collecting, and release of non-native species. We note that among the ‘significant nest robberies in 2000’ were (perhaps unsurprisingly) ten nests of Peregrine Falcons Falco peregrinus, but also ten of Avocets Recurvirostra avosetta and seven of Tree Sparrows Passer montanus. Further information from RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2DL. . . ...BirdWatch Ireland: Irish Birds 2000 The annual publication Irish Birds contains a wealth of information on a range of species from the Republic. Of particular interest will be reports on winter waterbird populations, breeding wader populations, the Irish bird report for 1999 and the Irish ringing report for 1999. Three species were added to the Irish List in 1999: Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor , Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica (at least seven individuals), and Arctic Redpoll Carduelis hornemanni. Enthusiastic followers of the ‘Notes’ in British Birds will enjoy ‘Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii recap- tured in Brazil’ and ‘Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus hunting from perch’. BirdWatch Ireland, 8 Longford Place, Monkstown, Co. Dublin, Ireland; e-mail: bird@indigo.ie Pelagics in French waters Following the large increase in the number of pelagic trips in the Bay of Biscay, with most observations from the Portsmouth-Bilbao and Plymouth-Santander ferries, the C.H.N. (French Rarities Committee) and the C.A.F. (French List Committee) would like to stress that the major part (more than two-thirds) of these two routes lies in the French Economic Exclusion Zone. Consequently, birders are kindly requested to submit all records ot Little Shearwater Puffinus assimilis, Wilson’s Storm-petrel Oceanites oceanicus and Long-tailed Skua Stercoral ius longi- caudus (together with all rarer species) seen in French waters to the C.H.N., c/o LPO, La Corderie Royale, BP 263, 17305 Rochefort Cedex, France. Precise location of the observations will, of course, be extremely useful. Observers are thanked for their contribution to the knowledge of seabirds in this part of the Atlantic Ocean. ( Contributed by Pierre Crouzier, Chairman of the C.H.N., and Pierre Lc Marechal , Chairman of the C.A.F.) British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 27-30 29 News and comment Migration Watch Imagine tracking summer migrants day by day, from their first landfall on the south coast of England to their eventual arrival on breeding grounds in northern Scotland. This is what the British Trust for Ornithology is planning to do this spring, with help from birders across Britain. And everyone who participates will be able to see the results 24 hours a day. For the first time, the BTO is harnessing the internet for a migration study, which will, it is hoped, involve not only the stalwart BTO members who regularly take part in its surveys but also many other bird- watchers, too. ‘Migration Watch’ will be officially launched on the BTO website (www.bto.org) on 1st March, but the introductory pages are already ‘live’. The BTO’s aim is to track an estimated 16 million summer migrants which arrive each spring, and attempt to correlate ‘pulses’ of migration with prevailing weather conditions. The Trust wants people to be able to follow species such as Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica and Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus from the first sighting in this country to multiple arrivals in their nesting areas. The arrivals of those two species always attract the interest of the general public (and letters to The Times), and it is hoped that anyone with access to the internet will log on to record his or her own sightings. Potential contributors are being encouraged to visit the ‘Migration Watch’ website now, so that they can register their e-mail address and the likely sites that they will be watching this spring. Once migration is underway, maps for each species will be updated on the website every night. Birders will then be faced with a dilemma as dawn breaks: should you go looking for migrants, or should you first check the ‘Migration Watch’ website, to see if Pied Flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca have reached your part of the world yet? Feeding frenzy in the garden It is that time of year again. Not only are there holiday brochures scattered across the house but so, too, are there Big Garden Birdwatch survey forms. The RSPB’s long-running annual census of garden bird populations attracted 50,000 participants last year, twice the number in any previous year. The profile of the event was raised by the active involvement of the BBC Radio Four programme ‘Today’, and it is hoped that many of the new converts will again take part in 2002. The key weekend is 26th-27th January, when garden birdwatchers are asked to spend an hour counting the birds in their garden or local park, logging the highest number of each species seen. Schools are invited to take part on any day during the week of 21st-27th January. Last year’s ‘top ten’ were as follows: 1. Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris 2. House Sparrow Passer domesticus 3. Blue Tit Parus caeruleus 4. Blackbird Turdus merula 5. Common Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs 6. Greenfinch Carduelis chloris 7. Robin Erithacus rubecula 8. Great Tit Parus major 9. Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto 10. Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus This bears an interesting comparison with two other garden ‘top tens’ which we reported in ‘News and comment’ recently (Brit. Birds 94: 553). Big Garden Birdwatch packs can be obtained by writing to RSPB Big Garden Birdwatch, Somers House, Somers Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 9DU (telephone 0870-601-0215). Alternatively, you can submit your survey results online, by visiting www.rspb.org.uk/birdwatch, where the forms are available until 28th February. Marine Charter Sir David Attenborough has endorsed a new Marine Charter, launched by no fewer than 28 environmental groups just before Christmas. The Charter calls for a comprehensive reform of the way in which our seas are managed and protected. Michael Meacher, Minister for the Environment, was present at the launch, at Westminster on 18th December. On the same day, EU Fisheries Ministers were meeting in Brussels to finalise severe restrictions on fishing quotas, as policymakers finally admit that our marine ecosystem is close to collapse. Although the UK Government has recently acknowledged the need for better protection of the marine environment (in March 2001, Prime Minister Tony Blair made his ‘green speech’, in which he stated that Government ‘will be launching measures to improve marine conservation’), nothing substantive has happened. Hence the launch of the Marine Charter, co-ordinated by the Wildlife and Countryside Link. Its Marine Task Force of 28 organisations includes national and regional NGOs and other groups, such as the Shark Trust and the Hebridean Whale and Dolphin Trust. The Marine Charter calls for a range of measures to improve the manage- ment of marine activities and to afford protection for sites, features and species of conservation interest or ecological importance. These measures include: • The establishment of a representative and well-managed network of nationally important marine protected areas in UK waters • Creation of a unified marine planning system with a statutory require- ment to undertake Strategic Environmental Assessment of all plans, policies and programmes affecting the marine environment • Stricter enforcement powers, with stiff penalties applied for offences. The demands of this Charter duplicate many of the provisions in the Marine Wildlife Conservation Bill (see Brit. Birds 94: 606), which has now passed through its committee stage and will return to the floor of the 1 louse of Commons for its report stage in March. 30 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 27-30 THE RED KITE By Ian Carter. Arlequin Press, Chelmsford, 2001. 187 pages; 15 colour plates; 16 tables; 8 figures; colour and black-and- white illustrations. ISBN 1-900159-61-9. Hardback, £22.50. The Red Kite Milvus milvus is a very special bird, and its cause is well served by this very special book, the latest addition to the series of attractive and keenly priced monographs from Arlequin Press. A selection of well-chosen colour photographs and Dan Powell’s colour and black-and- white illustrations add much to the book’s appeal, and I was particu- larly taken by Michael Warren’s stunning dust-jacket design. Perhaps surprisingly, this is the first monograph in English to deal with all aspects of this glamorous species, which, as this book says, is able to ‘thrill and delight almost everyone’. From a British perspec- tive, its publication is especially timely and welcome, given the SCOTTISH BIRDS: CULTURE AND TRADITION By Robin Hull. Mercat Press, Edinburgh, 2001. 320 pages; line-drawings. ISBN 184183-0259. Paperback, £12.99. In Scotland, birds have been an important part of human lives for millennia, as a source of food, oil, feathers, money, superstition, myth, cultural tradition, identity, lore and artistic inspiration. One need only think of the recent histo- ries of Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus , Osprey Pandion haliaetus and Red Grouse Lagopus lagopus to appre- ciate that this is an ongoing pattern. Less well understood today is the past economic importance of a species such as Northern Gannet Morus bassanus, the smoked skins Reviews recent and ongoing reintroduction programmes in Scotland and England. Ian Carter has been closely involved with Red Kites since 1995. This adds authority to an easy and direct writing style which sum- marises and communicates a large amount of information, drawn not only from studies in Britain but also from those made elsewhere in Europe and from personal com- munications. The opening chapter sets the scene, with a basic species descrip- tion (sensibly, the reader is referred elsewhere for detailed plumage descriptions), brief taxonomic notes and a summary of (British) local names. The remaining ten chapters cover a variety of topics: its chequered British history, breeding distribution and status, migration and wintering, reintro- ductions (usefully listing all raptor reintroduction schemes in Europe), diet and feeding behaviour, habitat and land-use, breeding biology, social behaviour and play, home range and dispersal, and mortality and survival. There is also an exten- sive bibliography. of which were once sold like kippers on the streets of Edinburgh and Glasgow; and the central role that the Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis played for at least 1,000 years in the island life of St Kilda. This book, which documents the history of the nation’s avifauna, comprises two main elements. The first is a narrative account of birds’ social and economic importance since Paleolithic times. These six chapters become increasingly more detailed the closer we come to modern times. This not only reflects the greater abundance of source material but also underlines the much deeper relevance of the period to an understanding of the country’s modern avifauna. The second, and larger, part of the book is the species accounts for 195 birds on the Scottish List. For each, Hull provides an exhaustive That Red Kites need all the help they can get is demonstrated by the author’s review of the species’ world breeding distribution and status, for, although overall breeding numbers are thought to be stable, there have been declines in many parts of its range. This book estimates the global breeding population at between 18,240 and 24,240 pairs, which is not much above the upper limit of a recent estimate of the British breeding population of the Common Buzzard Buteo buteo (17,000 pairs). As this book also makes clear, illegal persecution is still the main threat to the Red Kite in many parts of its range, and is without doubt slowing its expansion from reintroduction release areas in Britain. Mortality due to accidental poisoning, for example by feeding on rats killed by second-generation anticoagulant poisons, is another worrying issue that needs to be addressed. This well-written and useful monograph deserves to be widely read. Add it to your shopping list. Pete Coinbridge inventory of vernacular names, the Gaelic versions and their meanings, plus a gloss on the derivation of the old country nicknames, rounded off with snippets of old mythology and historical quota- tions. One small niggle is the fact that the author has neglected to weed out the living vernacular tra- dition (do people still call Turn- stones Arenaria interpres ‘stanepecker’ or not?) from the merely archaic. Nevertheless, this is a well-written and fascinating book. The author has dug deeply, searched widely and compressed skilfully, making his text a dipper’s paradise for anyone whose interest in birds extends beyond the tertial fringes to these often neglected social and cultural aspects of ornithology. Mark Cocker © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 3 I -34 31 Reviews PHOTOGRAPHING WILD BIRDS By Chris Gomersall. David & Charles, Newton Abbot, 2001. 160 pages; many colour photographs. ISBN 07153-11131. Hardback, £19.99. If you have ever wanted a ‘com- plete’ guide to bird photography, this is it. The contents are grouped into five sections: equip- ment, controlling the image, in the field, case studies, and post- production. The book is beauti- fully illustrated, almost entirely with the author’s own material, but with a series of ‘guest’ pho- tographs, too. The illustrations are accompanied by informative captions which highlight key pho- tographic points and present technical details. In many ways, the photographs, with their accompanying descriptions, are as informative as the main text of the book. WILD BIRDS The titles of the five sections are largely self-explanatory. ‘Equipment’ is just that: cameras (including metering, autofocus systems, etc.), lenses (with mention of the latest advances such as image-stabilisation, con- verters and filters), tripods and other means of camera-support, and film types. ‘Controlling the image’ deals with composition, metering and Hash photography. ‘In the field’ discusses a number of techniques, including the use of hides, stalking, and nest pho- tography, together with a useful section on the potential problems of air travel and the protection of equipment from salt water. ‘Case studies’ illustrates problems encountered by the author when taking photographs of particular species or in certain situations: a Common Kestrel Falco tinnun- culus nesting on a cathedral and seabirds at sea are two of these. ‘Post-production’ deals with editing, cataloguing, storage, and selling your images. And, quite rightly, an appendix reproduces the Nature Photographer’s Code of Practice and draws attention to the legal aspects of bird photog- raphy. In summary, the book is full of the author’s considerable experi- ence of the subject, and is a ‘good read’. To find the answer to a par- ticular query may take a little time, although it will probably be there, somewhere! Richard Chandler FIELD GUIDE TO THE BIRDS OF EAST AFRICA By Terry Stevenson & John Fanshawe. Poyser, London, 2002. 602 pages; 287 colour plates; distribution maps. ISBN 0856610798. Hardback, £29.95. This impressive and authoritative work, covering Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, has been written by two of the most influential ornithologists associ- ated with East Africa. In a compact volume, 1,388 species are described and illustrated in a series of excel- lent colour plates, which include all the main plumages, distinctive races and vagrants known to have occurred in the area. Each plate depicts between two and seven species and faces the relevant species accounts. Although perhaps inevitably a little heavy, its size means that it can easily be carried in the field. The amount of descriptive text is limited by the space available, but unique field characters are highlighted in italics, while habits, habitats, status and vocalisations are also treated. A generalised, single-colour range map accompa- nies the text. The brevity is occa- sionally a disadvantage, and sometimes the puzzled observer will have to resort to more spe- cialist works, for example if con- fronted with a flock of large gulls Larus on the beach at Sabaki River, or a nightjar (Caprimulgidae) on the road in Tsavo. The illustrations conform to today’s high standards, although to my eye some of the shapes are too angular and, although feather details may be fundamentally correct, the sum of the whole is to create an image that is not always immediately recognisable. Some plates are somewhat garish (for example, the Streptopelia doves and some bright blue drongos Dicrurus ), although this may be a reflection of the printing process rather than of the artist’s interpre- tation. Aesthetically, it is also lam- entable that the paper is not opaque. Comparisons will undoubtedly be drawn with other guides on the market, but really there is little competition. Williams’s Birds of East Africa is incomplete and out of date, while Van Perlo’s Birds of Eastern Africa is simply not in the same class. Birds of Kenya and Northern Tanzania by Zimmerman FIELD GUIDE TO THE BIRDS OF East Africa Kenya Tanzania Uganda Rwanda Burundi Terry Slrvciuum and John l'an*>hawc 32 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 3 1 -34 Reviews C et al. is the only serious rival for at least part of the region, since it has more information, while the illus- trations, although somewhat jumbled, are produced by artists who perhaps have a more intimate knowledge of the species con- cerned. I noticed a few errors. For example, Green-capped Eremo- mela Eremomela scotops should have pale yellow eyes, not dark red ones, the race xanthogaster of Forest Robin Stiphrornis ery- throthorax has a yellow and not a white belly, and I was confused by the account for Woodhouse’s Antpecker Parmoptila woodhousei. In fact, it is Red-fronted Antpecker P. rubrifrons which occurs in the region. The illustration of the male is indeed rubrifrons, but the female D depicted is that of woodhousei. These quibbles aside, this book represents a new milestone and is an essential work on the region. The forthcoming companion set of songs and calls on CD is eagerly awaited. Nik Borrow BIRDWATCHING GUIDE TO OMAN By Hanne & Jens Eriksen and Panadda & Dave E. Sargeant. Al Roya Publishing, Oman, 2001. 256 pages; maps, colour photographs, line-drawings. Registration no. 208/2001. Softback, £20.00. Diverse, beautiful and completely safe, the Sultanate of Oman has been a well-kept secret for far too long. For birders, however, the secret is now out and the appeal is enormous: there are some 486 bird species on the Oman checklist, and the country contains a unique and enviable mixture of Afrotropical, Palearctic and Oriental (subconti- nental) species. If you want to see a good selection of these, including some of the many specialities, you will find this guide absolutely indispensable. All essential information for the visitor is provided, including a 'practical guide’, of standard travel- guide format, detailing visa requirements, currency, car hire, travel arrangements and accom- modation options. Suggested itin- eraries of varying duration are covered briefly, but adequately. Thereafter, it is a veritable ornithological feast. The ‘Site Guide’, which takes up just over half of the 256 pages, describes more than 60 of the Sultanate’s prime birding localities in detail. Sites are sensibly grouped by geo- graphical proximity into ten sepa- rate areas. The text tackles each site in turn, first listing the ‘Key Species’ and then detailing how to get the best birdwatching from the area. A minor criticism is that the opportunity to mention any wildlife other than birds has only rarely been taken. Simple, clear maps accompany each site entry, with distances measured to the nearest 100 m where necessary, so that the possibility of getting lost is minimised. Particularly helpful are the ‘Site Species Lists’ which follow, and which give a good idea of the likelihood of finding particular species at particular sites. The next chapter, ‘Bird Finder’, is an annotated systematic list, with notes on distribution and status, together with how, where and when to find any species which you might be seeking. Although gener- ally self-evident from the preceding section, it is perhaps more conve- nient to check on particular target species here. Along with the site guide, these pages will soon become well thumbed. The Oman Bird List is a repetition of the pre- ceding ‘bird finder’, with the status appearing as a code instead of text, but also bearing tick boxes. An index of common and scientific names is provided, but for the site species lists alone, together with a site gazetteer, the latter listing lati- tude and longitude and perhaps being of rather limited value. Colour photographs of many of the sites and plenty of birds really bring this guide to life. Oman’s national tourist authority must be absolutely delighted with its publi- cation; even for non-birding tourists it would prove an excellent travel companion. Of its genre, it is truly a de luxe edition and certainly deserves to become a best-seller. Buy it, and visit Oman; you will certainly not be disappointed. Jouanin’s Petrel Bulweria fallax ahoy... Simon Aspinall WHERE TO WATCH BIRDS IN DORSET, HAMPSHIRE & THE ISLE OF WIGHT By George Green & Martin Cade. 3rd edition. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. 308 pages. ISBN 0-7136-5692-1. Paperback, £14.99. The latest edition of this remarkably well-researched and handy site guide (first reviewed Brit. Birds 83: 104) covers a total of 98 localities and is attractively illustrated by Richard Allen. Dipping into the accounts of those sites which I know best, I was immediately impressed with the accuracy of the information presented and the utility of the maps. Apart from the usefulness of the site information, the large amount of background detail presented sketches in the main avian features of the region. This detail is especially valuable for Dorset and the Isle of Wight, as only Hampshire boasts a recent avifauna. This is clearly one of the best bird-finding guides around, and it is diffi- cult to see how it might be improved upon. At a shade under £15.00, it rep- resents very good value for money. Pete Combridge British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 31-34 33 Reviews ATLAS OF THE BREEDING BIRDS OF LANCASHIRE AND NORTH MERSEYSIDE 1997-2000 By Robert Pyefinch & Peter Golborn. Hobby Publications, Liverpool, 2001. 408 pages; 8 colour plates; maps. ISBN 1-872839-08-8. Hardback, £25.00. This is a most attractive book, and there will be tew Lancashire birders who do not recognise the superb impression of Leighton Moss on the front cover, or the Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus flying around the nest site at India Mill, in Darwen, on the spine. The high-quality artwork continues inside, with the illustra- tions by David Quinn and Tony Disley being especially praiseworthy. With no fewer than 13 contributing artists, the standard is predictably variable, but there are very few howlers. It is, however, a pity that much of the artwork is not credited to the individuals. The layout is a model of clarity, with a large, tetrad distribution map facing the text for each species. In addition, there are 47 maps showing abundance for all Biodiversity Action Plan red- and amber-listed species. There is also a well-written chapter on geology, climate and land use, and a thought-provoking section looking at trends and predic- tions. I found the methodology and statistics a little overwhelming, but their inclusion is undoubtedly nec- essary since the Atlas will be used as a conservation tool in the county. The text cites up-to-date research to explain population trends and distributions, but it is sufficiently anecdotal to be readable. In particular, the Black Grouse Tetrao tetrix account was an enjoy- able mix of science and anecdote. Inevitably, there are a few, mostly small, omissions in the detail of some texts. For example, the Hawfinch Coccothraustes coc- cothraustes account lists important food sources, but omits to mention the most important one, Hornbeam Carpinus betulus. Similarly, in the Twite Carduelis flavirostris account there is no mention of sorrel Rumex, which is undoubtedly the most important summer food source. Sadly, the publication of this atlas heralds the extinction of Black Grouse and European Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus in Lan- cashire, yet there are still enough rare and unusual species to make browsing fun; Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris, Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus, Ruff Philomachus pugnax and Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa are all included. The real coup, however, was the dis- covery of Britain’s first successful nesting Eurasian Spoonbills Platalea leucorodia since the middle of the seventeenth century. At the outset, few could have hoped for such a momentous discovery during the Atlas period. It is a shame that the first successful nesting by Avocets Recurvirostra avosetta occurred in 2001, after the main survey period. The event still gets a mention, though, and rightly so, since this was the first away from eastern England. Most species are arranged in sys- tematic order, but this is abandoned for certain rare species, which have been moved to avoid large blank spaces of text; for example, Pintail Anas acuta comes between Common Eider Somateria mollis- sima and Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula in this book. I would much prefer to have seen more artwork filling the spaces, rather than this idiosyncratic order. All of my quibbles are only minor, however, and do not alter the fact that this is an excellent, readable and useful book. It can certainly hold its own among other county atlases, and the Lancashire and Cheshire Fauna Society should be congratu- lated on its production. Tim Melting Looking back Seventy-five years ago: ‘CORMORANT IN NORTH DERBYSHIRE. A Cor- morant ( Phalacrocorax c. carbo) appeared on the lake in the Buxton Gardens on November 20th, 1926. It was in immature plumage and allowed me to get within five yards of it. The lake is a small piece of water situ- ated among streets and houses. At the time, the weather was misty, glass very low and wind S.W. Cormorants are of rare occurrence in Derbyshire and are generally observed in the south of the county along the Trent valley. As far as I know, it has never been reported from the Peak district. William Shipton. [There are about half a dozen records of Cormorants from Derbyshire, but all are from the Trent or Dove Valleys, and we have no previous records of this species from the High Peak.— F.C.R.J.]’(Bnf. Birds 20: 202, January 1927) ‘Great Spotted Woodpecker Breeding in Suther- land.— Mr. E. G. Paterson records (Scot. Nat., 1926, p. 92) that a pair of Dryobates [ Dendrocopos ] major reared a brood of five at Bal Blair, Invershin, in 1926. The nest was found on May 29th with young almost able to fly. The extension of this bird as a breeding- species in Scotland in recent years has been remark- able. In 1924, extensions were recorded for Fifeshire, Morayshire and east Inverness-shire (cf. Brit. Birds 20: 111), while the authors of the Scottish Report in 1925 give further evidence of its spreading, records coming from Ayrshire, Aberdeenshire, Banff-shire and east Inverness-shire (Scot. Nat., 1926, p. 74). Except as a migrant (probably of the northern form), we believe the bird was previously unknown in Sutherlandshire.’ (Brit. Birds 20: 206, January 1927) 34 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 3 1 -34 Monthly Marathon ) Anyone reading this column on a regular basis could be forgiven for thinking that there really is a need for a ‘Guide to Headless Waders’! They crop up with alarming regularity, and here we have another: Monthly Marathon photo number 182 (Brit. Birds 94: plate 279, repeated here as plate 9). So, where do we start? First of all, perhaps, by standing back and looking at the wider picture. Within the context of its surroundings (the ripples on the water and the surface of the shore- line), this does not look like a large wader. Zooming in, we notice almost straightaway that it has pale, greenish, legs which immedi- ately narrows the field. What we can see of the legs, in terms of length, also indicates that we do not have one of the larger green- or yellow-legged species, such as Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis, Greenshank T. nebularia or Greater Yellowlegs T. melanoleuca , a con- clusion backed up by the overall plumage. We can also rule out Lesser Yel- lowlegs T. flavipes and Wood Sand- piper T. glareola , since the plumage simply has too much rufous, while lacking any of the white feather- notches of those species. That leads us to the yellowish-legged calidrines, and, again, close exami- nation of the plumage pattern, par- ticularly the broad rufous-brown fringes of the wing-coverts, as well as the general impression of a small bird, suggests that it is not one of the larger species, notably Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos or Sharp-tailed Sandpiper C. acumi- nata. That leaves us with the three small species, Temminck’s Stint C. temminckii , Long-toed Stint C. sub- minuta and Least Sandpiper C. minutilla. Now it starts to get really difficult, and first of all we should try to age our mystery bird. Juve- nile calidrines generally have rather evenly dark-centred feathers with clean-cut paler fringes. On this individual we can see, especially on the exposed lower scapulars, evi- dence of a more complex internal pattern. This, coupled with the broad pale grey tips to the scapu- lars, suggests a spring adult, since these pale edges will soon wear off to reveal its breeding plumage. Knowing that we are dealing with a spring adult, we can start to look at the main contenders more carefully. Temminck’s Stint can be quite a variable species in spring plumage, but it would be excep- tional for one to show as many dark-centred ‘breeding-type’ scapulars and wing-coverts as our mystery bird. Typically, it shows a liberal scatter of plainer, greyish, non-breeding-type scapulars and coverts among the patterned feathers, while the latter are duller, less rufous. Temminck’s Stint is also a relatively long-tailed wader, with the tail tip usually extending beyond the wing tip. Although the stance of our mystery bird, which is preening, and with the near wing drooped, could possibly hide a long tail, the fact that we cannot see it also suggests that this is not a Temminck’s Stint. That decision brings us to Least Sandpiper and Long-toed Stint, and also the need for close and careful scrutiny of the photograph, focusing on individual feather detail. Sitting on top of the long Large rear scapular with broad greyish tip, indicative of fresh breeding plumage. Subdued pattern characteristic of Least Sandpiper (Long- toed Stint tends to have broader, brighter edge). Short inner tertial with very narrow rufous edge. Longest tertial with very narrow, whitish edge. Same length as wing-tip (so there is no significant primary projection). Wing-tip (see above). The pattern of the innermost greater coverts is very important in distinguishing Least Sandpiper from ing-toed Stint in breeding plumage. Long-toed tends to show broad rufous fringes of even width, with solid black centres and rather white tip: often has a somewhat 'waisted' black centre, with the rufoqs. edge being a .hijjl§ broader in the middle (as just about visible on the innermost feather here): sometimes the rufous edge extends boldly across the middle of the feather to form a bar, which isolates the distal portion of the black centre (which Second innermost covert here). is very clear on the The rather rufous-tinged upperparts suggest that this is either a juvenile or a summer-plumaged adult, but the broad greyish tips to many of the scapulars, especially obvious on the larger rear feathers, are characteristic of fresh summer plumage. These tips wear off quickly (thereby exposing brighter markings on the feather(s) which they overlap) and. judging from the limited wear on some of the rear scapulars, this individual is still in quite fresh “““P plumage. “ ■H 9. Least Sandpiper Calidris minutilla, Texas, USA, April 1994. © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 35-36 35 Richard Chandler Monthly Marathon ) tertial (the uppermost ‘point’, at the rear end) is a much shorter inner tertial which has a bright, but narrow, rufous edge. Although both species have more or less pro- nounced rufous tertial edges, they are generally broader and usually much more obvious on Long-toed Stint than on Least Sandpiper. Those large rear scapulars are a little on the dull side, too, lacking the stronger, broader and brighter edges more typical of Long-toed Stint. It is, however, the greater coverts which are the real clincher in this solution, especially the three innermost ones which are clearly visible beyond the median coverts. On Long-toed Stint, the greater coverts usually show broad, even, rufous fringes with solid black centres and white tips. On Least Sandpiper, the rufous edges tend to bulge inwards at the middle of the feather, which can be seen on the innermost covert of our bird. Sometimes, this bulge extends almost right across the greater covert as a narrow rufous bar. This feature can, in fact, be seen on the second innermost greater covert and also, to some extent, on the third. This is, therefore, an adult Least Sandpiper in spring plumage, and it was photographed by Richard Chandler in Texas, USA, in April 1994. 10. 'Monthly Marathon'. Photo no. 1 85. Thirty-third stage in eleventh 'Marathon' or first stage in twelfth. Identify the species. Read the rules (see below), then send in your answer on a postcard to Monthly Marathon, do The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY or by e-mail to editor@britishbirds.co.uk, to arrive by 28th February 2002. Separating these two species has never been easy, and we can all be forgiven for finding this puzzle a tough one to solve. Consider how long it took the BBRC, together with an impressive list of interna- tional experts, to come to a deci- sion on Britain’s first Long-toed Stint, at Marazion Marsh, Corn- wall, in June 1970 {Brit. Birds 89: 12-24), even with lots of pho- tographs, and not one of them ‘headless’! Despite the difficulty of the challenge, 71% of the entrants in this round of the Marathon came up with the correct answer. Among those who plumped for the wrong species. Pectoral Sandpiper was the most popular alternative (14%), ahead of Long-toed Stint (10%). And, yet again, there were no slip- ups by the leading pack. Peter Lansdown, Andy Mears and Peter Sunesen remain at the front, now with 17-in-a-row, closely followed by Jon Holt on 16, ahead of Lou Cross on 12 and Richard Patient on eight. Steve Rooke For a free brochure, write to SUNBIRD (MM), PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG 1 9 I DF, or telephone 01767 682969 Sunbird The best of bird watching tours Monthly Marathon Rules 1 . Only current individual subscribers to British Birds are eligible to take part. Entrants should give their name, address and BB reference on their entry. Only one entry per person each month. 2. Entries must be sent either by post, each one on a separate postcard, or by e-mail and be received at the British -Birds Editorial Office (Monthly Marathon, British Birds Editorial Office, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY; e-mail: editor@britishbirds.co.uk) by the stated closing date. Every care will be taken, but, even if negligence is involved, no responsibility can be accepted for non-delivery, non-receipt or accidental loss of entries. 3. All BB subscribers are eligible, except members of the Editorial Board and staff of British Birds , Directors and members of staff of SUN BIRD/WINGS Holidays, and Directors and members of staff of our printers. (Members of the BB Notes Panel, the Rarities Committee, and other voluntary contributors - including bird-photographers, even if one of their photographs is used in the competition - are eligible unless proscribed above.) 4. To win, a British Birds subscriber must correctly identify the species shown in ten consecutive photographs included in this competition. The ‘Monthly Marathon’ will continue until the prize has been won. 5. In the event of two or more BB subscribers achieving the ten-in-a-row simultaneously, the competition will continue each month until one of them (or someone else!) achieves a longer run of correct entries than any other contestant. 6. In the event of any dispute, including controversy over the identity of any of the birds in the photographs, the decision of the Editor of British Birds is final and binding on all parties. 7. No correspondence can be entered into concerning this competition. 8. The name and address of the winner will be announced in British Birds. 36 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 35-36 Announcements Bird Photograph of the Year Established in 1976, this competi- tion seeks to recognise the best and/or the most scientifically inter- esting bird photograph. Up to three colour transparencies, each taken during 2001, may be sub- mitted by each photographer. Pref- erence is given to photographs taken in the Western Palearctic (Europe, North Africa and the Middle East), but those of species on the West Palearctic List taken anywhere in the world are also eli- gible. The winner will receive a Sprayway Gore-Tex jacket, an inscribed salver and £100; the two runners-up will receive £50 and £25; all three winners will also receive books presented by Harper- Collins Publishers. An additional award of an engraved goblet and £100 is presented by The Eric Elosking Trust for the highest- placed photograph submitted by an entrant aged 25 or under. Closing date for entries; 28th February. For full details of the The winner of the 2002 BPY will receive a Sprayway Gore-Tex jacket 1 1 functional outdoor clothing systems rules, visit our website (www.britishbirds.co.uk), or write to British Birds (BPY), The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY, enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Past winners: Michael C. Wilkes (1977), Peter Lowes (1978), Dr Edmund Fel- lowes (1979), Don Smith (1980), Richard T. Mills (1981), Dennis Coutts (1982), David M. Cottridge (1983), John Lawton Roberts (1984), C. R. Knights (1985), Alan Moffett (1986), Dr Kevin Carlson (1987), Bob Glover (1988 & 1992), Hanne Eriksen (1989 8c 1990), Philip Perry (1991), Alan Williams (1993 8c 1994), Mike Lane (1995), Roger Tidman (1996 8c 2001), Jens Eriksen (1997 8c 1998), Tony Hamblin (1999) and Alan Petty (2000). Bird Illustrator of the Year Established in 1979, this award recognises an artist for the best set of bird illustrations. Entrants are invited to submit four line-draw- ings (of precise specified dimen- sions) suitable for publication. The subjects should be birds recorded in the Western Palearctic. The winner will receive £100 and an inscribed salver, the two runners-up receive £50 and £25, and all three receive books from the sponsor, Christopher Helm/ A. & C. Black. Two additional awards are pre- sented: The Richard Richardson Award, for the best work sub- mitted by an artist under 22 years of age, established in 1979 in honour of Richard Richardson, the East Anglian ornithologist and artist; and The PJC Award, for a single work of merit, established in 1987 by David Cook in memory of his wife, Pauline. All the winning entries are dis- played at the Society of Wildlife Artists annual exhibition and at the British Birdwatching Fair. Closing date for entries: 15th March. For full details of the rules, visit our website (www.british- birds.co.uk), or write to British Birds (BIY), The Banks, Mount- field, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY, enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Past winners: BIY Crispin Fisher (1979), Norman Arlott (1980 & 1981), Alan Harris (1982), Martin Wood- cock (1983), Bruce Pearson (1984), Ian Lewington (1985), Chris Rose (1986), David Quinn (1987), Martin Hallam (1988), John Cox (1989), Gordon Trunk- field (1990), John Davis (1991), John Gale (1992), Richard Allen ( 1993), Ren Hathway (1994), Andrew Stock (1995), Dan Powell (1996), John M. Walters (1997), Paul Henery (1998), Brin Edwards (1999), Daniel Cole (2000) and Rosemary Watts/Powell (2001). RRA Alan F. Johnston (1979), Andrew Stock (1980), Darren Rees (1981), Keith Colcombe (1982 8c 1984), Gary Wright (1983), Ian Lewington (1985), Timothy Hinley (1986), Andrew Birch (1987 8c 1991), John Cox (1988), Stephen Message (1989), Antony Disley (1990 8c 1992), Peter Leonard (1991 8c 1993), Max Andrews (1994 8c 1995) and Simon Patient (1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 8c 2000). PJC Award J. S. Lyes (1987), John Hollyer (1988), Darren Rees (1989), Andrew Stock (1990), Dafila Scott (1991), Richard Fowling (1992), John M. Walters (1993), James McCallum (1994), George Woodford (1995), Dan Cole (1996), Paul Henery (1997), George Brown (1998), Rosemary Watts/Powell (1999), Szabolcs Kokay (2000) and George Brown (2001). British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 37 37 Mike Malpass Recent reports Compiled by Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan This summary of unchecked reports covers mid November to mid December 2001. White-billed Diver Gavia adamsii Fame Islands (Northumberland), 17th November. Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides Horsey Mere (Norfolk), 17th November to 10th December. Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Radipole Lake (Dorset), 23rd-24th November and 10th December, and (presumed same) Portesham (Dorset), 28th November to 2nd December. Snowy Egret Egretta thula Still at Balvicar (Argyll), to 25th November. Ross’s Goose Anser rossii Juvenile white morph still in Norfolk, at Wells and other sites, to at least 12th December. Baikal Teal Anas formosa Male, Minsmere (Suffolk), 18th November to at least 12th December. Black Duck Anas rubripes Male still at Barrow Harbour (Co. Kerry), to at least 12th December. Redhead Aythya americana Male still at Kenfig (Glamorgan ), until early December. Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis First- winter male, Swineham Gravel-pit (Dorset), 11th November to at least 12th December. White-rumped Sandpiper Calidris fuscicollis Fair Isle (Shet- land), 13th November; Bal- lyquintin Point (Co. Down), 28th November; two, Bally- cotton (Co. Cork), 4th December. Long-billed Dow- itcher Limnodromus scolopaceus Still at Belfast Lough (Co. Down), to at least 12th December. Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Tacumshin (Co. Wexford), to at least 12th December; Lough Foyle (Co. Londonderry), 7th December. Daily Log: October 2001 The underlying theme at many coastal sites in October is the volume of common migrants, and the spectacle of large falls of thrushes, or a constant stream of finches overhead, is often a particular highlight October is also one of the best months for rarities and scarce migrants, but the following selection is confined to the more pronounced movements of common species. With no contributions received from the Scottish observatories, this month’s account is inevitably biased in favour of the south and east coasts of England, and focuses on the counts of chats, thrushes and finches in particular In general, it was an unexceptional month for chats and thrushes, although several observatories recorded a reasonable passage of finches of various species, which peaked at the end of the second week of the month. At Filey (North Yorkshire), the best arrivals of chats and thrushes were on 1 8th, with 70 Robins Erithacus rubecula and 400 Song Thrushes Turdus philomelos, and 23rd, when 3,300 Blackbirds Turdus merula, 1,600 Fieldfares Turdus pilaris and 3,200 Redwings Turdus iliacus were recorded. A moderate fall at Spurn (East Yorkshire), also on 1 8th, comprised 360 Blackbirds, 735 Fieldfares, 620 Song Thrushes and 2,340 Redwings. A count of 42 Mistle Thrushes Turdus viscivorus here, on 26th, was also notable, rivalled only by 40 at the Calf of Man (Isle of Man) on 9th. Peak numbers of thrushes at Holme (Norfolk) were on 2 1 st, with an arrival of 500 Blackbirds and 1 ,000 Redwings, while on the same day there were 70 Robins, 1 50 Blackbirds and 350 Redwings at Landguard (Suffolk), with I 1 5 Robins and 400 Redwings at Sandwich Bay (Kent). At Dungeness (Kent), Robins peaked at 1 50 on 1 7th- 1 8th, but there was little evidence of the larger thrushes. A similar pattern emerged at Portland (Dorset), where 70 Robins, 45 Common Stonechats Saxicola torquata and 60 Song Thrushes on 1 4th, together with 80 Blackbirds on 28th, were the best counts. At this site, there were, in fact, still more warblers than thrushes, with, for example, 1 00 Blackcaps Sylvia atricapilla, 70 Common Chiffchaffs Phylloscopus collybita, 70 Goldcrests Regulus regulus and 10 Firecrests Regulus ignicapillus on 2 1 st.The same was true at Cape Clear Island (Co. Cork), where monthly maxima of Blackcaps (50+ on 1 9th) and Common Chiffchaffs (70 on 20th) exceeded the peak counts of thrushes. 38 © British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 38-40 Recent reports 1 2. Male Baikal Teal Anas formosa, Minsmere, Suffolk, November 200 1 . Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea First-winter, Scalloway (Shet- land), 12th November, when taken into care, released in Lerwick (Shetland) on 20th November, and present until at least 2nd December. Gull-billed Tern Sterna nilotica Titchwell area (Norfolk), 16th-27th November. Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri Blennerville (Co. Kerry), 23rd November. White-winged Black Tern Chlidonias leucopterus Lady’s Island Lake (Co. Wexford), 25th November. Little Auk Alle alle Fluge numbers along the east coast, including, on 9th November, 933 past St Mary’s Island (Northumberland), 787 past Cresswell (Northumberland) in just over an hour, 2,800 past Newbiggin (Northumberland) in two hours, 5,015 past Flamborough (North York- shire), 8,186 past the Fame Islands, and 1,784 past Ness Point (North Yorkshire); on 13th November, 336 past Spurn (East Yorkshire), 420 past Newbiggin; 300 past Hartlepool (Cleve- land), and 326 past Flamborough. Paddyfield Warbler Acrocephatus agricola Cot Valley (Cornwall), 15th November. Blyth’s Reed Warbler Acrocephalus dumetorum Portland (Dorset), 12th November. Pallas’s Leaf Warbler Phylloscopus proregulus Hengistbury Head (Dorset), 14th November; Sandwich Bay (Kent), 20th November. Hume’s Warbler Phyllo- scopus humei Portland, 15th- 17th November. Dusky Warbler Phylloscopus fuscatus In addition to the large numbers reported earlier in the autumn, one was at Sennen (Cornwall), 16th November to at least 12th December. Penduline Tit Remiz pendulinus Near Pagham Harbour (West Sussex), 21st-22nd November. Rosy Starling Sturnus roseus Juvenile, Peterculter (Northeast Scotland), 7th-30th November; juvenile still at Gower (Glamorgan), taken into care, 29th November. Little Bunting Emberiza pusilla Still at Channerwick (Shetland), to at least 12th December. At Filey, there was little to suggest a strong finch passage, with I 1 0 Bramblings Fringilla montifringilla on 23rd the only record of consequence. Farther south, Spurn had a much busier month, with a marked southward passage of finches on several occasions, particularly during the first 1 2 days. During that time there were five counts of more than 700 Linnets Carduelis cannabina, peaking at 1 , 1 00 on 2nd and 1 ,300 on 6th. Two other species contributed to the bulk of the movements in mid-month, with 590 Greenfinches Carduelis chloris and 1,330 Goldfinches Carduelis carduelis on 9th, and a further 1 ,500 Goldfinches on 1 2th. Small numbers of Bramblings, Siskins Carduelis spinus and redpolls Carduelis were also involved, and there cannot be many sites in Britain able- to boast a southbound movement of 1 08 Tree Sparrows Passer montanus (on 25th). At Holme, Landguard and Sandwich Bay, there were fewer finches highlighted in the monthly report, but again the middle of the month was generally the peak time, with the exception of 450 Goldfinches and 520 Linnets south at Landguard on 3rd. On 1 0th, observers reported 145 Goldfinches at Holme, 177 Chaffinches Fringilla coelebs, 464 Greenfinches, 277 Goldfinches and 138 Linnets at Landguard, and 1 68 Chaffinches at Sandwich Bay. Landguard followed this up on I 3th with 349 Goldfinches and 294 Linnets. At Dungeness, three days in the month stand out, the first of these on 9th when 1 , 1 50 Goldfinches, 205 Siskins and 1 ,450 Linnets were recorded. On 1 9th, 1 ,725 Goldfinches were logged, along with 1 54 Siskins and 430 redpolls, with a further 830 Goldfinches on 2 1st. Then, on 27th, there were 360 Siskins, 280 Linnets and 725 redpolls, with 420 Chaffinches the following day. Numbers on the west coast of Britain were more modest. At the Calf of Man, the peak day was 1 3th, with a movement of 64 Chaffinches, 85 Greenfinches and 60 Goldfinches. At Walney (Cumbria), the middle of the month was again the time of strongest passage, with I 1 0 Goldfinches on 1 0th, 50 Chaffinches, 1 70 Greenfinches and 350 Linnets on 1 2th, and Linnets up to 450 there the following day.The Irish observatories were largely unaffected by movements of finches, although 80 Goldfinches at Cape Clear on 8th and 95 Linnets at Copeland (Co. Down) on 1 3th perhaps warrant a mention. The above summary of unchecked news was supplied by the Bird Observatories Council's 'grapevine , courtesy of the British Trust for Ornithology British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 38-40 39 Steve Young/Birdwatch Mike Malpass Hugh Horrop Recent reports 1 3. First-winter Ivory Gull Pagophiia eburnea, Lerwick, Shetland, November 200 1 . 1 4. Gull-billed Tern Sterna nilotica, Titchwell, Norfolk, November 200 1 . HRare Bird News supplies all its information free to British Birds. Call 09063 888 III for the latest, up-to-date news (28p/min cheap rate; 4 1 p/min other times; including VAT) Call 07626 923923 to report your sightings to the hotline 40 British Birds 95 • January 2002 • 38-40 Classified advertising RATES Text: 50p per word. Minimum cost: £10. Semi-display: Mono. £15 per see (width 40mm) or £32 Der dec (width 85mm) Minimum 2cm. Series: 5% discount for 6, 10% discount for 12. (All rates exclude vat at 17.5%) 1 ayment for all classified advertisements must be made in advance by VISA, Mastercard or by cheque payable to British Birds. Copy deadline: 10th of the month. Contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd., 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2627. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BOOKS BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD. Visit our website for our online catalogue Visit our shop and see our extensive collection. Hawkridge Books, The Cruck Barn, Cross St, Castleton, Derbyshire S30 2WH. Tel: 01433 621999. Fax: 01433 621862. Email: books@hawkridge.co.uk. Web: www.hawkridge.co.uk RARE AND OUT OF PRINT books on Ornithology. Isabelline Books. Tel: 01326 210412. Fax: 0870 051 6387. BACK NUMBERS OF ALL leading ornithological and natural history journals, reports, bulletins, newsletters, etc. bought and sold. Catalogue details: David Morgan, Whitmore, Umberleigh, Devon EX37 9HB or www.birdjournals.com The original BIRDWATCHER’S LOGBOOK The most concise way to record your observations. Monthly, annual and life columns for 762 species, plus 159 diary pages. Send £7.45 inclusive P/P to: Coxton Publications, Eastwood, Beverley Rd, Walkington, Beverley, HU17 8RP. 01482 881833 FOR SALE FIVE VOLUME SET OF Lars Jonsson ‘Birds of..” (Penguin/Helm), all fine, Helm vol. in d/w, £125 ono; ‘The Dotterel’, Nethersole- Thompson, fine in d/w, £65 ono. Tel: 01629 65074. Email: jakeandtrev@hotmail.com. SWAROVSK1 8.5 x 42EL’S, boxed, as new. £600. Tel: 02882 240 593. WANTED NEWTON/WOLLEY: Ootheca Wolleyana STC. Please write to: David Ellison, 40 Queensway, Rothwell, Leeds LS26 ONB. DESPERATELY SEEKING 6-10 old-sized British Birds binders (cordex ONLY). Nicholas Green, 020 7485 9280. HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION Scotland MORVERN (DRIMNIN) HOLIDAY COTTAGES. Beautifully situated by Sound of Mull. Superb walking and wildlife. No pets. Open all year £175-£205 fully inclusive. Tel: 01967 42 1308. Email: glasdrumtrust@aol.com Overseas PROVENCE, CAMARGUE. Two s/c cottages. Rogers, Mas d’Auphan, Le Sambuc, 13200 ARLES, France. Tel: (0033) 490972041, Fax: (0033) 490972087. SINEMORETZ, BULGARIA Villa Philadelphia is a cosy six-room Bulgarian-American Inn offering exclusive service and excellent opportunities for birding in a once closed region:www. villaphiladelphia.com Email:tours@ villaphiladelphia.com Tel:215. 517. 7639 (USA), +359. 88. 53. 56. 86 (BG). BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS KIMBERLEY, AUSTRALIA - BIRDING tours. Experienced, knowledgeable ornithological guide - George Swann. Bushwalking, 4WD safaris, coastal cruises. Small groups. Charters available. Kimberley Birdwatching, PO Box 220, Broome, Western Australia 6725 Tel/Fax: +61 8 9192 1246. Email: kimbird@tpg.com.au Web Site: rvww4.tpg.com.au/users/kimbird SAKERTOUR - THE CARPATHIAN Birding Company. Hungary, Slovakia, Romania. All Central European Specialities. Ten years of experience in professional guiding: Z. Ecsedi and J. OlAh jr. extensive local contacts. H-4032 Debrecen, Tarjan 6, Hungary. Tel/Fax: 36-66-210390. Email: saker@axelero.hu www.sakertour.hu Updated Hungarian Birdnews. ELLERY ESTATE - MOST ATTRACTIVE choice of self-catering cottages and chalets situated on the shores of Loch Caolisport. While you are at Ellery you are free to go wherever you please. There are hill walks, many lochs and burns where you can fish, numerous wildlife, birds, flowers, etc. The perfect location for the true country lover. For a full colour brochure please write to: The Booking Office, Ellery 7, Lochgilphead, Argyll PA31 8PA. Tel: 01880 770232. Fax: 01880 770386. Email: info@ellery.com Come see rare European birds in Spain Small groups, experienced guides, high success with the rarest species. A great variety of habitats in top natural sites. Rural houses, regional dishes and good prices. Select among scheduled 6-day tours or ask for personalised trips Complete information in our website and brochure: Email:info@blrdingandalusia.com www.birdingandalusia.com Fax +34 950 221430 Pio Baroja 26, 7°3, 04006 Almeria, Spain BIRDINS ANDALUSIA AUSTRALIA exclusive Birdwatching Tours Australia wide, private charter only Birdwatching Aficionados Jonny Schoenjahn Fax: +61 8 9192 7708 PO Box 5493, Broome WA 6726, Australia iwvw. users, bigpond. com/jonnybird/ MEXICO 100 ENDEMIC BIRD SPECIES Expert level small group tours, and custom trips for private parties. USA based LEGACY TOURS, guided by Michael Carmody: Fax: (509) 624-1885 Email: jigsaw@winstarmail.com References from top world listers BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS CUMBRIA, SOLWAY 8t LAKE DISTRICT Tours - 2 and 4 day BirdBreak tours led by local professional ornithologists. Pomerine skua, osprey, black grouse, black guillemot, barnacle & pink footed goose, peregrine falcons, puffins 8t lots of waders. Small groups collected at Carlisle station. Contact: BirdBreaks, Wallsend House, Church Lane, Bowness-on-Solway, Cumbria CA7 5AF. Email: birdbreaks@emgroup.org.uk; Website: www.emgroup.org.uk/birdbreaks. Tel: 016973 51055. BIRDWATCHING Species In Sri Lanka 26 Endemics H,GH ELMS TRAVEL (PVT) LIMITED Tours tailor-made 01 3rd Lane' Nawala Road Rajagiriya . •. Sri Lanka to suit your Tei.94 1 861 4^5 / 94 1 86i 466 , Fax. 94 1861 464 requirements e-mail, highelms@itmin.com www.highelmstravel.com USA The Carotinas Mountains to the Sea April II to 21 2002 Explore the beautiful, undiscovered Carolinas with local birding and natural history experts. From coastal marshes to Blue Ridge Peaks for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers, 20+ warblers and spectacular scenery. Further details on this trip and full brochure please ring: 01209 718144 or fax 01209 612458 or Email: grsdmillsflorists@camborne.fsbusiness.co.uk Web site:www.birdventures.com Come to Donana, the wild heart of Spain. Professionally led birding - botany excursions. Small groups and individuals. All year round. Charming guesthouse facing the marshes. Transfer from airport. Personalised stays. Full board from £22. All inc. 6 days from £200. fAguila Imperial 150. 21750 El Roclo, Huelva, Spain. Tel: +34 959 442466/620 964369. Fax: +34 959 442466. E-mail: donana@siscelnet.es Information and prices: www.sistelnet.es/donana "Do*UZ*M Ltd. SPANISH PYRENEES BIRDWATCHING CENTRE Birders dream guesdtouse nr. Wallcreeper & Lammergeier sanctuary. Fb £150 pppw. 8-day programme for individuals, couples and friends £550 - all included. Brochure & information: M. Ridgard Tel: 01638 664598. www.boletas.org/jjsv@ boletas.org For classified advertising contact Ian Lycett Tel: 020 7704 9495 ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk Wildlife Computing Computer software for birders http ://www wildlife. co uk Desktop Software Bird Recorder 32 • The world's most comprehensive bird and wildlife records database • Supplied with birds, butterflies, moths, dragonflies and mammals database. • World and Western Palearclic versions available Prices from £70. • Requires Windows 95. 98, ME. NT4 or Windows Mobile Software ml""' m? Pocket Bird Recorder • As easy to use as a paper notebook Revolutionises note taking in the field. • Automatically updates your desktop PC database when you return home. • Available for Palm Pilot and Windows CE Pocket PCs. Price £35. 2000. Contact: Wildlife Computing, World Bird Distribution • Contains distribution data for 364 areas worldwide. • Use with Bird Recorder 32 or on its own to produce your own checklists. Standalone version available soon. • Included FOC with BR 32 World Edition. • Requires Windows 95. 98. NT4 or Windows 2000. 6 Fiddlers Lane, East Bergholt Suffolk C07 6SJ Tel (+44) 01206 298345 or 07768 348867 Fax (+44) 01206 298068 Email sales@wildlife.co.uk Payment by cheque. Switch. Mastercard or Visa EILAT & SOUTHERN ISRAEL (AUTUMN/WINTER/SPRING) ★ A better quality Israel birding experience assured. ★ Tours by a team of dedicated protessionals. ★ Ground prices from 160 GB pounds sterling- 240 US dollars ★ Birds on your doorstep! Almost 300 species recorded at Lotan. ★ Northern Israel itineraries from 5-8 days. ★ Perfect for self-guided birders. ★ Customized itineraries for tour companies. ★ Full details on request at www.birdingisrael.com ★ Contact - James Smith/David Dolev at Kibbutz Lotan, Doar Na Chevel Eilot, 88855 ISRAEL. Fax: + 9728-6356-937. Tel: + 9728-6356-935. ★ Email birdlotan@lotan.ardom.co.il J Birduiatching Breaks The finest in birding holidays led by professional leaders and local experts to: ★ Armenia ★ Bulgaria ★ Canada (Alberta, Churchill & Manitoba, Long Point) ★ ★ Chile ★ China (Sichuan) ★ Corsica ★ Costa Rica ★ Cuba ★ Dominican Republic & Puerto Rico ★ Finland ★ France (Pyrenees, La Brenne) ★ Ghana ★ Holland ★ ★ Hungary' ★ India (North & Himalayas. South & Andaman Islands) ★ Japan ★ ★ Korea ★ Malaysia ★ Mexico ★ Morocco ★ Nepal ★ Senegal ★ South Africa ★ ★ Spain (Galicia, Picos de Europa) ★ Sri Lanka ★ Sweden (Oland) ★ Uganda ★ ★ United Kingdom (Islay) ★ USA (Arizona, Colorado, New l| Engand & Florida ★ Texas & Washington State ★ Venezuela ★ Check our website for special offers www.birdwatchingbreaks.freeserve.co.uk E-mail: m.finn@birdwatchingbreaks.freeserve.co.uk Tel: 01227 740799 Fax: 01227 363946 Birdwatching Breaks, 26 School Lane, Herne, Kent CT6 7AL BIRD NEWS to PAGERS and MOBILE PHONES Up to the minute bird news wherever you are. Local news, national news. Rare Bird Alert 01603 456789 Binoculars & Telescopes Top Makes, Top Models, Top Advice, Top Deals, Part Exchange Show Room Sales 01925 730399 "TJteul Order 07000 247392 Credit/debit cards accepted -hlsdi sid British Birds has for sale the following back issues: Volumes 89 (1996) & 90 (1997) incomplete volumes - various issues Volumes 91-93 (1 998-2000) complete volumes Individual issues from all volumes: £3.00 Rarities issues from all volumes: £5.00 Complete volumes: £20.00 UK £25.00 Overseas Payment can be made by credit card or cheque. Contact: British Birds, Back Issues, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel: +44(0)1580 882039 or Email: accounts@helm-information.co.uk. — v. — . )me to BB Books, the new mailorder service from British Birds. To mark our launch we are pleased to present some 170 titles, 50 of these at special offer prices (denoted in red). ooks included in BB Books are recommended by British Birds as reliable, good value and important additions to any catcher's library. We aim to provide the most prompt, efficient and friendly service possible. ioks fulfilment is provided by NHBS Ltd in association with British Birds - each sale benefits the journal, so please take ntage of our excellent selection. Birds of East Africa Stevenson & Fanshawe Comprehensive field guide to all the resident, migrant and vagrant birds of Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. □ #22326 23.99 29r95 hbk Field Guide to Birds of Australia Simpson & Day Completely revised edition of this excellent guide, which is a field edition of the authors' The Birds of Australia (now out of print). □ #107606 1 9.99 24.99 pbk Collins Bird Guide: Large Format Svensson et al Large version of the Collins Bird Guide with expanded text and full-size colour plates. A magnificent volume. □ #106883 22.99 29r99 hbk Birders - tales of a tribe Cocker This is a story of the birding community, of its characters, its rules, its equipment (only a certain type of notebook will do) and its adventures - often hilariously funny. □ #120708 1 5.99 hbk Sunbirds & Flowerpeckers Cheke S Mann The first identification guide to the sunbirds and their allies, with 48 colour plates by Richard Allen accurately portraying all major plumage variations. □ #66414 37.00 hbk Toucans, Barbets and Honeyguides Short S Horne This book covers in unmatched detail the life history, relationships, biology and conservation of all the world's toucans, barbets and honeyguides. □ #101743 60.00 hbk ,'»e and Western Palearctic >s New to Britain & Ireland - Palmer - #111106 s s of Britain & Europe - Peterson et al. - #22327 ' S of Europe - Jonsson - #49559 12.99 s of Hungary - #49560 14.99 is s of Israel - Shirihai - #21254 1 s of the Western Palearctic - Complete : olumes) - #32807 s s of the Western Palearctic - Complete (CD) i-imp & Perrins - #28660 ' s of the Western Palearctic - Concise c aw & Perrins - #50548 ;rdwatching Guide to Eastern Spain - #108192 sh Birds: Folklore, Names and Literature - #66552 11.25 ins Bird Guide - Svensson et al. - #1 13220 1 2.99 C I Atlas of European Breeding Birds - #53830 I Guide to Birds of the Middle East " ter et al. - #45653 li ing Birds in Britain - Lee GR Evans - #123780 dbook of Bird Identification Beaman & Madge - #17061 55.00 : orical Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain tdand - Holloway - #44008 ’’tification Guide to European Passerines eansson - #889 " tification Guide to Non-passerines - Baker - #29342 cortant Bird Areas of Europe - Heath 8 Evans - #101969 Atlas of Breeding Birds - Gibbons et al. - #20923 1 Macmillan Birder's Guide to European and die Eastern Birds - #52543 Macmillan Field Guide to Bird Identification - #24237 ; re to Watch Birds Herefordshire, Shrops, '■:s, Warwickshire, Worcs - Helm - #65059 : re to Watch Birds in Cumbria, Lancashire -Cheshire - Helm - #65057 ‘ ■re to Watch Birds in Devon and Cornwall - Helm - #119385 re to Watch Birds in Dorset, Hampshire and sle of Wight - Helm - #120343 re to Watch Birds in E Anglia - Helm - #125992 re to Watch Birds in Europe and Russia - Helm - #105248 re to Watch Birds in Ireland - Helm - #29509 9.75 re to Watch Birds in Italy - Helm - #35882 re to Watch Birds in Kent, Surrey and Sussex m - #65058 re to Watch Birds in NE England - Helm - #24053 re to Watch Birds in North and East Spain m - #85717 □ Where to Watch Birds in Scotland - Helm - #64580 12.99 pbk 25.00 hbk □ Where to Watch Birds in Somerset, Avon, Gloucs 12.99 pbk 19.99 hbk & Wilts - Helm - #2894 15.99 pbk □ Where to Watch Birds in Switzerland - Helm - #97411 11. 2S i a nn I t»V-7 _7 pbk 19.99 hbk □ Where to Watch Birds in Thames Valley and the 14.99 pbk 78.85 hbk Chilterns - (NYP 04/2002) Helm - #125993 250.00 hbk □ Where to Watch Birds in the E Midlands - Helm - #53088 12.99 pbk □ Where to Watch Birds in the London Area - Helm - #44408 12.99 pbk 99.00 CD □ Where to Watch Birds in Wales - Helm - #101643 14.99 pbk □ Where to Watch Birds in Yorkshire - Helm - #69139 14.99 pbk 49.50 hbk North America 10.95 pbk □ A Birder's Guide to Florida - #779 24.50 spr 14.99 pbk □ A Birder's Guide to S. California - #86478 24.50 spr ic on 1 O.JJ pbk □ A Birder's Guide to SE Arizona - #44527 22.95 spr 59.95 hbk □ A Birder's Guide to the Rio Grande Valley - #100616 24.50 spr 31.95 hbk □ Collins Pocket Guide: Birds of N. America - #81054 16.99 pbk □ Field Guide to the Birds of N. America 9.99 pbk 19.95 pbk - National Geographic - #8871 1 00 QQ hbk □ The Hummingbirds of North America - #67108 26.25 ocnn JTTW hbk 31.95 hbk □ I/D Guide to N. American Birds Part 1 - Pyle - #75330 29.99 pbk □ North American Bird Guide - Sibley - #106918 20.99 pc nn AJ.W pbk 36.00 pbk □ The Sibley Guide to Bird Life and Behaviour - #124065 35.00 hbk 19.50 pbk South & Central America & Caribbean 75.00 pbk □ Birds of Southern S. America 14.99 •49t99 pbk 53.95 hbk - de la Pena & Rumboll - #66504 17.99 hbk U Birds of the West Indies - Raffaele et al. - #69140 28.99 dc nn jj.W hbk □ Birds, Mammals & Reptiles of the Galapagos 16.95 pbk 14.99 pbk - Swash & Still - #86419 12.99 pbk □ Guide to Birds of Costa Rica - Stiles et al. - #4386 40.00 pbk □ Guide to Birds of Trinidad & Tobago - French - #14770 32.00 pbk 12.99 pbk □ Field Guide to the Birds of Peru- Clements et al - #63442 40.00 pbk □ The Birds of Ecuador vol 1 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #21379 55.00 pbk 14.99 pbk □ The Birds of Ecuador vol 2 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #1 17744 40.00 pbk 14.99 pbk □ The Birds of Ecuador, 2-volume set - #118677 80.00 pbk □ Where to Watch Birds in Mexico - Howell - #85698 19.99 pbk 14.99 pbk 16.99 pbk Africa, Middle East & Indian Ocean Islands d*A9 pbk □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - #40871 33.99 /in nn hbk 12.99 pbk □ Birds of Madagascar: a Photographic Guide - #54245 23.50 ~>o r>n 20 UU hbk 12.99 pbk □ Birds of the Gambia & Senegal - Barlow et al. - #31919 23.99 ^ee hbk □ Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands - #70343 14.99 D^t99 pbk 12.99 pbk □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of Eastern Africa - #43706 14.99 ^F9t99 pbk 14.99 pbk □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of S Africa - #86446 14.99 pbk □ Field Guide to Birds of Kenya & N. Tanzania - #85718 13.99 1 c nn pbk See BB Books online at www.nhbs.com/bb-books □ Field Guide to the Birds of Seychelles - #116115 □ Important Bird Areas in Africa and Associated Islands - #120103 □ Mammals of Madagascar - Garbutt - #54246 □ Newman's Birds of Southern Africa - #115772 □ SASOl Birds of Prey of Africa & its islands - #85607 □ SASOL Birds of Southern Africa - #69110 □ The Birds of Africa vol 1 - Fry et al. - #571 □ The Birds of Africa vol 2 - Fry et al. - #572 □ The Birds of Africa vol 3 - Fry et al. - #2780 □ The Birds of Africa vol 4 - Fry et al. - #10567 □ The Birds of Africa vol 5 - Fry et al. - #19103 □ The Birds of Africa vol 6 - Fry et al. - #19104 25.00 pbk 55.00 hbk 25.00 ->r\ r\r\ JU.Uu hbk 12.99 -4999 pbk 15.99 9999 pbk 15.99 9999 pbk 84.00 1 ~in nn T jU.UU hbk 84.00 130.00 hbk 84.00 130.00 hbk 84.00 44999 hbk 84.00 1 4 Pi nn TZU.W hbk 92.00 i i r aa TTTVV hbk Asia & Pacific □ Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - Grimmett et al - #69141 □ The Birds of Japan - #10075 30.00 □ Birdwatchers' Guide to India - #82704 □ Checklist of Birds of the Oriental Region - #54331 □ Field Guide to Birds of Bhutan - #97388 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Nepal - #107846 □ Field Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #66407 □ Field Guide to Birds of W. Malaysia & Singapore #83306 23.99 □ Field Guide to the Birds of China - #101745 23.99 □ Field Guide to the Birds of SE Asia - #64016 26.50 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka - #83310 23.99 □ A Guide to the Birds of Nepal - #10372 30.00 □ Guide to the Birds of Thailand - #9945 □ Guide to the Birds of the Philippines - #101746 27.99 □ Guide to the Birds of Wallacea - #31250 □ Mammals of the Indian Subcontinent - #80720 1 3.95 □ Pocket Guide - Birds of the Indian Subcontinent- #97400 14.99 55.00 hbk -4999 hbk 18.75 pbk 10.00 pbk 16.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 25.00 hbk 32.50 pbk 9999 pbk 9999 hbk -2995 pbk -4999 hbk 45.00 hbk 94:95 pbk 41.00 hbk •4995 pbk 4999 pbk Australasia □ Birds of New Guinea - #1683 □ Collins Field Guide to Birds of Australia - #88226 □ Complete Guide to Finding Birds of Australia - #53612 □ Hand Guide to the Birds of New Zealand - #116574 □ HANZAB vol 1 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10556 □ HANZAB vol 2 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10667 □ HANZAB vol 3 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10668 □ HANZAB vol 4 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10669 □ HANZAB vol 5 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10670 35.00 pbk 14.99 9999 pbk 14.95 pbk 15.50 9999 pbk 150.00 hbk 72.50 hbk 72.50 hbk 135.00 hbk 125.00 hbk World □ Birds of the World: a checklist -Clements -#101888 35.00 hbk Monographs □ Albatrosses - Tickell - #101886 □ Buntings & Sparrows - Byers et al. - #21255 23.50 □ Crows & Jays - Madge 8 Burn - #97387 □ Cuckoos, Cowbirds & other cheats - Davies - #104272 □ Finches & Sparrows - Clement et al. - #97396 □ Gulls: A guide to identification - Grant - #580 □ Kingfishers, Bee-eaters & Rollers - Fry 8 Harris - #97398 14.25 □ Munias and Mannikins - Restall - #54237 21.00 □ The Mute Swan - Birkhead 8 Perrins -#1165 11.99 □ New World Blackbirds - Jaramillo 8 Burke - #82707 26.25 □ New World Warblers - Curson et al - #29510 20.99 □ Nightjars - Cleere - #65487 □ Nightjars & their Allies - Hoiyoak - #105584 □ Owls - K6nig et al - #66408 □ Parrots - Juniper 8 Parr - #65486 29.50 □ Pigeons & Doves - Gibbs et al. - #66403 31 .99 □ Pittas, Broadbills and Asities - #29868 21.50 □ Rails - Taylor 8 van Perlo - #66402 26.25 □ Raptors of Europe and the Middle East Forsman - #55844 23.95 □ Raptors of Europe, Middle East & N. Africa - Clark 8 Schmitt - #54599 □ Raptors of the World - Ferguson-Lees et al. - #5601 □ Seabirds: An Identification Guide - Harrison - #851 24.99 □ Seabirds of the Word: A photographic guide - Harrison - #63122 □ Shorebirds - Hayman et al. - #554 24.99 □ Shrike & Bush-Shrikes - Harris 8 Franklin - #105227 28.99 □ Shrikes - Lefranc 8 Worfolk - #54240 20.99 □ Skuas & Jaegers - Olsen 8 Larsen - #63425 □ Starlings & Mynas - Feare 8 Craig - #82706 24.00 □ Swallows & Martins - Turner 8 Rose - #3929 20.99 □ Swifts - Chantler 8 Driessens - #86417 □ Sylvia Warblers - Shirihai et al. - #107849 □ Terns: an identification guide - Olsen 8 Larsen - #33658 18.75 □ The Golden Eagle - Watson - #53818 □ The Great Auk - Fuller - #101175 □ The Hobby - Chapman - #103400 □ The Nuthatches - Matthysen 8 Quinn - #69079 □ The Peregrine - Ratcliffe - #858 □ The Red Kite - Carter - #1 1 5639 □ Thrushes - Clement et al. - #107850 28.99 □ Tits, Nuthatches & Treecreepers - Harrap 8 Quinn - #13707 22.50 □ Tundra Plovers - Byrkjedal 8 Thompson - #69080 □ Warblers of Europe, Asia & N. Africa - Baker - #65060 24.00 □ Wildfowl - Madge 8 Burn - #2621 22.50 □ Wrens, Dippers & Thrashers - Brewer - #66416 40.00 to nr\ tO.W 16.99 24.95 19.99 25.95 1 Q Q n I O. J7 TQAA il o . w 9595 1C AA jj.Uu -2999 30.00 50.00 35.00 qc <~tr> TQ AA jO.W -tc r\r\ tw.w QC Afl -2995 26.50 49.00 -2999 15.99 -29:99 ic r\n j“.W TC Aft txw 24.00 JA.W 71 7 on C f JJ 28.00 60.00 -24:99 31.95 45.00 22.50 25.95 36.95 22.50 ic no J7,W ~iQ OO T7T77 29.95 Ji.VU -2999 35.00 f f h I- h h h h h h Handbook of Birds of the World - del Hoyo et al. □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 1 - #17555 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 2 - #17556 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 3 - #17557 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 4 - #17558 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 5 - #17559 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 6 - #17561 □ Threatened Birds of the World - BirdLife mt - #1 10198 □ World Bird Species Checklist - Wells - #77401 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 70.00 hbk 29.50 hbk Miscellaneous □ Birds and Climate Change - Burton - #35909 1 8.7 5 24.99 hbk Recordings & Videos □ African Bird Sounds, 2-volume set - Chappuis - #119048 141.00 1 59.95 North Africa and Atlantic Islands, West and Central Africa □ Bill Oddies’s Video Guide to British Birds - #98805 17.95 □ Bird Songs and Calls of Britain and Europe 46.94 (Complete 4 CD Set) - #63342 □ The Birds of Britain and Europe, 4-Video Set - #39466 49.94 □ Eastern Rarities: The Birds of Beidaihe - #86435 17.95 □ The Large Gulls of North America - #100756 17.95 □ The Raptors of Britain and Europe - video - #49316 17,98 □ Sound Guide to Nightjars & related Nightbirds - #82371 14.99 □ A Sound Guide to the Owls of the World - #84226 24.99 □ The Warblers of Britain and Europe - video - #86434 17.95 Prices quoted in £ (UK Sterling). All special offer prices are valid only for January 2002, other prices quoted are subject to any publishers increases and all sales subject to NHBS Ltd Terms & Conditions (available on request). VAT is included in the price of CDs, Videos etc as applicable. Make all cheques and POs payable to NHBS Ltd. Payment can also be made in US$ & C, please contact customer services for details. Orders are normally despatched promptly from stock, but please allow up to 21 days for delivery in the UK, longer if abroad. Name Address Postcode Suscriber No Please sign here Please debit my Visa/Mastercard/Switch/AMEX Telephone Goods total £ P&P total £ Total £ Expiry date | Switch - Start date Issue No AMEX - Start date / Code Standard Service (books) postage 8> packing charges and delivery times Up to and including £5.00 £10.00 £30.00 £45.00 £65.00 £100 Over £100 In transit times (from despatch) (Per item) (Per item) United Kingdom£1.00 £2.00 £4.00 £4.50 £5.50 £7.50 £7.50 3 days £2.00 £1.25 Europe £1.50 £4.00 £5.00 £6.50 £8.50 £10.50 11% 5 days £2.50 £1.50 Rest of World £2.00 £4.50 £6.00 £7.00 £10.00 16% 16% 20 days £3.00 £2.00 Video Maps/CDs Please send order to: BB Books, do NHBS Ltd, 2-3 Wills Rd, Totnes, Devon TQ9 5XN, UK Pay O1B03 T*»l DIRnt RRSqit amail hh.hnnktiSnhhc rnm - ali«/a 1/C m into hh.hnnl/c uwhon nrrlor'^ Guidelines for contributors British Birds publishes material dealing with original observations on the birds of the Western Palearctic. Except for records of rarities, papers and notes are normally accepted for publication only on condition that the material is not being offered in whole or in part to any other journal or magazine. Photographs and drawings are welcomed. Referees are used where appropriate, and all submissions are reviewed by the BB Editorial Board or Notes Panel. Contributions should, if possible, be submitted on disk or (preferably) by e-mail, to the Editor. Most word-processing applications are suitable, but, if you are not using an up-to-date, standard program, it is best to submit two versions, one in the original word-processed format and one in a basic text format such as RTF (Rich Text Format). For contributors without access to a computer, text should be submitted in duplicate, typewritten, with double spacing and wide margins, and on one side of the paper only. Hand-drawn figures should be in black ink on good-quality tracing paper or white drawing paper; lettering should be inserted lightly in pencil, while captions should be typed separately. Please discuss computer-generated maps and figures with the Editor before submitting them. For use in main papers, notes and letters, photographs should preferably be either 35-mm transparencies or high-quality prints. Digital images are acceptable, but, to ensure good reproduction, these should be saved as a TIFF or an EPS file with a resolution of no more than 300 dpi and an image width of at least 13 cm and supplied on a CD-ROM. Digital images with lower resolution, or in other formats (e.g. JPEGs), do not reproduce well, and will be used more sparingly, and usually only when there is no alternative (for example, for ‘Recent reports’). Digital images should be sent to the Design and Production team at The Banks (see inside front cover), and large images should be submitted on CD-ROM. With the increasing use of digital photography, some photographers will wish to supply images taken with digital cameras. To ensure that our high standard of photographic reproduction is maintained, however, we would ask all photographers to read the Code of Practice for the Supply of Digital Images issued by the Association of Photographers, posted on its website as a downloadable Adobe Acrobat PDF file - www.aophoto.co.uk/aoppdfs/DIGcode.pdf Only images of the very highest quality, supplied as a 35-mm transparency, will be considered for a front-cover illustration. Papers should be concise and factual, taking full account of previous literature and avoiding repetition as much as possible. Opinions should be based on adequate evidence. Authors are encouraged to submit their work to other ornithologists for critical assessment and comment prior to submission. Such help received should be acknowledged in a separate section. For main papers, an abstract summarising the key results and conclusions should be included, but should not exceed 5% of the total length. Authors should carefully consult this issue for style of presentation, especially of references and tables. English and scientific names and sequence of birds should follow The ‘British Birds’ List of Birds of the Western Palearctic (1997); or, for non- West Palearctic species, Monroe & Sibley (1993), A World Checklist of Birds. Names of plants should follow Dony et al. (1986), English Names of Wild Flowers. Names of mammals should follow Corbet & Harris (1991), The Handbook of British Mammals, 3rd edition. Topographical (plumage and structure) and ageing terminology should follow editorial recommendations (Brit. Birds 74: 239-242; 78: 419-427; 80: 502). Authors of main papers (but not notes or letters) will receive five free copies of the journal (plus three each to subsidiary authors of multi-authored papers). Further copies may be available on request in advance, but will be charged for. A schedule of payment rates for contributors (including authors, artists and photographers) is available from the Editor. Eurasian Reed Warbler ISSN 0007-0335 British Birds Established 1907, incorporating The Zoologist, established 1843 Published by BB 2000 Limited, trading as 'British Birds’ Registered Office: 4 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London WC2E 8SF British Birds Editor Roger Riddington Assistant Editor David A. Christie Editorial Board Ian Carter, Richard Chandler, Martin Collinson, Robin Rrytherch, Nigel Redman, Roger Riddington Art Consultants Robert Gillmor & Alan Harris Photographic Research Robin Chittenden David Tipling Design Mark Corliss Rarities Committee Chairman Colin Bradshaw Hon. Secretary Michael J. Rogers Paul Harvey, John McLoughlin, John Martin, Doug Page, Adam Rowlands, Ken Shaw, Brian Small, Jimmy Steele, Reg Thorpe, Grahame Walbridge Archivist John Marchant Statistician Peter Fraser Museum consultant Ian Lewington Notes Panel Colin Bibby, lan Dawson, Jim Flegg, Ian Newton FRS, Malcolm Ogilvie, Angela Turner (Co-ordinator) Annual subscription rates Libraries and agencies - £72.00 Personal subscriptions UK and overseas surface mail - £56.50 Overseas airmail - £88.00 Concessionary rates (Available only to individual members of the RSPB, BTO, IWC, SOC, County Bird Clubs 8t Societies and other National or Regional organisations) UK - £42.00 Overseas surface mail - £46.00 Overseas airmail - £69.50 Single back issues - £6.50 Available from British Birds, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Rarities Issue - £10 (available as above) Please make all cheques payable to British Birds Guidelines for Contributors: see inside back cover of January 2002 issue, or visit the BB website. www.britishbirds.co.uk CIRCULATION & PRODUCTION The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel: 01580 882039 Fax: 01 580 882038 EDITORIAL Chapel Cottage, Dunrossness, Shetland ZE2 9JH Tel & Fax: 01950 460080 Papers, notes, letters, illustrations, etc. Roger Riddington E-mail: editor@britishbirds.co.uk ‘News & comment’ information Bob Scott & Adrian Pitches, 8 Woodlands, St Neots, Cambridgeshire PE 19 1UE Tel: 01480 214904 Fax: 01480 473009 E-mail: abscott@tiscali.co.uk 'The Ornithological Year’ bird news Barry Nightingale &. Keith Allsopp, 7 Bloomsbury Close, Woburn, Bedfordshire MK1 7 9QS Tel: 01525 290314 Rarity descriptions M. J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, Cornwall TR26 3AZ Subscriptions & Circulation Vivienne Hunter E-mail: subscriptions@britishbirds.co.uk Accounts & Administration Hazel Jenner E-mail: accounts@helm-information.co.uk For all advertising matters, please contact: lan Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd, 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N I 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2767. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk Design & Production Philippa Leegood E-mail: design@britishbirds.co.uk ADVERTISING BB Books c/o NHBS Ltd, 2-3 Wills Road, Totnes, Devon TQ9 5XN Tel: 01803 865913 Fax: 01803 865280 Email: bb-books@nhbs.com Front cover photograph: Little Egret Egret ta garzctta, Britain, December 1997. Robin Chittenden Sirdwatching holidays in France from just £495. Have a brochure flown to you today. For a great value early summer break from £495 e ar person, get Outthere and experience our i .ilored birdwatching holidays, brought to you from . urocamp and Keycamp Holidays. Based in the best birdwatching regions in D authern France, your tour leader will introduce you ' ) the local bird life and will be on hand to answer our questions throughout your weeks itinerary, icluding informal soirees where you can share the ay’s experiences. The price is inclusive of meals, minibus transportation and continental style holiday home accommodation. If this sounds like the perfect holiday for you, simply call the number below and we'll fly out a copy of our new brochure to you straight away. For a free brochure call today on: 08709 019 484 Quoting ref: BRIT I www.outtherebirdwatching.co.uk Heart of France - Cantobre Look for: Griffon Vulture Black Vulture Alpine Swift Hoopoe Purple Heron Night Heron Greater Flamingo Slender-billed Gull Moustached warbler Spectacled Warbler SW Medrterranean- Argeles Look for: Purple Heron Greater Flamingo Black-winged Stilt Kentish Plover Purple Gallinule Penduline Tit Rock Thrush Blue Rock Thrush Penduline Tit Bonelli's Eagle SW France - Messanges Look for: White Stork Spoonbill i Purple Heron Booted Eagle Black Kite ! Little Bittern Mediterranean Gull | Short-toed Eagle Cetti's Warbler Nightjar New Diascopes from Carl Zei ZEISS New Carl Zeiss Diascopes T* FL • 65 mm and 85 mm Objectives • Straight and Angled bodies. • 2 fixed magnification eyepieces and 1 variable eyepiece • Fluoride glass • Waterproof, Nitrogen filled For details of your nearest Carl Zeiss Dealer. Please contact our helpline 017 07 871350. British Birds Volume 95 Number 2 February 2002 42 Eurasian Reed Warbler: the characters and variation associated with the Asian form fuscus David J. Pearson, Brian }. Small and Peter R. Kennerley 62 The non-breeding status of the Little Egret in Britain A. /. Musgrove 8 1 The BB/BTO Best Bird Book of the Year 2001 Roger Riddington, Colin Bibby, Ian Carter, Richard Chandler, Peter Hearn and John Marchant Regular features 6 1 Looking back 85 Notes Grey Heron preying on Rabbit and Common Kingfisher John Sparks Grey Heron eating Rabbit Martin Coath Purple Heron following the plough Edward Mayer Raptors perching in close proximity R. C. Dickson Hobbies feeding on the ground L. P. Alder and C. Ettle Red Grouse chick eaten by sheep Niall El. K. Burton Arctic Tern chicks being fed by several adults Chris Sharpe High and low Green Woodpecker nest holes Alastair J. K. Henderson and Andrew C. B. Henderson Great Spotted Woodpecker using a megaphone for drumming John Eyre Yellow Wagtail feeding on berries of Elder L. P. Alder Pied Wagtail nesting in regularly used vehicle Chris Sharpe Unusual form of distraction display by male Blackbird A. P. Radford Blue Tit pecking at Hedge Accentor corpse Colin Humphrey 9 1 Letters The impact of climate-related habitat loss on Arctic-breeding birds Mark Avery Photographs of birds in the hand James Burgess 92 News and comment Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches 96 (§) Monthly Marathon Paul Holt 97 Recent reports Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan © British Birds 2002 Eurasian Reed Warbler: the characters and variation associated with the Asian form fuscus David J. Pearson , Brian J. Small and Peter R. Kennerley ABSTRACT This paper discusses the characters of and variation within Reed Warblers Acrocephalus scirpaceus of the Asian form fuscus. Compiled from extensive data from the wintering and breeding grounds, and on migration, it provides an in-depth treatment of this taxon. Morphological and biometric variation, together with taxonomic status, range, migration patterns, moult and voice, are discussed. The identification of fuscus, along with comparable plumages of the western form scirpaceus and those of Marsh Warbler A. palustris, is discussed in detail. There is considerable variation in both colour and size of Asian populations of fuscus, which is also apparent on the wintering grounds in East Africa, and we have identified ‘typical fuscus', ‘warmer fuscus' and ‘greyer fuscus’ as groups within the population which show constant plumage characters. Nevertheless, only freshly moulted adults in the wintering areas, adults which have recently returned to the Palearctic breeding grounds and first-winters in early autumn, up to November, are likely to be separable from the western form scirpaceus. In western Europe, it is essential that any putative fuscus be examined in the hand, as well as in the field; even then, using conventional means, it is unlikely that geographical provenance will be established with certainty. 42 © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 I 4 * • Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 18 FEB 2002 ■ -n The small, unstreaked warblers of the genus Acrocephalus have long presented identification challenges for birdwatchers and ringers alike. Recent studies and publica- tions enable many of the species which occur in western Europe to be identified with confi- dence, although some individuals remain prob- lematic. Criteria for the identification of Reed Warbler A. scirpaceus (hereafter referred to as Eurasian Reed Warbler), Marsh Warbler A. palustris , Blyth’s Reed Warbler A. dumetorum and Paddyfield Warbler A. agricola , both in the hand (e.g. Svensson 1992) and in the field (e.g. Harrap & Quinn 1989; Harris et al. 1995), are now well established, using a combination of plumage characters, biometrics, structure and vocalisations. With the exception of Eurasian Reed Warbler, variation within the adult plumage of these species is minor and incon- stant across their respective breeding ranges. Age classes within species do differ and are recognisable by a range of features, including plumage and bare-part characters, biometrics and plumage abrasion. Eurasian Reed Warbler, however, shows con- siderable variation in size and colour, and two races are currently recognised: A. s. scirpaceus (hereafter referred to as scirpaceus) breeds in Europe and North Africa, while A. s. fuscus (hereafter referred to as fuscus) occupies the species’ range in Asia. All those breeding within the traditionally recognised range of fuscus are treated here as fuscus , irrespective of their plumage colour. The closely related African Reed Warbler A. baeticatus of sub-Saharan Africa forms a superspecies with Eurasian Reed Warbler, and the two are considered to be con- specific by Dowsett-Lemaire & Dowsett (1987). Along the Red Sea and in northern Somalia, a distinctive form avicenniae, of uncertain affini- ties, inhabits coastal mangroves. It has been var- iously treated either as a race of African Reed Warbler (e.g. Ash et al. 1989; Urban et al. 1997) or as a race of Eurasian Reed Warbler (Helbig & Seibold 1999), or been given specific status (e.g. Sangster et al. 1998). Following its decision to abandon the Bio- logical Species Concept (BSC) in favour of the Phylogenetic Species Concept (PSC), the Dutch committee for systematics (CSNA) no longer recognises subspecies. It has, therefore, chosen to treat fuscus as a full species, the ‘Caspian Reed Warbler’ A. fuscus, distinct from A. scirpaceus (Sangster et al. 1998). This decision, influenced by the genetic studies of Leisler et al. (1997), has inevitably generated considerable interest in fuscus, a form which had previously received little attention in the literature. Few authors provide a detailed treatment of fuscus, while those who have done so have tended to draw comparisons with Marsh Warbler rather than with scirpaceus. Without clear guidelines to identify fuscus, there has been much speculation concerning its appearance and the criteria by which it can be separated from scirpaceus. In this paper, we discuss the morphological and biometric limits of fuscus, together with its present status, drawing attention to the marked variation in both size and colour that exists in Asia. We attempt to set out the characters by which fuscus can be separated from scirpaceus, and we discuss its likely occurrence in western Europe. We draw heavily on our own experi- ence of fuscus, including observation of many hundreds of trapped birds, on breeding grounds in Kazakhstan, on passage in Turkey, Israel and coastal Sudan, and in winter quarters in Uganda and Kenya. Variation in the Eurasian Reed Warbler in Europe and Asia Variation in the Eurasian Reed Warbler occurs primarily in terms of size and coloration, but also, to a lesser extent, in wing formula. Broadly speaking, size increases and colour saturation decreases from west to east. Traditionally, two races have been recognised, the warmly coloured nominate scirpaceus, which breeds in Europe east to the Ukraine, and the paler, more olivaceous and typically larger fuscus, which breeds from central Turkey and the Caucasus east to northwest China, and south to the Middle East. In Europe, scirpaceus shows little colour variation; the upperparts are usually warm brown, while the breast and flanks are strongly washed with warm buffy-brown. Some worn adult scirpaceus from Scandinavia can appear greyer than their southern counterparts and approach typical fuscus in coloration. Excep- tionally, grey variants resembling Lesser Whitethroat Sylvia curruca in colour have occurred (Voous 1975; Marsh 1982; S. J. R. Rumsey in litt.), but these are grey above and white below, lacking all brown pigmentation in their plumage. In Asia, variation is complex and extensive, involving colour and size. A similar array of British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 43 c Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus variation exists among wintering individuals in East Africa. Here, the majority, which for clarity are termed ‘typical fuscus', have warmer tones on the upperparts confined to the rump and uppertail-coverts, with the mantle paler olive- brown to buffy-brown, and the crown and nape often with a greyish tinge. The underparts are whiter than those of scirpaceus, with the buff wash reduced and confined to the flanks. Alongside these birds, some Eurasian Reed War- blers exhibit plumage tones similar in colour to those of scirpaceus wintering in western Africa, yet they are identical to ‘typical fuscus' in size, wing formula and moult strategy. These indi- viduals, which we term ‘warmer fuscus’, have also been observed on spring passage in Kuwait (D. J. Kelly in litt.), and their origins probably lie in the Caucasus or Caspian Sea area and within the range attributed to fuscus, rather than in European Russia or Ukraine. A minority of those wintering in East Africa, termed ‘greyer fuscus', are rather distinctive. Compared with ‘typical fuscus', these are greyer-brown and more uniform above, with no warmth on the rump (Pearson 1972). ‘Greyer fuscus’ probably originate from the eastern limits of the breeding range, where they occur frequently during August among ‘typical fuscus’ in eastern Kaza- khstan. Intermediates between the three colour types have been noted in Kenya, and colour variations in Asia are probably clinal. There are size differences within scirpaceus in Europe. Wing length increases from west to east, with the smallest breeding birds in Iberia and the largest in Ukraine. In central Asia, fuscus are even longer-winged, and it appears that only these long-winged individuals migrate to East and southern Africa. Compared with scirpaceus, the wing formula of central Asian fuscus is marginally different. On average, fuscus has a slightly shorter second primary (P2) than scirpaceus, more frequently appearing as short as P5 (following Svensson 1992, the primaries are numbered ascendantly). Those breeding in the desert regions of southwest Asia, from Israel to Saudi Arabia, resemble ‘typical fuscus' in colour, but are smaller, similar in size (wing length) to scirpaceus from western Europe. They also have a slightly more rounded wing, with both the second and third primaries shorter than those of ‘typical fuscus' from central Asia (Morgan 1999), more similar to the much shorter and rounder wing of the form avicen- tiiae of the Red Sea mangroves. Thus, fuscus as traditionally defined spans a large range of wing lengths and is not usually separable by measurements from nominate scir- paceus. Populations indistinguishable in colour from scirpaceus probably intergrade with ‘typical fuscus somewhere within the latter’s recognised range. Long-winged ‘greyer fuscus’ are as dif- ferent in colour from ‘typical fuscus’ as the latter are from European scirpaceus. The subspecific boundaries within fuscus may require clarifica- tion, and perhaps need to be redefined, but that is beyond the scope of this paper. Molecular studies With the development of the technique of sequencing mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), it is now possible to investigate the evolutionary relationships among closely related taxa. This can be achieved with a high degree of reliability, and the technique has proved extremely useful for investigating the taxonomy of the small, unstreaked Acrocephalus warblers. These closely related warblers are very similar to one another, and their morphological appearance has pro- vided few external clues to their relationships, which had, until recently, been largely a matter of speculation. An improved understanding was provided by Leisler et al. (1997), who analysed the nucleotide sequence (over 1,000 base pairs) of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene of 27 Acrocephalus species and subspecies, and three Hippolais species. Using results from three indi- viduals of nominate scirpaceus and four of fuscus, they compared these two taxa. They found that cytochrome b of scirpaceus from Europe and that of fuscus from southeast Kaza- khstan differed in 3.8% of nucleotide positions (a ‘genetic distance’ of 3.8%), indicating appre- ciable genetic differentiation. Perhaps most sur- prising, however, was their conclusion that scirpaceus was not a sister taxon of fuscus, and was, in fact, more closely related to avicenniae and the West African baeticatus. Leisler et al. (1997) did not, however, claim that scirpaceus and fuscus were distinct species. Instead, they concluded that further studies, especially play- back experiments, were needed to clarify the position of avicenniae and fuscus within the scirpaceus co mpl ex. Helbig & Seibold (1999) also reconstructed the phylogeny of the Acrocephalus warblers, using nucleotide sequences of 1 kb of the cytochrome b gene, and examined 37 ingroup 44 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 1 5. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. Typical fuscus', fresh first-winter Lake Alakol, Kazakhstan, August 1 993. 1 6. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. Typical fuscus’, fresh adult, Jubail, Saudi Arabia, 1 6th April 1 992. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 45 Arnoud B. van den Berg David Pearson Peter R Kennerley Arnoud 8. van den Berg Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 1 7. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. Typical fuscus’, fresh adult, Jubail, Saudi Arabia, 29th April 1 992. 1 8. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. 'Typical fuscus, slightly worn adult, Goksu delta, Turkey, 14th May 1998, 46 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscu s y taxa of four genera belonging to 28 traditionally recognised species. They found rather less genetic distance between scirpaceus and fuscus than did Leisler et al. , with nucleotide differ- ences between scirpaceus from Europe and fuscus from two sources (Eilat, Israel, in March, and Ngulia, Kenya, in November) of 1.63% and 2.55% respectively. Although the breeding grounds of individuals in their samples were unknown, they found almost as much genetic distance (1.54%) between the two fuscus samples themselves. Remarkably, this was almost as much as that found between Euro- pean scirpaceus and West African baeticatus (1.92%-2.40%). Having acknowledged that their sample sizes were small (seven fuscus and five scirpaceus), Helbig & Seibold concluded that the total range of genetic divergence within the Eurasian Reed Warbler complex was small (up to 2.6%) com- pared with that between Eurasian Reed Warbler and other closely related species. For example, they found a genetic divergence of 7. 8-8. 3% between scirpaceus and Marsh Warbler, and a divergence of 9.9-10.0% between scirpaceus and Paddyfield Warbler (figures rounded up to one decimal point). By comparison, the divergence within other groups of warbler taxa included up to 9.6% within the Olivaceous Warbler Hippo- lais pallida complex; 6.2% within the Great Reed Warbler A. arundinaceus! Clamorous Reed Warbler A. stentoreus grouping; 7.9% between the two taxa in the Western Bonelli’s Warbler Phylloscopus bonellH Eastern Bonelli’s Warbler P. orientalis pairing; and 5.4% within the Common Chiffchaff P. collybita complex. Molecular studies do not define species limits. Rather, they measure the genetic distance between related taxa, or, more strictly, between examples taken from particular parts of the range. Only by comparing genetic distance with those of traditionally defined and recognised species is it possible to speculate on the status of a particular taxon. In the case of the Eurasian Reed Warbler, the genetic distance between fuscus and scirpaceus cannot alone support the recognition of two species. The existence of dis- tinct, genetically divergent forms has yet to be demonstrated. Breeding range The Eurasian Reed Warbler has an extensive breeding range across the warm and temperate latitudes of the Palearctic. Nominate scirpaceus breeds at suitable wetlands throughout most of western Europe, from the Iberian peninsula and Britain & Ireland in the west, north to central Sweden and south into northern Africa, from Morocco to Tunisia (Cramp 1992). The eastern limits lie in the western Turkish provinces of Thrace and Anatolia (Roselaar 1995), and north and east around the northern shore of the Black Sea to Ukraine and western Russia. The breeding range of fuscus is patchy and fragmented, and largely determined by the dis- tribution and availability of stands of reed Phragmites within the steppe grasslands of central Asia. Its western limits appear to lie in central Turkey (Roselaar 1995), where individ- uals exhibiting characters associated with fuscus were found in the Goksu delta in mid May, and presumed to be breeding (PRK). Eastwards from here, fuscus breeds in eastern Turkey, the southern Caucasus and the western Caspian Sea region, north to the lower Volga River and south into northern Iran; its breeding range also encompasses much of southern Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, and extends south and east to the Tien Shan Mountains. The eastern limits lie south of that mountain range, in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region in western China, where Grimmett 8c Taylor (1992) found indi- viduals of this taxon in June/July 1988 at Kashi and Bosten Hu. Other observers have subse- quently relocated them here, and P. J. Leader {in lift.) found them in 2001 at new locations close to the Mongolian border, presumably breeding. A smaller form (see page 44), currently regarded as fuscus, breeds in the Middle East from southern Israel south and east to central Saudi Arabia (Riyadh), Kuwait, UAE and (pre- sumably this form) southwest Iran. Migration Eurasian Reed Warblers winter in Africa, mainly in northern tropical and equatorial regions, south to northern and eastern Zaire (DR Congo) and Tanzania; small numbers reach the southern tropics, and winter regularly in Zambia, Malawi, northeast Namibia and Botswana. Nominate scirpaceus from northern and western Europe migrate through Iberia to western Africa, while those from central and eastern Europe move through the Balkans and Egypt, presumably to Sudan and north-central Africa. Long-winged fuscus undertake a southwest- erly migration, and winter from Ethiopia and East Africa to eastern Zaire and south to British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 47 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus > Botswana. In East Africa, ‘typical fuscus ’ are accompanied by equally long-winged ‘warmer fuscus ’ and ‘greyer fuscus the precise origins of these warmer and greyer birds are unknown, but probably lie within the central Asian part of the range. Shorter-winged birds resembling ‘typical fuscus ’ have been noted in early autumn on the Sudan coast (G. Nikolaus and DJP), and are presumably the smaller individuals from breeding grounds in southwest Asia migrating to winter quarters in Sudan and Ethiopia. Central Asian fuscus leave their breeding grounds in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan from late July onwards, and, while the majority migrate during August, passage continues until early October. Migration through Arabia spans late July to mid November, with southbound passage across the Sudan coast mainly between late August and mid October. The first birds arrive in Uganda and western Kenya in late Sep- tember, but the main influx there begins in late October, with passage continuing to late December. Many birds reach East Africa in fresh plumage between the end of November and January, having moulted in northeast Africa (see below). The first individuals reach Zambia in mid October, and southernmost wintering sites in Botswana are occupied in November and December. Departure from southern Africa commences in late March or early April, and from East African wintering sites between early and mid April. Northward passage occurs through Kenya from the beginning of April into early May, and through Ethiopia from mid April to late May. Local populations in Arabia have returned to their nesting sites in April, ahead of the main passage of long-winged fuscus bound for central Asia, which appear between late April and mid May. The main arrival in eastern Kazakhstan does not take place until mid to late May. There are four recoveries in Asia of fuscus ringed in eastern Africa. One ringed in Ethiopia in April was recovered in Kuwait in September; one ringed in eastern Sudan in October was recovered in western Iran in May; and, of two ringed in Kenya in April, one was recovered in central Saudi Arabia in September and the other in Russia (Astrakhan) in May. In addition, an individual of unknown race and origin was ringed in Cyprus, in August, and recovered at Khartoum, Sudan, in September. The first stage of autumn migration o (fuscus from the breeding grounds to northeast Africa is slightly later and more protracted than that of Marsh Warbler, which leaves its breeding grounds in late July and August and crosses the Red Sea into Sudan mainly between mid August and late September. In spring, fuscus passage through Arabia and the Middle East peaks in late April to early May, about ten days on average before that of Marsh Warbler (G. Niko- laus and J. S. Ash in lift.; D. J. Kelly in litt.). Moult A few Iberian scirpaceus moult on their breeding grounds, but otherwise all adult and first-year Eurasian Reed Warblers undergo a complete moult in Africa. In the case of adults, this is usually supplemented by a partial body moult in the breeding area in late summer. Almost all scirpaceus moult between September and December, so that those arriving back on the breeding grounds in May do so with their plumage about six months old. Although the primaries are then somewhat faded, most show relatively little abrasion on the tips of the remiges until July. In fuscus , the timing of moult varies according to the wintering area in Africa. Most of those wintering in East Africa moult between September and December, during a wet-season stopover in Sudan or Ethiopia, before contin- uing south to winter quarters; but many (up to 40% of the population in Uganda) moult on their final wintering grounds between December and March. Those wintering in southern Africa usually moult during the late winter period. In Botswana, for example, at the southern limit of the wintering range, all appear to do so (Tyler & Tyler 1997). Breeding fuscus in central Asia, as scirpaceus in Europe, still have unworn primary tips in May or early June, but those with a delayed winter moult have notice- ably fresher, darker webs at this time. Small fuscus breeding in the Middle East, which are short-distance migrants, must moult shortly after reaching their winter quarters; they arrive on the breeding grounds in April with remiges noticeably worn, in contrast to the fresher appearance of migrant fuscus passing through at the same time (G. Nikolaus in lift.). Plumage characters of fuscus Recent accounts of fuscus have tended to suggest that its plumage features are always dis- tinctive, but this oversimplifies what is a more complex situation. Roselaar (in Cramp 1992) 48 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Jari Peltomaki Peter R. Kennerley Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 1 9. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. Typical fuscus', slightly worn adult, Goksu delta, Turkey, 14th May 1998. 2 1 . Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. ‘Smaller fuscus, worn adult, Eilat, Israel, I Oth March 1992. 20. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. Typical fuscus’, moderately worn adult with abraded primary tips, Goksu delta, Turkey, 22nd May 1 998. 22. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of race fuscus. 'Smaller fuscus, worn adult, Israel, I Oth March 1992. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 49 Jari Peltomaki Peter R. Kennerley Brian /. Small Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 50 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus described fuscus as duller, cooler-toned and paler than nominate scirpaceus. He emphasised a grey tinge to the head and nape; a grey- to olive-toned back, with a paler sandy-grey or warm buff rump; a whiter supercilium, eye-ring and underparts than nominate scirpaceus ; and whiter tips and fringes to the inner web of the outer rectrices. He considered that variation in colour was not clinal, and that fuscus was sepa- rated from scirpaceus in central Asia by a gap in distribution. Svensson (1992) provided a better descrip- tion, stressing the similarity of the colour of the upperparts of fuscus to those of a worn Marsh Warbler, being a slightly greyer olive-brown than in nominate scirpaceus , and less rufous- tinged above. The sides of the breast and flanks are described as slightly whiter, less creamy- buff, than in the nominate race. He also empha- sised that, in worn plumage, fuscus becomes paler than scirpaceus. Kok & van Duivendijk (1998) described fuscus as structurally very similar to scirpaceus, but with plumage distinctly paler and greyer ‘and thus more like Marsh Warbler’. They emphasised the pale, brown-grey upperparts which lack the prominent rufous or brown tones of European scirpaceus, and stated that the rump is rather pale, sandy-grey or brown- grey, but can be brown, even warm brown, in first-years. They considered fuscus to be, on average, slightly paler and greyer than Marsh Warbler, lacking the green tinge to the upper- parts typical of that species, and with margin- ally whiter underparts. The outer tail feathers of fuscus are correctly described as showing dis- tinct pale edges and tips, these being more often present than they are on Marsh and, especially, scirpaceus. Interestingly, Kok & van Duivendijk considered that this tail pattern, combined with the general coloration, may give a striking resemblance to Olivaceous Warbler of the eastern form elaeica. These accounts may create the perception that separation of fuscus from scirpaceus, and from Marsh Warbler, is rather straightforward. They suggest that greyness is a typical feature of fuscus, in contrast to the ‘rufous’ tones of scir- paceus-, this is, however, rather simplistic and misleading. Only a minority of Asian individ- uals can be assigned to our category of ‘greyer fuscus’. ‘Typical fuscus’ in East Africa, although slightly paler and more olive than scirpaceus, are tinged grey only on the crown and nape. More- over, ‘warmer fuscus’ are practically identical in colour to scirpaceus. There is a widespread ten- dency to exaggerate the colour tones of scir- paceus. While these are undoubtedly warmly coloured, we defy anyone to see rufous in their upperparts. A better description would be rich brown or rich olive-brown above with a warm or cinnamon tone, strongest on the scapulars, wing-covert fringes and rump. The plumage of the four types that we con- sider to originate from within the recognised breeding range of fuscus is described in detail immediately below. ‘Typical fuscus’ In fresh plumage, in late winter and spring, the upperparts are a fairly rich, slightly creamy brown or olive-brown, with a greyish cast con- fined to the head and nape. The rump and uppertail-coverts are paler, with a warm sandy, ochreous or tawny tinge. The mantle and scapulars are slightly paler and less warm than those of scirpaceus. The edges of the primaries and secondaries are a warm, buffy brown on newly moulted individuals, contrasting slightly with the duller colour of the upperparts. The underparts are off-white, with a pale buff wash across the breast and along the flanks. This wash is less intense, less warm-tinged and less extensive than in nominate scirpaceus and gives the underparts of ‘typical fuscus a slightly but consistently paler appearance. After the complete winter moult, fuscus usually shows broad, conspicuous, pale buff to buffish-white tips to at least the three outer- most pairs of rectrices, which contrast with the browner feather bases. On many individuals, these pale tips extend across all rectrices, including the central pair. On the outer pair, the pale tip broadens and extends along the inner web as a pale buff to whitish fringe; with careful observation, this pale fringe can be viewed in the field, and it is readily apparent on a trapped bird. These pale tips are quite conspicuous on adults returning to the breeding grounds in May and June, but become less so in late Fig. I (opposite). Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of nominate race scirpaceus and eastern race fuscus. I : Fresh adult scirpaceus. (Note that 'warmer fuscus' would appear virtually identical.) 2: Worn adult scirpaceus. 3: First-winter scirpaceus. 4: Fresh adult fuscus of 'greyer' type. 5: First-winter fuscus of 'typical' type. 6: Fresh adult fuscus of 'typical' type. 7: Worn adult fuscus of 'typical' type. 8: Worn spring adult fuscus of 'small' type. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 51 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus summer, owing to abrasion and bleaching. Although some newly moulted adult scirpaceus in West Africa show paler buffy-brown tips to the rectrices, and some also have a suggestion of a pale inner-web fringe on the outer rectrices, these tend to be narrower and less well defined than on fuscus (fig. 2). In late winter, the recently moulted pri- maries of fuscus have a conspicuous whitish fringe around the tip, broadest at the tip of the outer web (fig. 3). This feature highlights the position of the primary tips in the closed wing, as does a similar pattern on Marsh Warbler, and is especially marked in spring on those individ- uals which (like Marsh Warbler) moult late and whose feathers still have a blackish ground colour. Most adults returning to central Asia in May and June still show conspicuous pale primary tips. In scirpaceus, pale primary tips are usually Fig. 2. Tail pattern of Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of nominate race scirpaceus and eastern race fuscus. Drawings show underside, with outermost tail feather to the left. 1 . Adult fuscus, May. Note the relatively well-marked whitish tips to the outer four or five rectrices, and the pale outer fringe and inner edge. 2. First-winter fuscus, October Although narrower than those of adults, the pale creamy tips (more warm-coloured than those of adults) are still fairly distinct. 3. Adult scirpaceus, April. Any pale area at the tip is subdued and difficult to see, and looks more like bleaching. 4. First-winter scirpaceus, September No pale tips present, but a narrow warm fringe is visible on close examination. Fig. 3. Pattern and shape of tip of fifth primary of adult Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of eastern race fuscus in May (left) and nominate scirpaceus in April (right). Note the conspicuous pale primary tip and the less rounded, squaner impression of the tip of the inner web of the former 52 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus present on freshly moulted individuals in West Africa, but are not so broad or conspicuously pale as those of fuscus and are invariably less prominent. Wear of the primary tips and fading of the darker web reduce the contrast even further, and the tips are often inconspicuous or absent by April when the earliest scirpaceus return to European breeding grounds, although they may persist on some until late May. In worn plumage, in early autumn, the sepa- ration of adult fuscus from scirpaceus is more difficult, but the upperparts of the former tend to be paler, more buffy-brown, and the under- parts very white. First-winter fuscus differs from scirpaceus in much the same way as does the fresh adult; it is somewhat duller, less bright olive-brown, on the upperparts and shows restricted warmness of colour on the rump. As with the adult, the crown and nape are faintly washed with grey, which contrasts with the browner mantle. Fading of the wing and tail feathers occurs rapidly in first-winter fuscus, and the pale tips to the rectrices are rarely as prominent as on adults. First-winter scirpaceus in Europe usually lack pale rectrix tips com- pletely, but retain narrow buffy tips to the pri- maries until October. ‘Warmer fuscus’ Some 25-30% of the newly moulted individuals in Uganda and Kenya are more warmly coloured than ‘typical fuscus ’. They are a richer, slightly darker and warmer brown on the mantle and scapulars, and a deeper cinnamon or tawny brown on the rump and uppertail- coverts; they also lack the grey tinge to the crown and nape, which closely match the mantle in colour. Below, they tend to have a stronger buff-brown wash on the flanks. The upperparts of specimens match those of freshly moulted scirpaceus collected in Liberia and Nigeria. Yet it is unlikely that these warmer birds originate from the range of scirpaceus (Ukraine and westwards). Their long wings with tendency towards a slightly shorter second primary (see ‘Wing length and structure’, page 55) match those of ‘typical fuscus\ Like the latter, they frequently delay moult until late winter, and when fresh usually show prominent pale primary tips and pale markings at the tips of the rectrices. Moreover, a few birds in East Africa are difficult to categorise, and judged intermediate between this type and ‘typical fuscus’. ‘Greyer fuscus’ A small minority, approximately 5% of those seen in East Africa in spring, are greyer than ‘typical fuscus’. They are almost uniform greyish-brown above and lack any warmth on the rump and uppertail-coverts. Below, they are whiter than ‘typical fuscus’, with the grey-buff 23. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephaius scirpaceus of race fuscus. 'Smaller fuscus', worn adult, Israel, 1 0th March 1992. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-61 53 Jari Peltomaki Peter R. K ennerley Jari Peltomaki Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 24. Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of nominate race scirpaceus. Worn and rather grey adult, Finland, July 1995. 25 Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of nominate race scirpaceus. Fresh first-winter Suffolk, 24th September 200 1 . 54 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus Table I . Sample wing lengths of Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of nominate race scirpaceus. All measurements in mm, maximum chord. Except where otherwise indicated, sources refer to unpublished data. Locality Age Range Mean No. Season Source Balearic Islands adult 63-68 64.8 19 Cramp 1992 adult 61-67 62.7 21 Cramp 1992 Suffolk, England adult 62-69 65.7 112 late July-mid August DJP juv/lst-w 61-71 65.1 242 late July- mid August DJP Germany adult 63-71 66.6 104 Leisler & Winkler 1979 juv/lst-w 62-69 65.4 179 Leisler & Winkler 1979 Kvismaren, Sweden adult 62-72 67.6 1,011 mid June-mid July B. Neilson, S. Bensch juv/lst-w 60-72 66.6 3,779 mid June-mid July B. Neilson, S. Bensch Crimea adult 66-70 67.7 3 August DJP, G. Nikolaus juv/lst-w 64-70 66.8 100 August DJP, G. Nikolaus Table 2. Sample wing lengths of Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus of eastern race fuscus. All measurements in mm, maximum chord. Except where otherwise indicated, sources refer to unpublished data. Locality Age Range Mean No. Season Source E Arabia (Karan) adult 62-72 68.8 11 Spring per G. Nikolaus SW Arabia (Farasan Is) adult 64-74 68.2 152 Spring G. Nikolaus, J. S. Ash E Kazakhstan (L Alakol) adult 67-72 69.1 19 August DJP, G. Nikolaus lst-w 64-74 68.6 300 August DJP, G. Nikolaus Sudan adult 61-72 67.4 123 August-September DJP, G. Nikolaus lst-w 61-71 66.6 97 August-September DJP, G. Nikolaus S Turkey (Goksu delta) adult 64-73 68.5 12 May PRK Uganda & C Kenya: all forms adult 64-76 68.7 866 Dec-May (moulted) DJP lst-w 65-70 67.3 39 Oct-Dec (unmoulted) DJP ‘typical fuscus ’ adult 65-76 68.9 198 December DJP ‘warmer fuscus’ adult 64-75 68.8 66 December DJP ‘greyer fuscus’ adult 65-72 69.3 17 December DJP Ngulia, Kenya adult 68-74 71.1 23 Dec-Jan (moulted) DJP lst-w 66-73 69.6 46 Nov-Jan (unmoulted) DJP wash on the flanks even more restricted. These individuals are very close in coloration to Oliva- ceous Warbler of the eastern form elaeica. Similar birds, both adults and first-winters, occur frequently in autumn among ‘typical fuscus ’ in southeast Kazakhstan, where they account for perhaps 15-20% of the population (DIP). ‘Small fuscus’ The small individuals of the Middle East are similar in plumage colour to ‘typical fuscus’ from central Asia. These moult soon after reaching their winter quarters, for they already have slightly worn remiges on arrival at their breeding grounds in March and April. Owing to the effects of wear and bleaching, ‘small fuscus appear slightly duller than the longer-winged fuscus which pass through Arabia on migration in April. Wing length and structure Eurasian Reed Warbler shows a dine of increasing wing length from southwest Europe to eastern Kazakhstan. This is apparent across the European range of scirpaceus, with the smallest birds breeding in the Iberian peninsula and the largest in Scandinavia and Ukraine (table 1). The mean wing length of a sample of adults from England was 65.7 mm (range 62-69 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 55 < Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus mm), significantly longer than that of breeding adults in Spain and slightly shorter than for German adults. Cramp (1992) gave a maximum wing length of 72 mm from a sample of 771 birds from Sweden. This is, however, exception- ally long for scirpaceus, and the mean wing length of this large sample is only 63.2 mm. A larger sample from Kvismaren, Sweden, close to the northern limit of the European breeding range, has a mean wing length of 67.6 mm for adults (range 62-72 mm) and 66.6 mm for juve- niles/first-winters (range 60-72 mm). As would be expected, these northern breeders are slightly longer-winged compared with those breeding in southern and western Europe. Even in these northerly latitudes, very few scirpaceus will show a wing length in excess of 70 mm, and it appears that none will exceed 72 mm. The wing lengths of scirpaceus and central Asian fuscus overlap extensively, but fuscus is, on average, slightly larger (table 2). Among newly moulted individuals in East Africa, the mean wing length of ‘typical fuscus' is 68.9 mm (range 65-76 mm); ‘warmer fuscus’ (mean 68.8 mm, range 64-75 mm) and ‘greyer fuscus' (mean 69.3 mm, range 65-72 mm) are equally long-winged. East African measurements match those taken from migrants passing through the Arabian Peninsula and from autumn individuals in Kazakhstan. Interestingly, birds trapped at Ngulia, on the eastern fringe of the southward passage through Kenya, are longer-winged than those in central Kenya, with moulted adults having an average wing length of 71.1 mm (range 68-74 mm). Comparison of the wing formula of scir- paceus from Suffolk, England, with that of fuscus wintering in East Africa (table 3) shows that they differ only marginally. The second primary tends to be slightly shorter on fuscus, in the majority of cases falling between P4 and P5, although several have P2 equal to or shorter than P5. In scirpaceus, P2 more frequently falls between P3 and P4, but most commonly between P4 and P5; only occasionally is it as short as P5. This difference is unlikely to provide much assistance in determining the provenance of a trapped individual. Further- more, the tendency for a shorter second primary was just as evident on ‘warmer fuscus’ as on ‘typical fuscus’ trapped in Uganda. Both scirpaceus and fuscus have P3 emar- ginated. One characteristic of fuscus is said to be a slight emargination on P4 (Svensson 1992). We have carefully examined live fuscus, as well as prepared specimens of ‘typical’, ‘warmer’ and ‘greyer’ types, and have been unable to detect this feature easily. A few individuals do show a slight tapering towards the tip of the outer web of P4, but this is matched by some scirpaceus, and we doubt that a clear emargination occurs regularly among northern breeding fuscus. Morgan (1998) recorded wing lengths within the range of 60-65 mm for breeding Eurasian Reed Warblers in Eilat, Israel, and a wing formula which was distinctly different Table 3. Position of tip of second primary (P2, primaries numbered ascendantly) in relation to tips of other primaries on closed wing of Eurasian Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus and Marsh Warbler A. palustris. Figures refer to percentages of sample total. All data from DJR using individuals captured in England and East Africa. Locality Age Sample >P3 P3 P3-P4 P4 P4-P5 P5 P5-P6 Season Eurasian Reed Warbler A. s. scirpaceus Suffolk, England adult 43 0 0 30 30 35 5 0 July-September lst-winter 117 0 0 19 45 31 3 2 July- September Eurasian Reed Warbler A. s. fuscus Sudan, Uganda adult 95 0 0 7 26 62 4 1 Aug-Dec (unmoulted) & Kenya lst-winter 35 0 0 11 17 60 9 3 Aug-Dec (unmoulted) Kenya/Uganda adult 265 0 0 2 12 73 9 4 Jan-April (moulted) Marsh Warbler adult 117 3 27 49 15 6 0 0 Nov-Dec (unmoulted) Kenya lst-winter 268 1 7 56 20 16 0 0 Nov-Dec (unmoulted) adult 49 0 2 45 43 10 0 0 April (moulted) 56 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-61 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus 26. Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris. Slightly worn adult, Fair Isle, Shetland, June 1 996. 27. Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris. Slightly worn adult, Fair Isle, Shetland, June 1 997. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 57 Roger Riddington Roger Riddington Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus from that of longer-winged fuscus trapped on passage at the same site. The smaller birds were characterised by a shorter P3, which was often equal to, and never more than 0.5 mm longer than, P4. Furthermore, P2 was rather shorter than on migrant fuscus, in the majority of cases equal to P5 or falling between P5 and P6. Addi- tionally, an emargination was frequently present on P4, characteristic of African avicenniae and baeticatus, but very unusual in scirpaceus and long-winged passage fuscus. Elsewhere in the Middle East, similar wing length and wing structure have been noted on birds breeding near Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (G. Nikolaus in litt.). Separation from Marsh Warbler In spring, Marsh Warbler is typically uniform above, with mid-greyish-brown upperparts tinged greenish, most noticeably on the fore- head and crown. Consequently, many fuscus can be distinguished from Marsh Warbler by a warm-tinged rump, a more buffy olive-brown mantle, and a grey cast to the head. The upper- parts of some fuscus are identical to those of a typical Marsh Warbler, and the uniform upper- parts of ‘greyer fuscus practically match those of greyer Marsh Warblers. In early autumn, the worn upperparts of both adult fuscus and adult Marsh Warbler tend to be browner and more uniform, and the two taxa are, therefore, even harder to distinguish than in spring. Marsh Warblers usually acquire fresh, greenish-tinged mantle and scapular feathers in Ethiopia during October. First-winter Marsh Warblers closely resemble adults, and show an indistinct greenish tinge to the entire upperparts that young fuscus invariably lack. They do, however, tend to be slightly warmer above than adults, and some are distinctly warm-tinged on the rump and thus more like first-winter fuscus. Such individuals always lack greyness on the head and usually show faint gingery fringes to the wing-coverts and the edges of the rectrices which, in some lights, can appear distinctly greenish. It is the underparts that provide the most useful and constant plumage distinction between fuscus and Marsh Warbler at all ages. On the former they are whitish with a pale buff wash and never a trace of yellow, while on the latter they are washed ochreous- or yellowish- buff. Although sometimes faint on worn birds, this yellow tinge is readily seen on adult and first-winter Marsh Warblers in the hand, and is often discernible in the field. Leg colour is frequently quoted as a char- acter for separating Eurasian Reed and Marsh Warblers, but there is some overlap, particularly in the case of first-winter birds, so that it should be used with caution. Adult fuscus (like scir- paceus) have greyish-brown to flesh-brown tarsi, while on adult Marsh Warbler these are, on average, paler, ranging from mid brown to a characteristic pale pinkish-straw. First-year fuscus usually have bluish- or greenish-grey to dark brown tarsi and toes. On first-winter Marsh Warblers, they range from dark grey- brown to about mid brown and sometimes pinkish-brown, but are quite dark on approxi- mately half of the young Marsh Warblers exam- ined in Kenya in late autumn (DJP, pers. obs.). Methods for separating Marsh Warbler and Eurasian Reed Warbler, including fuscus, in the hand are well established. They involve mea- surements and wing-formula details as described by Williamson (1968) and Svensson (1992) (and for fuscus see also Pearson 1989). Although Marsh Warblers tend to have a longer second primary (table 3) and have longer wings (table 4), these features are variable within a large sample and will not usually identify indi- vidual birds. Moreover, central Asian fuscus have a mean wing length about the same as that of Marsh Warbler. The position of the notch on the inner web of P2 is probably the best single character for separating fuscus from Marsh Warbler. On adult fuscus, this lies 11-14 mm Table 4. Sample wing lengths of Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris. All measurements in mm, maximum chord. Locality Age Range Mean No. Season Source Sudan adult 66-74 69.0 89 August-September D)P, G. Nikolaus, unpub. Ist-winter 65-73 68.5 144 August-September DJP, G. Nikolaus, unpub. adult 64-73 68.4 384 Nov- Dec (unmoulted) Pearson 1989 Kenya lst-winter 64-73 67.9 488 Nov-Dec (unmoulted) Pearson 1989 adult 65-73 69.6 77 April ( moulted) Pearson 1989 58 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus > from the tip (falling between the tip of P9 and the secondaries on the closed wing), compared with 9-12 mm from the tip on Marsh (falling between P6 and P9). On first-winter fuscus , it lies 10-13 mm from the tip (between P8 and the secondaries, but occasionally as high as P7), and on first-winter Marsh Warbler 8-11 mm from the tip (between P6 and P8). This feature should clinch the identification of almost all adults and most first-winter birds. Additional methods for in-hand identifica- tion of difficult individuals are summarised in Pearson (1989) and Svensson (1992). Voice The songs of scirpaceus and fuscus closely resemble each other, and also that of African Reed Warbler, leading Dowsett-Lemaire and Dowsett (1987) to conclude that Eurasian Reed and African Reed Warblers are conspecific. It is, indeed, surprising that across the vast breeding range of the reed warbler complex, throughout Europe, central Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, the songs remain so similar. Apparent minor vocal differences between scirpaceus and fuscus may be attributable to regional variation. The song of fuscus has a tendency to be slightly more deliberate, with a marginally slower delivery. It contains fewer of the scratchy phrases found in the song of scirpaceus and contains more phrase repetition. Some singing fuscus in the Goksu delta, Turkey, incorporate a highly distinctive, unmusical, two-note phrase that has been likened in speed and pitch to a handsaw cutting through wood. It is repeated approximately twice per second, for up to six seconds, the series descending very slightly in pitch and speed of delivery, and is immediately followed by the typical song. As this phrase is not apparent in the song of scirpaceus in Europe or that of fuscus in Kazakhstan, it may be due to individual variation or be part of a regional dialect. It has long been appreciated that Eurasian Reed Warbler can, and does, include mimicry within its song. Atkin et al. (1965) discussed the ability of Eurasian Reed Warblers, especially unmated males, to mimic the song of Marsh Warbler, plus an extensive repertoire of calls, including those of Common Redshank Tringa totanus and Common Tern Sterna hirundo. Unlike Marsh and Blyth’s Reed Warblers, however, the inclusion of mimicry is not an important component within the songs of either scirpaceus or fuscus. Both taxa regularly incorporate limited mimicry, such as the calls of Bearded Tit Panurus biarmicus , but this typi- cally appears randomly and occasionally. Identification summary Examination in the hand of a putative fuscus is essential to support any claim of this form in western Europe. Additional observations in the field, where subtle changes in tone and hue can occur under a range of light conditions and postures, may also help to substantiate identifi- cation. In addition to a full range of biometrics, examination of the extent of plumage abrasion may also assist in determining when moult has occurred, the timing of which can be compared with that of west European scirpaceus. Worn adults will be mostly inseparable from scir- paceus. Only freshly moulted adults in the win- tering areas, adults which have recently returned to the Palearctic breeding grounds and first-winters in early autumn, up to November, are likely to be identifiable. The following suite of characters should sep- arate ‘typical fuscus ' or ‘greyer fuscus’ from scir- paceus. ‘Warmer fuscus ’ is not considered separable from scirpaceus in terms of plumage alone. These features are in no particular order of merit but should, ideally, be compared directly with those of scirpaceus in the hand. • Upperparts Pale, less rich (more creamy) olive-brown, tinged greyish on the head and nape, and with a paler (sandy, ginger or tawny-buff) rump and uppertail-coverts, or pale, greyish olive-brown from head to uppertail-coverts. In comparison, scirpaceus is a richer brown, with a warmer cinnamon tone. • Underparts Pale, almost white, with a pale buff or cream wash restricted to the breast sides and flanks (i.e. whiter than scirpaceus). • Wings In May and June, the primaries have distinct pale tips, broadest next to the feather shaft on the outer web and highlighting the position of each feather in the closed wing. A dark ground colour of the primaries, indi- cating a late-winter moult (as in Marsh Warbler), is a further pointer towards fuscus. The wing-coverts are edged buff-brown, less cinnamon than scirpaceus. Although the wing British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 59 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus ) length of fuscus averages longer than scir- paceus, there is extensive overlap and only a measurement above 72 mm is likely to exclude scirpaceus. • Tail The outermost pair of feathers shows conspicuous whitish tips and distinct broad, pale fringes that extend along the distal inner webs. Conspicuous whitish tips are also present on at least the two adjacent pairs, and often on all rectrices. Pale tips to the outer rectrices may also be present on some scir- paceus, but these are invariably narrow, less contrasting, and rarely extend onto the central rectrices. Furthermore, on scirpaceus, the pale extension along the inner web of the outermost pair is usually absent or, at best, appears narrow, diffuse and ill-defined. Claims from Britain Currently, no reports of fuscus from western Europe have been sufficiently convincing to merit acceptance. Although there have been several reports from Britain, it remains unproven whether any of these actually repre- sents an individual originating from within the breeding range of fuscus. In recent years, there have been a number of October reports from Britain of both Marsh Warbler and fuscus, including several well- watched individuals on the Isles of Scilly. It should be remembered that the vast majority of Marsh Warblers depart from Europe by mid September, so that any putative Marsh Warbler in northwest Europe in October merits very close scrutiny. A particularly co-operative and intriguing individual on St Agnes, Scilly, in October 1979, generated much debate, both at the time and subsequently (Grant 1980). This individual was eventually trapped, and identi- fied in the hand as a Marsh Warbler. Published details and descriptions, however, reveal many differences from first-winter Marsh Warblers trapped in East Africa at the same time of year, yet are a close match of fuscus (Pearson 1981). In retrospect, it seems possible that this was, indeed, a fuscus, and only a lack of knowledge of this form at that time masked its true identity. Elsewhere, claims include singles trapped at Spurn, East Yorkshire, on 24th September 1977, 3rd June 1984 and 18th- 19th September 1993 (Neal 1996), one trapped on Fair Isle, Shetland, during 12th June to 1st July 2000 (Shaw et al. 2000), and one in song and trapped at Filey, North Yorkshire, for several days from 10th June 2001 (Dunn 2001). Any Eurasian Reed Warbler paler or greyer than typical European breeding scirpaceus will inevitably generate interest as pressure grows to add fuscus to national (and personal) lists. It seems certain that claims of atypical Eurasian Reed Warblers displaying some characters of fuscus will continue to be made. Given the diffi- culties surrounding the identification of this form, even in the hand, any claim should remain unproven unless all the subtle charac- teristics associated with ‘typical fuscus' or ‘greyer fuscus' are met. Ideally, feather, tissue or blood samples should be obtained, with appropriate authority, for molecular investigation and to facilitate comparison with known breeding populations. Acknowledgments DJP extends his thanks to Gerhard Nikolaus and Graeme Backhurst for much co-operative warbler-ringing over the years in eastern Africa, and to Joseph Chernichko and Andrei Gavrilov for arranging visits to ringing centres in Ukraine and Kazakhstan. The staff at the Natural History Museum, Tring, have been particularly helpful, especially Robert Prys-Jones and Mark Adams, We also thank John Ash, Stephanie Tyler; Stephen Rumsey, Staffan Bensch, Bo Neilson and Dave Kelly for providing information and much helpful discussion. Arnoud B. van den Berg, Jari Peltomaki and Roger Riddington have allowed us to use their excellent slides to illustrate this paper, and Dave Farrow kindly provided a tape recording of the song of fuscus from Kazakhstan. Finally, our thanks go to Paul Leader; who made numerous comments on an earlier draft; his in-depth understanding of Acrocepho/us-warbler identification has improved this paper immensely. Fig. I , by Brian Small, taken from the forthcoming Helm Identification Guide Reed and Bush Warblers of the World by Peter Kennerley and David Pearson, is reproduced here with the kind permission of the publishers, Christopher Helm. References Ash, J. S., Pearson, D. J., Nikolaus, G.. & Colston, R R. 1 989. The mangrove reed warbler of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden coasts, with description of a new subspecies of the African Reed Warbler Acrocephalu s baeticatus Bull. Brit. Orn. Club 1 09: 36-43. Atkin, K„ Townsend, A. D., Pyman, G. A., Swaine, C. M., & Davis, R 1 965. Some comments on the problems of separating Reed and Marsh Warblers. Brit. Birds 58: 181-188. Cramp, S, (ed.) 1 992. The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. 6. Oxford. Dowsett-Lemaire, F„ & Dowsett, R. J. 1 987. European and African Reed Warblers, Acrocephalus scirpaceus and A, baeticatus ; vocal and other evidence for a single species. Bull. Brit. Orn. Club 107: 74-85. Dunn, R 200 1 .The putative Caspian Reed Warbler in North Yorkshire. Binding World 14: 329-332. Grant, RJ. 1980. Identification of two first-winter Marsh Warblers. Brit. Birds 73: 1 86- 1 89. Grimmett. R.. & Taylor, H. 1 992. Recent observations from 60 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 Eurasian Reed Warbler of Asian form fuscus Xinjiang Autonomous Region, China, 1 6 June to 5 July 1 988. Forktail 7: 139-143. Harrap, S., & Quinn, D. 1 989. The difficulties of Reed, Marsh and Blyth's Reed Warbler identification. 8 irding World 2: 3 1 8-324. Harris, A., Shirihai, H., & Christie, D. A. 1995. The Macmillan Birder's Guide to European and Middle Eastern birds. London. Helbig, A. J„ & Seibold, I. 1999. Molecular Phylogeny of Palearctic-African Acrocephalus and Hippolais Warblers (Aves: Sylviidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution I I (2): 246-260. Kok, D., & van Duivendijk, N. 1 998. Masters of Mystery. Dutch 8 irding 20: 36-40. Leister; B., & Winkler, H. 1979. Zur Unterscheidung von Teich- und Sumpfrohrsanger Vogelwarte 30: 44-48. — , Heidrich, R, Schulze-Hagen, K., & Wink, M. 1 997. Taxonomy and phylogeny of Reed Warblers (genus Acrocephalus ) based on mtDNA sequences and morphology./ Orn. I 38: 469-496. Marsh, R 1 982. Grey-and-white juvenile Reed Warbler Brit. Birds 75: 35-36. Morgan, J. 1 998. Wing formula of Reed Warblers Acrocephalus scirpaceus from Israel - a cautionary note. Ringing and Migration 19: 57-58. Neal, G. 1996. The Birds of Spurn, A Comprehensive Checklist Spurn Bird Observatory. Pearson, D. J. l972.The wintering and migration of Palearctic passerines at Kampala, southern Uganda. Ibis I 14: 43-60. — 1981. Identification of first-winter Marsh and Reed Warblers. Brit. Birds 74: 445-446. — 1 989. Separation of Reed Warblers Acrocephalus scirpaceus and Marsh Warblers A. palustris in eastern Africa. Scopus 13:81 -89. Roselaar C. S. 1 995. Songbirds of Turkey, an atlas of biodiversity ofTurkish passerine birds. Haarlem. Sangster G„ Hazevoet, C. J., van den Berg, A. B., & Roselaar; C. S. 1998. Dutch avifaunal list: species concepts, taxonomic instability, and taxonomic changes in 1998. Dutch Birding 20: 22-32. Shaw, D., Holt, C., & Maggs, H. 2000. The Caspian Reed Warbler on Fair Isle. Birding World I 3: 3 1 5-3 1 7. Svensson, L. 1 992. Identification Guide to European Passerines. Fourth edition. Stockholm. Tyler; S. J., & Tyler; L. 1 997. Observations on the seasonal presence and moult of European Reed Warblers Acrocephalus scirpaceus at a site in southeast Botswana. Ostrich 68: I 17-1 18. Urban, E. K„ Fry, C. H„ & Keith, S. (eds.) 1997. The Birds of Africa.V ol. 5. London. Voous, K. H. 1975. An aberrant Reed Warbler; or: on the inequality of genera in birds. Ardeola 21: 977-985. Williamson, K. 1968. Identification for Ringers I .The genera Cettia, Locustella, Acrocephalus and Hippolais.Third edition. Tring. David J. Pearson, 4 Lupin Close, Reydon, Southwold, Suffolk IP18 7NW Brian ). Small, 78 Wangford Road, Reydon, Southwold, Suffolk IP 18 6NX Peter R. Kennerley, 16 Coppice Close, Melton, Woodbridge, Suffolk IP 12 1RX Looking back Seventy-five years ago: ‘PROBABLE HAWK-OWL IN MIDDLESEX. On December 27th, 1926, at West Molesey Reservoirs, Mr. R. W. Heenan and I saw what was, without any doubt, a Hawk-Owl ( Surnia ulula subsp). It was perched in the upper branches of a tree at the foot of the largest reservoir and paid no attention to passing motorists on the road close by. At first, from the length of tail, we thought it some strange kind of Hawk, but a nearer approach showed the peculiarly “square” shape of the head and the obvious Owl-shape of the body. It was then facing us, and we particularly noticed (1) the cross-barring on the breast, (2) the black “border” encircling the cheeks, and (3), most important of all, the long tail which, to us, appeared distinctly wedge- shaped, i.e. coming to a point. ‘After a bit it rose and, with a sort of half-twist, dropped into the next tree, where it again settled, this time with its back to us, when it appeared all darkish- brown above, with scattered paler markings, and the tail barred, but not strongly. We tried to get a closer view, and the bird then flew away behind the next tree, and we could not find it again. W. Kay Robinson.’ ( Brit. Birds 20: 226, February 1927) ‘MONTAGU’S HARRIER BREEDING IN WORCES- TERSHIRE. On June 5th, 1926, I saw a male Montagu’s Harrier (Circus pygargus ) quartering the lake close to a country house in Worcestershire. Pheasants were being reared, but a protective warning was issued. In December, I asked the head-keeper if he had seen the bird after I left. He told me that two adults and three young of the year were in the neighbour- hood until October. The parents were seen once only at the rearing field, but later, in addition to Mallard, many Pheasants were taken, a marked preference being shown for hens. Guy Charteris.’ (Brit. Birds 20: 226-227, February 1927) British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 42-6 1 61 The non-breeding status of the Little Egret in Britain A.J. Musgrove WelS ABSTRACTThe Little Egret Egretta garzetta, formerly a rare vagrant in Britain, has undergone a remarkable range expansion following a large influx in 1989, and at the end of 1990 it was removed from the list of species considered by the British Birds Rarities Committee. Single-site counts in excess of 100 were made in autumn 1995, with the first site count of more than 200 in autumn 1 998. The Little Egret was confirmed as a new British breeding bird in 1996, and by 1999 at least 30 breeding pairs were recorded at a total of nine sites. This paper documents the change in the species’ non-breeding status in Britain. Using data from the Wetland Bird Survey, with supplementary counts from roost surveys and county bird reports, it is estimated that more than 1,650 Little Egrets were present in September 1999, over 40% of these between Swanage Bay, Dorset, and Pagham Harbour, West Sussex. A further increase in the British population is expected. The increase in Britain has been mirrored in adjacent areas of northwest Europe. 62 © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Formerly a rare vagrant in Britain, the Little Egret Egretta garzetta has undergone a remarkable range expansion in recent years. Following a large influx into Britain in 1989, and continued high numbers during 1990, the British Birds Rarities Committee took the decision to remove the Little Egret from the list of species which it considers. Records of this species occurring after the end of 1990 are no longer assessed by the BBRC, but are dealt with by the committees of individual local ornitho- logical societies. The Little Egret continued to be recorded in increasing numbers in Britain throughout the 1990s. By the autumn of 1995, counts in excess of 100 had been registered at individual sites, and three years later, in autumn 1998, the first single-site count of more than 200 was made. Moreover, breeding was confirmed in 1996, the first British breeding record ever for the species (Lock & Cook 1998), and by the summer of 1999 it was nesting at nine different sites, with an estimated total of at least 30 pairs (Ogilvie et al. 2001). The increase in Britain has been mirrored in Ireland (Smiddy & O’Sullivan 1998), in the Channel Islands (Atkinson & Wells in prep.; Jersey Bird Report) and on the near Continent (van den Berg & Bosman 1999; Bijlsma et al. 2001). This paper documents the change in the non-breeding status of the Little Egret in Britain in the period from 1958 to the end of the 1990s. Using data from the Wetland Bird Survey, with supplementary counts from roost surveys and county bird reports, it is estimated that more than 1,650 Little Egrets were present in Britain in September 1999, over 40% of these between Swanage Bay, Dorset, and Pagham Harbour, West Sussex. Historical status Unlike a number of other wetland species, such as Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris, Eurasian Spoon- bill Platalea leucorodia and Common Crane Grus grus , the Little Egret was not a regular component of the British avifauna in historical times. The first documented record is of one shot in East Yorkshire in 1826 (Naylor 1996) but, despite the species’ widespread occurrence in the southern half of the Western Palearctic, very few were reported in the nine- teenth century and in the first half of the twen- tieth century. In fact, certain well-watched counties did not record the species until com- paratively recently, with first county records for Sussex in 1952 (James 1996), Norfolk in 1952 (Taylor et al. 1999), Kent in 1957 (Taylor et al. 1981), Hampshire in 1957 (Clark & Eyre 1993) and Somerset in 1965 (Palmer & Ballance 1968). Owing to its rarity, records of Little Egrets were assessed by the British Birds Rarities Com- mittee. Fig. 1 shows the number of accepted records in each year from 1958 to 1988, and demonstrates a clear influx in 1970 and a more general increase through the 1980s. During that period, 403 individuals were seen in Britain (although some duplication cannot be ruled out), which represents a huge increase com- pared with the early part of the twentieth century and an average of 13 per year. Pre- dictably, there was a strong southerly bias, with about half of all records coming from only six counties: Devon, Cornwall, Dorset, Kent, Sussex and Hampshire (listed in descending order of recorded numbers). Fig. 2(i) depicts the monthly distribution during 1958-88, which reveals a peak in May similar to that observed for many other Mediterranean species, such as Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax and Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides. Although small numbers occurred in autumn, Little Egrets were notably scarce in Britain in winter at that time. The first influx: 1989-92 The events of 1989 have been described previ- ously (Combridge & Parr 1992). In summary, a marked arrival of Little Egrets occurred in May, followed by, as usual, few in June, but in mid Fig. I . Annual numbers of Little Egrets Egretta garzetta recorded in Britain during 1958-88. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 63 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain > Fig. 2. Monthly distribution of records of Little Egret Egretta garzetta in Britain during the three periods (i) 1958-88, (ii) 1989-90 and (iii) July 1993 to March 2000. Data for 1 958- 1 988 and 1 989-90 are from BBRC, and those for 1993-2000 are from monthly Wetland Bird Survey (WeBS) counts; comparable data are not available for 1 99 1 -92.The three datasets have been scaled to allow comparison. Note that BBRC data refer to arrival dates, whereas WeBS counts are obtained on a predetermined date each month. July a large-scale influx began, with almost 50 individuals present by late August. Numbers declined to single figures in October, but a second, smaller, influx was observed in December. BBRC, while acknowledging the likelihood of some duplication of records, sug- gested that no fewer than 120 individuals were seen in Britain that year. Most occurred along the south coast between Cornwall and West Sussex. The influx was evi- dently the result of post-breeding dispersal, a process which had led to a regular movement of Little Egrets to the north coast of Brittany since about 1980 and which preceded an increase in numbers and breeding range in northwest France. Voisin (1991) considered that the spread of Little Egrets northwards along the west coast of France was due to species-specific protection mea- sures, and to a lack of cold winters. The 1989 influx was not a tem- porary phenomenon. During 1990, BBRC amassed a further 113 British records and, at the end of that year, removed Little Egret from the list of ‘official’ rarities. The pattern of occurrence was similar to that in 1989, with a large influx in May, very few in June and then an increase in the late summer (fig. 2 ( ii ) ) . The number of August records in 1990 was, however, only about half that for August 1989. Initially, records of Little Egret, an attractive and striking species which is easy to identify, were well documented in county bird reports. Although detailed recording has continued over much of central and northern Britain, the numbers of sightings in many southern coastal counties rapidly grew so large that there was an inevitable decline in the precision with which the species was reported. This is partly because a species which is present throughout the year will inevitably be recorded less comprehensively (and less enthusiastically), and partly because, in the case of the Little Egret, the difficulty of assessing duplication between sites has increased greatly. Despite the lack of a central database of records, an analysis of county bird reports does, nevertheless, indicate that the numbers in Britain in 1991 and 1992 were at a similar level to those in 1989 and 1990 (Fraser et <;/. 1997). In autumn 1993, however, another major influx took place, making those numbers seem small by comparison. 64 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Further consolidation: 1 993-99 As Little Egrets have become more abundant in Britain, the Wetland Bird Survey (WeBS) - a partnership of the British Trust for Ornithology, The Wildfowl & Wet- lands Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Joint Nature Conservation Com- mittee - was well placed to monitor their spread. Each month, thou- sands of volunteers make a count of the birds using wetland habitats throughout Britain. Although the coverage is not 100% complete, it is certainly very high with regard to the wetlands frequented by Little Egrets, and the scheme provides the best comparative data on this species at a national level. These regular monthly counts are known as WeBS ‘Core Counts’, which, in their present form (the scheme is an amalgamation of two earlier surveys, National Wildfowl Counts and the Birds of Estuaries Enquiry), commenced in the summer of 1993. The total number of Little Egrets recorded on core counts each month from July 1993 to March 2000 is shown in fig. 3, where no correction has been made for variation in survey effort (an analysis taking into account the monthly coverage achieved by core counts did, however, confirm the same general monthly pattern of records). The steady increase in numbers is clearly apparent, with the autumn peak of 185 in Sep- ■m 1200 1000 Fig. 3. Total numbers of Little Egrets Egretta garzetta recorded on WeBS core counts in each month, July 1993 to March 2000. Note steady increase, with autumn peak rising from 1 85 in September 1993 to 1,074 in September 1999. 28. Little Egret Egretta garzetta, locality unknown, April 1 997. tember 1993 rising to 1,074 in September 1999. The numbers of egrets wintering in Britain have also increased, from 124 in January 1994 to 513 in January 2000. Another point of interest, not widely appreciated, is a regular ‘spring-passage’ peak. In every spring from 1995 onwards, the total number of egrets recorded in March has been greater than that in the preceding month. The relative monthly distribution of Little Egrets from core counts during July 1993 to March 2000 is shown in fig. 2(iii). This reveals that numbers are lowest in May and June, with return migrants appearing in July, more strongly in August and peaking in September. Numbers remain high in October and then gradually decline through to January/February. There is a small but perceptible increase in March, before the main exodus in April. Although the WeBS core counts provide the best comparative data British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 65 G. M Hall Robin Chittenden Robin Chittenden Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain on this species at a national level, other surveys, often on a local scale, provide valuable addi- tional information. In each winter since 1992/93, a number of estuaries have also been surveyed for the WeBS ‘Low Tide Count’ scheme, which aims to describe the distribution of estuarine waterbirds at low water, principally to locate important feeding concentrations. At certain suitable sites, Little Egrets are commonly observed during such counts, and these data are a valuable supplement to core counts, most of which take place at high water. While Little Egrets are increasingly com- monplace, along the south coast in particular, their ‘popularity’ means that many are still reported to County Recorders, so that county bird reports remain a rich source of informa- tion. The counts of Little Egrets documented within such reports sometimes exceed WeBS counts by a considerable margin. The majority of these higher counts are made at nocturnal roosts. At many British sites, as else- where in the world, Little Egrets have favourite roost sites to which they fly in the late afternoon as the light fades, and from which they leave at dawn. Although egrets can be difficult to count when in the roost (which is usually in trees or dense scrub), their move- ments to and from it provide an excellent oppor- tunity for accurate counts. To investigate the value of standardised roost counts, a pilot study was set up by WeBS to compare roost counts and core counts. Roost counts were under- taken at a number of estu- aries on dates as close as possible to the predeter- mined WeBS core count dates of 21st September 1997 and 18th January 1998. Fol- lowing the pilot survey, information on roosting egrets, covering a whole year if possible, was sought from many more sites. Observers were asked to carry out a dusk roost count of Little Egrets once a month from April 1999 to March 2000, on dates as close as possible to those of the WeBS core counts. The combination of core counts, low-tide counts and roost counts, as well as incidental information from county bird reports, has enabled a more accurate assessment of the true numbers of Little Egrets in Britain than that provided by the core counts alone. Since the peak WeBS core count of Little Egrets during the study period was in September 1999, an effort was made to establish as accurately as possible the number of Little Egrets present in Britain during that month. The results are dis- cussed in detail below, on a site-by-site basis, and a summary is presented in an Appendix on pages 79-80. Throughout these accounts, WeBS data collected up to and including March 2000 have been used, along with any other data sources available to the end of 1999. 66 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Non-breeding distribution in Britain The west coast north of Pembrokeshire • Solway Firth • Wyre Estuary Luvan • Ribble Estuary Sands Inland Sea • • Foryd Boy • Dec Estuary Dysynni Estuary # Dyfl Estuary Fig. 4. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta along the west coast of Britain north of Pembrokeshire, autumn 1 999. By the end of the 1990s, only single-figure counts of Little Egrets had been made along this stretch of coast. Nonetheless, there are still widespread records, although few of these were farther north, in northwest England and Scotland. The species is scarce in Cumbria (e.g. no records in 1999), and in Scotland it is still largely a late-spring vagrant. Little Egrets were recorded on core counts in September 1999 from the Ribble estuary (two), the Dee estuary (five), the Inland Sea (five), the Dysynni estuary (one) and the Dyfi estuary (two). Other sites where the species was seen during autumn 1999 were the Solway Firth (one in October), the Wyre estuary (two in September), Lavan Sands and Foryd Bay (three in Caernarfonshire in September: Welsh Birds). It would appear that there were approximately 20 Little Egrets on the west coast north of Pembrokeshire during September 1999. This region is one to watch closely for evidence of range expansion. Southwest Wales and the Bristol Channel Cleddau Estuary Carmarthen Bay • Burry Inlet Severn Estuary Ogmore Estuary • • Porlock Ba> Somerset levels • Taw-Tomdgc Estuary • Fig. 5. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta in southwest Wales and the Bristol Channel, autumn 1999. The Cleddau estuary complex formed the north- western limit of the core part of the Little Egret’s range in Britain by the end of the 1990s. The data which are available, both from WeBS and from the Welsh Bird Report, suggest that substantially more egrets occur here during mid-winter than in autumn. Up to 17 were recorded during core counts in the 1999/2000 winter, slightly below the peak of 21 during the two previous winters, although the Sep- tember 1999 count was only five. Roost counts have never been obtained from this site, largely because no main roost has been located, and it seems highly likely that core counts understate the true numbers using the estuary. The discovery of a central roost site, should one be established, would be of great value for monitoring at this locality. The wide expanses of sandflats which comprise much of Carmarthen Bay (the estuaries of the Taf, Twyi and Gwendraeth) are generally unsuitable for Little Egrets, although the inner parts of the estuaries have attracted a few individuals, with a peak count of nine in December 1998. No autumn core counts for the site were received in 1999, although two egrets were reported in September 1999 in the Welsh Bird Report. There are no known regular roost sites at which to monitor the species. The Burry Inlet (or Loughor estuary) is fast becoming a key site for Little Egrets, its wide expanses of saltmarsh being ideal for the species. Most counts from this well-monitored site were in single figures until autumn 1998. By far the largest influx on record here occurred in 1999, with 86 counted during Sep- tember, and high numbers remaining throughout the winter (e.g. 42 in March 2000). Evening roost counts were carried out during 1999/2000 in the area around the WWT Penclacwydd reserve, near Llanelli. These exceeded core counts during April to July, after which core counts were higher (e.g. 55 at roost in September 1999, and only 15 in March 2000). This may have been due either to birds being missed at the surveyed roost sites (e.g. if they arrived after dark), or to some individuals not using the main roost (roosting instead in dispersed fashion around the site, or perhaps forming an alternative roost elsewhere). If the latter is true, this suggests that the peak core count of 86 may itself be an underestimate. In the absence of other data, however, it is taken as the best estimate. East of the Gower, smaller areas of estuarine habitat exist at Swansea Bay and eastwards towards Lavernock Point, although, during the September 1999 core counts, Little Egrets were recorded only at the Ogmore estuary (two). The Severn estuary, from Cardiff up to Gloucester and then south to Bridg- water Bay, is a huge area, but the peak count of egrets dates back to August 1993, when 17 were at Frampton, Gloucestershire. Numbers did not approach this level again during the 1990s, with few core counts of more than four individuals, although there were ten in August 1999 and five in the fol- lowing month. Not surprisingly for such a large site, no central roost was discovered. Along the Somerset coast, five were also reported from Porlock Bay in British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 67 Bill Moorcroft Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain 3 1 . Little Egrets Egretta garzetta, Cornwall, c. 1 988. September 1999 (Somerset Birds 1999). Core counts of Little Egrets on the combined estu- aries of the Taw and Torridge have increased throughout the 1990s, with 48 in September 1999 the highest so far. An autumn peak is typical here, although the wintering population is also relatively high. Low-tide counts during the winter of 1994/95 recorded slightly lower numbers than the equivalent core counts. The main roost site, at Bideford, was sur- veyed between April 1999 and March 2000. Although core counts exceeded roost counts in some months, the observer considered that this was due to counts at roosts being curtailed by tidal and weather condi- tions, and that it was more typical for roost counts to exceed core counts. The peak roost count, also in Sep- tember 1999, was of 77 individuals. Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly Camel Estuary (iannel Estuary Fowcy l.ooe • Estuary Estuary # • • Tamar Complex Fal Complex Helford River Fig. 6. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, autumn 1 999. The Camel estuary is an important site for Little Egrets, with no fewer than 49 recorded as early as Sep- tember 1995. The peak core count, of 56, was in Sep- tember 1998, although only 39 were seen in September 1999. Incidental counts at this site have, however, been as high as 85 (M. Lawson in litt.). The main roost site in the area is in Little Petherick Creek, where counts have generally been similar to core counts, although 55 were seen in September 1999. There was also an incidental count of 61 in September 1999 (Birds in Cornwall). The Gannel estuary, at Newquay, is also a regular site for egrets, but only small numbers occur here. The peak core count, of six, was in September 1995, and the fact that there has been no increase since is presumably due to the small size of the site. During the 1999/2000 season, both roost counts (at Penpol Creek) and core counts recorded only one or two birds per month, although a higher incidental count of four was reported in Birds in Cornwall. At the Hayle estuary, a well-known site for Little Egrets, a steady increase in their numbers on core counts occurred during the study period, peaking at 13 in November 1999 (after eight in September 1999). No roost counts have been carried out, but, given the small size of the estuary, daytime counts are probably fairly accurate. Not surprisingly, in view of the estuary’s extensive coverage by birdwatchers, inci- dental counts reported in Birds in Cornwall were higher than WeBS counts, with 14 in September 1999 and a peak of 18 in October 1999. No counts of Little Egret were submitted to WeBS for the Isles of Scilly. Small numbers have, however, been present on the islands throughout the 1990s, most often on rocky shores between Tresco and Bryher, and roosting at Tresco Great Pool. The peak count to date, of 18, occurred in September 1999 (Isles of Scilly Bird Report). Marazion Marsh and the adjacent coast regularly attract Little Egrets, but counts have been small and an interchange between this site and the 1 layle estuary seems likely. Around The l izard, numbers of egrets along the I lelford River reached 28 in September 1996 ( Birds in Cornwall). Fewer than ten were seen on most core counts until October 1998, when 23 were recorded. The peak core count to date involved 24 in Hayle Fsluary Fresco 68 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain ) August 1999, with 17 seen in the following month. Roosting egrets were also surveyed here but, in all months, core counts were slightly higher. The degree of interchange between the Helford River and the Fal complex is unclear, but is probably not significant on a day-to-day basis (Pete Fraser and Steve Kolodziejski in litt.). The estuaries which comprise the Fal complex are something of a mystery so far as Little Egrets are con- cerned. Access is difficult, and the area has a long, winding shoreline. No single main roost has ever been identified, although smaller sub-roosts are occasion- ally noted. Core counts of egrets have been moder- ately high throughout the study period, usually of no more than 20, but with a peak of 45 in September 1998. The September 1999 count totalled only 14, although 34 were counted in the previous month. Birds in Cornwall could provide no higher counts for the month, but there are surely more birds at this site than are currently reported. The Fowey estuary is a small site but supports high numbers of egrets. Following a count of 30 in September 1995, there has been relatively little change since, but the peak core count, of 39, was in February 1999. Thirty-five were recorded during the core count in September 1999, slightly fewer than a roost count of 40 in the same month. Nearby, the Looe estuary is another small site, with fewer egrets than the Fowey. Numbers here have been fairly stable for some years, generally no more than eight, although the peak of 17 was in April 1996. No core count was available for September 1999, but Birds in Cornwall listed a report of seven. Roost counts were carried out on the lower reaches of the West Looe River during all but one month, but none exceeded the equivalent core count, suggesting that some individuals may roost farther upstream. The Tamar complex, including the estuaries of the Lynher and Tavy, plus St John’s Lake, is one of the most important British locali- ties for Little Egrets, although difficult to survey. In the autumn of 1993, the core count of 48 was the highest in Britain. Since then, totals have fluctu- ated, but the highest to date is of 95 in September 1999. Numbers in winter have increased throughout the study period, with a peak January core count of 45, in 2000. The main roost sites have been along the Lynher (Jupiter Point, Wilcove, Sheviock Wood), but the Kingsmill Lake/Landulph Marsh section of the Tamar has also been used. A roost of 74 individuals was observed in September 1993 (about 50% higher than the equivalent core count). During the 1999/2000 season, the only roost count involved a simultaneous survey of two separate roosts in Sep- tember 1999, which revealed 78 at Jupiter Point and 65 at Landulph. South Devon and Dorset Axe Estuary Exe Estuary • Christchurch Poole Harbour Harbour • • Otter Estuary Feign Estuary Fleet / Wey Yealm Estuary * Dart Estuary • • • Kingshridgc Estuary Ennc Estuary Avon Estutry Fig. 7. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta in south Devon and Dorset, autumn 1 999. WeBS core counts on the Plym estuary have recorded up to five Little Egrets (two in September 1999). The degree of interchange between here and the Tamar complex is not known but is likely to be frequent. No regular roosts are known for the Plym, and egrets probably roost on the Lynher. Incidental records from the Devon Bird Report are, however, much higher than WeBS counts, with a peak of 14 in November 1999, presumably because the site is watched intensively by local birdwatchers. The Yealm estuary has been occupied by Little Egrets throughout the 1990s. Although there has been no dramatic rise in numbers, the highest counts were nonetheless at the end of the study period, with a peak of 16 in September 1999. No roost counts were obtained for 1999/2000, nor for the pilot survey, 32. Little Egret Egretta garzetta, Britain, December 1 997. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 69 Robin Chittenden David Tipling/ Windrush Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain 33. Little Egret Egretta garzetta with Grey Heron Ardea cinerea, Bough Beech Reservoir Kent, August 1989. although there are thought to be two roost sites, at Kitley Pond and Cofflete Creek (the latter accessible only by boat). Without roost counts, 16 is the best estimate for September 1999, although this is perhaps slightly too low. Egrets recorded along the nearby coast at Wembury probably involve individuals from the Yealm. Continuing eastwards, the Ernie estuary supports similar numbers of egrets to those on the Yealm. The peak core count, of 17, was in September 1995, while nine were seen in September 1999. Roosts, around the confluence of the estuary’s two arms, were counted during all months of the pilot and main surveys. Roost counts during the full survey (with 13 in Sep- tember 1999) were generally higher than core counts, especially from November 1999 onwards; the peak, of 26 in February 2000, was double the equivalent core count. Unlike the core counts, roost counts suggest that higher numbers were present during the winter of 1999/2000 than in the previous autumn, which may reflect a wider daily dispersal in winter. Numbers of Little Egrets around the Avon estuary were similar from 1994 to 1998, with peak core counts of between eight and 12 individuals. Sixteen were counted in September 1999, however, with 17 in the following month. Unlike the Erme, the Avon clearly has a higher population in autumn than in winter. A roost at Hexdown Wood, counted throughout the pilot and full surveys, produced generally similar numbers to core counts; the September 1999 count was 19, down from the previous month’s 25. The Avon estuary is very close to South Huish Marsh and Thurlestone Marsh, and the small numbers of egrets noted on WeBS counts at these two sites are presumed likely to roost at I lexdown Wood. The Kingsbridge estuary has always been one of the prime British sites for Little Egrets, with a core count of 27 as long ago as November 1993 (the highest in the country in that month). The peak core count has since increased to 59, in both November 1998 and February 1999, with 55 in September 1999. An incidental count of 84 was reported in September 1998 ( Devon Bird Report), which is the highest yet for the site. In general, this is an area where numbers reach a peak in late autumn and are maintained at a high level through the winter, mean February core counts, for example, being higher than those in Sep- tember. Low-tide counts were carried out here between November 1993 and February 1994, and were similar to core counts. The principal roost site, counted for both the pilot and the main roost surveys, is south of Tosnos Point, but many other sites have been used sporadically. During all months, roost counts were lower than core counts, with a peak of 40 in September and October 1999, suggesting that not all individuals use the main site. An incidental roost count of 63 during autumn 1999 could not, unfortu- nately, be dated. It is assumed that the small numbers of egrets which are seen occasionally at Prawle Point are part of the Kingsbridge population. Only rather limited WeBS data are available for the Dart estuary. The Devon Bird Report lists a peak count of nine egrets for September 1999. No core count was available for that month, but the peak core count on record is of only ten, in August 1996. No roost sites are known, but the discovery of one would improve monitoring at this site, which is difficult to view in places. More Little Egrets are supported by the Teign estuary, although numbers have fluctuated; the peak WeBS core count was of 36, in August 1996, 70 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain > while only 13 were seen in September 1999. A roost count of 39 was, however, reported at Netherton in September 1999, following 46 in the previous month. Nearby, the Exe estuary is another well-known egret haunt. Peak autumn counts there rose sharply during the 1990s, to 38 in autumn 1995, and then remained fairly stable until 47 were seen in 1998, followed by 58 in September 1999. Low-tide counts from winter 1993/94 suggested that similar numbers were present at high and low tides. Roost counts were carried out for the main survey, at Cockwood. The September 1999 roost count of 35 was much lower than the cor- responding core count, but those in February and March 2000 were, in contrast, much higher. The reason for these discrepancies is not clear, but perhaps some of those egrets recorded on September core counts were using an unknown secondary roost site. Although it is postulated that egrets will move between the Teign and the Exe to roost ( Devon Bird Report), more recent observations (Tom Whiley & John Fortey in lift.) suggest that little regular move- ment has occurred between these two sites since 1998, and that some egrets may be entering roosts on the Exe after dark. Farther east, the two small estuaries of the Otter and the Axe are regular sites for Little Egret, but support only low numbers. In September 1999, two were recorded at the Otter and three at the Axe. In Dorset, the WeBS site of The Fleet and Wey (which includes Radipole and Lodmoor) holds widely varying numbers of egrets, which are difficult to analyse. The highest autumn core count was 18, in 1996, but only three were noted in September 1999, which seems likely to be an underestimate. Peak numbers often occur in late winter, the highest to date being 30, in February 2000. Although no central roost has been identified, egrets sometimes roost at Radi- pole, and it would be interesting to know how this roost is used by the birds in the area. Poole Harbour is one of the most important sites in Britain for Little Egrets, and also contains the country’s principal breeding colony; 23 pairs nested here in 1999, and the number has since increased (see postscript, below). Core counts in the harbour increased steadily throughout the 1990s, to a peak of 67 in September 1999. The regular pattern is of a peak in numbers in September, followed by a steady decline over the winter and only a very slight increase in March. For much of the 1990s, egrets using Poole Harbour have roosted in trees around Little Sea and Brand’s Bay, Studland (although the breeding colony at Brownsea Island has more recently been used as a roost during the summer months), and roost counts have shown that the area supports many more egrets than core counts suggest. During the main survey, roost counts exceeded core counts in every month by a large margin and are clearly vital for monitoring egrets here. The peak was 142 in October 1999, with 140 in the previous month. Although much of the discrepancy between the two counts is due to the dif- ficulty of viewing egrets in the harbour, an increasing number of egrets is feeding inland along the river valleys, notably the River Piddle, where 20 were seen in February 1999. These inland-feeding birds may well join the Little Sea roost at night, according to observations along the intervening flight line (Steve Smith in lift.), although the presence of individuals at dawn and dusk along the River Piddle points to an alternative hypothesis of a more discrete inland popu- lation (Steve Morrison in lift.). There are few recent WeBS counts for the small estuary at Christchurch Harbour, where the peak count of nine Little Egrets was recorded in September 1999. Monthly maxima documented in the Dorset Bird Report, however, imply a much higher level of occupancy. Autumn peak counts varied between five and 15 during 1993 to 1997, increasing to 28 in 1998 and to 44 in 1999 (with a count of 31 in September 1999). It is likely that much of this discrepancy is due to egrets feeding along the Avon Valley during the day and roosting at the harbour. Just how far these egrets will fly to reach the harbour is unknown. During 1999/2000, for example, up to 20 were recorded by WeBS core counts on the Avon between Fording- bridge, Hampshire, and Salisbury, Wiltshire; if these roost at Christchurch Harbour, they would complete a round trip daily of over 50 km. The Solent: Hurst Spit to Pagham Harbour, including the Isle of Wight Fig. 8. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta in The Solent, autumn 1999. The Solent consists of a number of areas which are usually considered as separate sites for census pur- poses, but their close proximity means that substan- tial interchange occurs among them. Since this is the most important area for Little Egrets in Britain, it is essential to consider these movements when attempting to gauge the true numbers of this species presently using The Solent. The Solent is bounded to the south by the Isle of Wight. The southern coastline of the island consists mostly of cliffs and is unsuitable for Little Egrets, but more suitable habitat exists along much of the northern shore. By the end of the 1990s, however, no large concentrations were known along the northeast British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 71 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain coast, nor any roost sites. The relatively small numbers of egrets seen here may roost locally or perhaps fly west to Newtown Harbour, or possibly north to a roost on the mainland (e.g. in Portsmouth Harbour), although there is currently no evidence for such movements. WeBS core counts have been carried out at Foreland, Bembridge, Ryde, Wootton and the River Medina, with the peak for the whole area totalling just eight, in November 1999 (in September 1999 there were singles at Bembridge and Medina). Low-tide counts at the Medina estuary in 1995/96, together with supplementary low-tide counts of all parts of The Solent in January 1997 and January 1999, revealed about twice as many egrets along this stretch of coast as in the core counts. Incidental counts from the Isle of Wight Bird Report include one of 12 in Bembridge Harbour in December 1999 (and four there in September 1999), again suggesting that core counts underestimate the number of egrets on this coast, although this is clearly not an area of major importance within The Solent. Newtown Harbour is the largest estuarine site on the Isle of Wight and holds the principal egret roost. WeBS core counts have peaked at 34 individuals, although little increase since autumn 1995 is apparent; 30 were recorded in September 1999. The wintering population is somewhat larger than those at nearby sites, but there is no evidence of a spring peak. Low-tide counts during the 1999/2000 winter revealed about 30% more egrets than found on core counts, while roost counts during the main survey were similar overall to core counts, although the Sep- tember 1999 roost count, of 46, was much higher. Where the egrets roosting at Newtown feed during the daytime is still not entirely clear; recent observa- tions suggest that most use the harbour itself, or the adjacent shore at Thorness Bay, but it is possible that some fly across to the mainland to feed (John Will- mott in lift.). West of Newtown, the Western Yar is a relatively small estuary, where the peak core count during the 1990s was of 12, in autumn 1998, with ten in Sep- tember 1999. No roost counts were carried out for the survey, but an incidental record of 19 was reported in September 1999 (Isle of Wight Bird Report). The Hampshire Bird Report refers to some of the egrets from the mainland flying across The Solent to roost at the Yar. Subsequently, a roost was discovered at the Yar, and new observations suggest that most Little Egrets crossing from Hurst Spit are roosting there, and not at Newtown (Kevin Lover in litt.). The Sep- tember 1999 count of 19 is used to represent the Yar population and those from the ‘North-West Solent’ which fly across to roost on the island. ‘North-West Solent’ comprises the Hampshire shore between Hurst Spit and Sowley Pond, including Keyhaven and Pennington Marshes. Core counts have been more variable here than at other sites, and mostly of fewer than 20 egrets, but 8ft were seen in September 1995 and 31 in November 1995. Such concentrations have not recurred, and just nine were reported in Sep- tember 1999. Sowley Pond and nearby Pylewell are the main egret roosts in the North-West Solent. The peak at Sowley was 63 in 1995, with 45 during August and September 1999, falling to 22 in October 1999 (but with very few in other months of the survey). Although some of the discrepancy between roost counts and core counts is due to individuals being missed on the latter, it is also possible that at least some of the egrets roosting at Sowley come not only from the Beaulieu estuary but perhaps even from Southampton Water; the Hampshire Bird Report, however, suggests that the Sowley roost contains egrets feeding no farther east than Lepe. Equally, some of those recorded on North-West Solent core counts fly across to the Isle of Wight to roost (see above). The Beaulieu estuary is a regular site for Little Egrets, with a peak core count of 21 in 1996 (but only four in September 1999). Low-tide counts have revealed totals broadly similar to those of core counts. Higher incidental counts are documented in the Hampshire Bird Report, with a maximum of 28 in August 1996. Although egrets have at times roosted at Needs Ore Point, where the Beaulieu discharges into The Solent, none was recorded there during the pilot or main roost surveys, and it seems most likely that Beaulieu egrets roosted at Sowley Pond in 1999. Broadly, the evidence suggests that the Sowley figure of 45 is reasonably accurate for the number of Little Egrets using the Beaulieu and that part of the North- West Solent from which the birds do not roost on the Isle of Wight. Bearing in mind the size of the site, relatively small numbers of Little Egrets occur on Southampton Water, and single-figure counts are typical. The peak core count during the study period was of 17, in August 1998, with 11 in September 1999. Regular low-tide counts here during the 1990s have been very similar to core counts. Incidental counts, however, reveal that significantly higher numbers used the site: in 1998 and 1999, for example, 14-18 were recorded on the Hamble estuary alone in each of the three months July-September, and up to ten were seen at several other single localities within this large site (Hampshire Bird Report; D. A. Christie in litt.). No key roost sites have been discovered, although Titchfield Haven and the Lower Test Marshes are used occasion- ally. More recently, egrets have been seen flying up the Test valley at dusk, presumably to roost, and appearing at Dibden Bay, on the lower Test, at dawn (Jess Pain in litt.). Consequently, although egrets may in the past have llown either west to Sowley Pond or east to Portsmouth Harbour to roost, it seems that Southampton Water should really be treated as a dis- crete unit, and a conservative total of 1 1 was therefore retained for the September 1999 estimate. Until recently, knowledge of the egret population using Portsmouth Harbour has been incomplete, 72 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 c Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain ) Fig. 9. Peak autumn counts of Little Egrets Egretta garzetta at Thorney Island roost, West Sussex, and on monthly Wetland Bird Survey core counts of Chichester Harbour West Sussex. largely because of limited access to parts of the harbour. Core counts suggest that the site has not been occupied throughout the study period, with none seen until autumn 1995. The highest numbers were in 1999, with 32 in Sep- tember, a peak of 51 in October, and a large wintering population in 1999/2000. The pilot roost survey revealed 32 in September 1997 and 19 in January 1998, at Fort Elson on the southwest shore (where the species now breeds). Although a new roost was discovered recently, at Horsea Island in the north of the harbour (Jason Crook in litt.), it is assumed that most egrets using Portsmouth Harbour roost at or near Fort Elson. Therefore, the core count of 32 is retained for the September 1999 population estimate, although, given that many individuals are overlooked during core counts at similar sites elsewhere, this is probably an underestimate. Langstone Harbour has long been a key site for Little Egrets, with autumn core counts of more than 30 in 1995, 1996, 1998 and 1999, and a peak of 51 in October 1999 (and 34 in September 1999). Numbers reported on core counts during the winter are rela- tively small, but low- tide counts in 1993/94 and, espe- cially, 1998/99 suggest that, in fact, the wintering population is high. It had previously been assumed that the Langstone egrets flew east to roost at Thorney Island, but recent observations have shown that many fly west to Horsea Island, in Portsmouth Harbour, instead. Although the latter roost was not counted for the full survey, 47 egrets leaving Langstone and heading west at dusk on 3rd September 1999 was the highest of such counts, and this figure is retained for the Horsea Island roost. Interestingly, this pattern of movements was not maintained throughout the whole of autumn 1999, and by mid October more Langstone egrets were flying to roost on Thorney Island than were moving to Horsea (Jason Crook in litt.). Chichester Harbour is the single most important site for Little Egrets in Britain. WeBS core counts reached 99 as early as autumn 1995, and then remained stable for a time before increasing again, to 134 in 1998 and 141 in October 1999 (118 in Sep- tember 1999). Generally, September is the peak month, with October close behind. Chichester Harbour has been counted at low water regularly during the 1990s, but core counts are on average about 30% higher than low-tide counts. Interestingly, there is no evidence at Chichester of the small spring peak noted at other sites. The roost sites of the Chich- ester egrets have been extremely well studied (Barry Collins in litt.). Little Egrets began roosting at Thorney Great Deep in 1991 and used this site almost continuously throughout the rest of the 1990s, although some roosted at Oldpark Wood in 1995. Peak autumn roost counts are shown in fig. 9, with the peak autumn core counts for comparison (note that roost counts, unlike core counts, were not con- fined to a single date each month). The Thorney Great Deep roost held 260 Little Egrets in September 1999 (following 271 in the pre- vious month), by far the largest number anywhere in Britain, and more than double the equivalent core- count total. It is generally considered that the Thorney roost contains egrets from Langstone Harbour, and perhaps from even farther afield. As discussed above, however, observations in 1999, and the discovery of the roost at Horsea Island, suggest that the situation may be more complex than was ini- tially realised. In 2000, it appeared that even some of the egrets spending the day in the northwest sectors of Chichester Harbour may also have been flying west to Horsea Island. Although Pagham Harbour is geographically quite separate from Chichester Harbour, it is usually con- sidered part of The Solent by local observers. Despite its relatively small size, it is another important site for Little Egrets in autumn. Core counts of up to 20 were made in autumn 1994 and have since increased, with 50 in October 1999. There have been no double-figure core counts at this site in winter, but low-tide counts at Pagham in each winter from 1995/96 suggest that this is not the true picture. During 1999/2000, roost counts were available for each month, and revealed on average more than twice the number of egrets seen on core counts. While the high roost counts in August and September 1999 (51 and 49, respectively) were eventually matched by the October core count, the winter roost counts were far in excess of either core counts or low-tide counts, indicating a wintering population of 30-40 individuals. The discrepancy sug- gests that, in winter, egrets range more widely during the day, perhaps along adjoining coasts or inland, but return to the harbour to roost. Local counters believe that there are no regular movements of egrets between Chichester and Pagham. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 73 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Bognor Regis to the Thames estuary • Thantes Estuary • Thanet Coast • Vledway Estuary * Swale Estuary • Pegwell Bay Rye Harbour • • Dungeness Adur Estuary • Cuckmere Estuary Fig. 1 0. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta between Bognor Regis, West Sussex, and the Thames estuary, autumn 1 999. Although Little Egrets occur widely along the south coast east of Pagham Harbour, suitable habitat is somewhat limited and numbers are, unsurprisingly, low. During the September 1999 core counts, three were seen on the Adur estuary and six at the Cuck- mere estuary, with none on the Ouse or Arun. The Sussex Bird Report emphasises that the Cuckmere is the most important of these small estuaries for this species, with incidental counts of ten in autumn 1998 and 1999, while surprisingly few sightings are recorded at the other estuaries. East of Beachy Head, the key areas are Rye Harbour and Pett Level (counted as a single site for WeBS). During the study period, core counts were low here until five were recorded in August 1998, and then 1 1 in September 1999. The roost count in September 1999, however, revealed 16 individuals, with an inci- dental count of 18 on another date in that month. No egrets were reported on core counts at Dungeness until September 1999, when five were seen on the gravel-pits, presumably different from the Rye indi- viduals. At Pegwell Bay, the peak core counts were of seven, in July 1998 and September 1999, with no higher incidental counts reported. Around the North Foreland headland, along the Thanet coast, there is little estuarine habitat, but three Little Egrets were recorded there in September 1999. In view of the dis- tance from other sites, these were presumably roosting locally. Farther west, the Swale estuary, between mainland Kent and the Isle of Sheppey, holds surprisingly low numbers of egrets, with a peak autumn core count of nine in 1994 and 1995. No core count was available for September 1999, but up to two were reported in that month, and a number of other incidental counts include one of 18 in August 1995 ( Kent Bird Report). Roost counts at Ham Road Pits numbered seven in November 1999, ten in January 2000 and seven in the following month (compared with core counts of seven, three and seven, respec- tively). While regular roost counts could result in slightly higher totals for the Swale than those from core counts, the numbers involved are not large. The Medway estuary has clearly established itself as the major Little Egret site in this region, but has achieved this position more recently, since only a single individual was recorded on core counts prior to summer 1995. An exceptional 30 were reported in September 1995, followed by lower numbers from 1996 to 1998, and then no fewer than 71 in September 1999. The autumn peaks here are short-lived, with relatively few present in winter (e.g. five during 1999/2000). Low-tide counts in 1996/97 produced similar numbers to core counts. No nocturnal roost sites have been discovered, with the peak counts made at daytime high-tide roosts. Recent observations have suggested that the species may be roosting in the Barksore/Slayhills area of the estuary (Trevor Bowley in lift.) and/or at Northward Hill, although the latter site may not have been used until autumn 2000. The Thames estuary is a huge site. For WeBS pur- poses, it is defined as the area from the mouth of the Medway upstream along the River Thames to Barking, and then out to Foulness, where the site borders the Crouch/Roach estuaries. Core counts here have increased during the 1990s, with most autumn peaks in single figures, but reaching 28 in August 1999, and 17 in the following month. As on the Medway, numbers decreased in 1997 and the winter population has been generally low until 1998/99. Given the size of the site and, more importantly, the difficult nature of the terrain in places (notably around Canvey Island and Foulness), it would be easy to miss egrets during core counts, and roost counts probably provide a better estimate of the population size. During the 1990s, roosts were known at Cliffe Pits on the south side of the estuary and at Foulness on the north. Numbers roosting at Cliffe have varied, but none was seen in September 1999, while six were roosting at Foulness in that month. Interpretation of roost counts and core counts is difficult on the Thames. The two roosts are well separated, and prob- ably involve different individuals. That at Foulness, however, almost certainly involves egrets recorded on core counts on the Crouch/Roach estuaries. As roost counts during the 1990s do not match the totals from core counts, the latter are taken as the best estimate. The recent discovery of further roost sites around the Thames, including an important one at Northward Hill, will be important for an improved under- standing of movements and population levels in the future. The east coast north of the Thames The Crouch and Roach estuaries have not been a par- ticularly important area for Little Egrets. Few core counts here recorded the species until autumn 1999, when four were present (including during September 1999), and three overwintered into 2000. These may well have roosted at Foulness, although a small roost was discovered in autumn 1998 at North Fambridge marina (Essex Bird Report). Moving north, few Little 74 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain > Humber Estuary The Wash North Norfolk Coast Breydon Water • • Benacrc Broad Dingle Marshes* * Aide Complex Coin. Estuary * Slour ' °™e" Cuu"n“ • Crouch / Roach F.stuorie* Fig. I I. Principal sites for Little Egrets Egretta garzetta on the east coast of Britain north of the Thames estuary, autumn 1999. Egrets are recorded along the open coast of the Dengie Flats, where the peak core count is of three during July 1999. Numbers have also been low in the Blackwater, with none until autumn 1995 and peak counts of four in both August 1996 and February 2000. None was recorded in September 1999 during core counts at the Blackwater and Dengie, although one (presumably from the Colne) was reported at Old Hall Marshes in that month (Essex Bird Report). The Colne estuary is the prime site for Little Egrets on the Essex coast. Core counts increased during the 1990s, and ten were seen in September 1999. Unusually, this site regularly holds higher numbers in winter than in autumn, the egrets perhaps arriving from across the North Sea as the winter pro- gresses. The core counts appear to underestimate the population, since roost counts for St Osyth Priory revealed 15 in September 1999, and a peak of 27 in March 2000. An incidental count of 16 was made at Flag Creek (adjacent to St Osyth) in September 1999 (Alf Mullins in lift.). There are few regular sites for Little Egrets north of the Naze but, if the species continues to increase, this is likely to change. Hamford Water, for example, with seemingly ideal habitat for the species, has so far recorded only low numbers during WeBS core counts, and none was seen during September 1999. No egrets were recorded on core counts on the Stour estuary until one in September 1998, followed by five in Sep- tember 1999. At the neighbouring Orwell estuary, core counts revealed a few egrets in autumn 1998, although a roost of up to nine became established at the adjacent Trimley Marshes in September 1999 ( Suffolk Bird Report). It seems likely that this roost comprised the egrets feeding on the Stour. No Little Egrets were recorded at the Deben estuary during WeBS core counts in the 1990s. Similarly, few records of Little Egrets were reported on core counts at the Aide complex (including the Ore and Butley Rivers) in the mid 1990s, but three were present in September 1999 (and four in the following month), while nine were reported in the Suffolk Bird Report. Sightings here tend to be concentrated around Havergate Island and Orfordness. Egrets are regularly seen on the extensive coastal reserves between Aldeburgh and Lowestoft, but the only individuals recorded in autumn 1999 were one at Dingle Marshes and two at Benacre Broad. In Norfolk, Breydon Water and the associated Berney Marshes appear ideal for the species; while only one was recorded on WeBS core counts in Sep- tember 1999, the Norfolk Bird Report suggests that, in fact, four were present. A huge area of suitable egret habitat exists along the north Norfolk coast, although winters there can be extremely cold. Little Egrets are now seen regularly, but are largely restricted to the area around Titchwell in the west. Core counts here have included 12 in January 1996 and ten in 1998, while the six in Sep- tember 1999 reflect the general stability of the popu- lation of this area. Winter low-tide counts in 1997/98 suggested that core counts may underestimate the numbers present, although the peak count reported in the 1999 Norfolk Bird Report was of only seven (from August to November). The Wash is a premier site for many other estu- arine species but has not yet become an important one for Little Egrets. Core counts recorded up to seven in autumn 1993 but no more than two since (including in September 1999). There is no indication that significant numbers are being overlooked here. Similarly, egrets are reported only occasionally on the Humber, with one present during September 1999. No Little Egrets have been recorded by WeBS core counts along the east coast north of Spurn, and the species is still a rare visitor to Northumberland ( Birds in Northumbria 1999), with only one record in 1999 and none in 1998. In eastern Scotland, as on the west coast, most records still occur in the spring. It is pos- sible that a handful of egrets was missed in the north- east during September 1999, but these are insignificant in terms of the total picture. Inland Little Egrets do occur inland, mostly as occasional vis- itors. The most important areas are along rivers in Dorset and west Hampshire and on the Somerset Levels. The rivers which enter Poole and Christchurch Harbours, Dorset, have been discussed above in rela- tion to those sites. No September 1999 core counts were available for the Somerset Levels, although the Somerset Bird Report records 13 at Shapwick Heath and one (probably from Shapwick) at Ham Wall in that month. Even higher numbers had been present during the previous month, with 22 at Shapwick and four at Ham Wall. WeBS core counts noted a further five inland Little Egrets, all in East Sussex and Kent (singles at Arlington Reservoir, Darwell Reservoir and Stodmarsh, and two at Bewl Water). Given the transitory appearance of many inland visitors, which are presumably en route to or from the main estuarine sites, any other records are perhaps best British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 75 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain > considered accounted for in the coastal totals. Assuming that those on the Dorset and Hampshire rivers are covered by the Poole and Christchurch counts, it appears that about 18 Little Egrets were present inland in September 1999, most of them on the Somerset Levels. It is, however, worth mentioning also that this species has appeared well inland, with records from, for example, Rutland Water, Leicestershire. Discussion of results Little Egrets have continued to increase dramat- ically in Britain throughout the 1990s. Fol- lowing the influx in 1989, a further increase in total population size occurred in every autumn from 1993 to 1999 with the exception of 1996 and 1997 (fig. 3). By the end of the decade, birdwatchers could expect to find the species in any suitable habitat between Pembrokeshire and Essex, with smaller numbers farther north. More than 40% of these were to be found along the 80 km of coast between Swanage Bay in Dorset and Pagham Harbour in Sussex. Detailed analysis of all available data sug- gests that at least 1,610 Little Egrets were present in Britain in September 1999 (see Appendix, pages 79-80), 50% more than the total recorded by WeBS core counts. Most of the difference was due to higher counts at a number of nocturnal roosts, notably at Thorney Island and Little Sea. It is possible that the total con- tains some duplication of records, although strenuous efforts were made to minimise this problem when the results were analysed. Equally, it is possible that the counts for a number of sites are underestimates, mostly when roosts were not surveyed. Such concerns are discussed above, where the most important areas likely to be affected are the Fal complex, Portsmouth Harbour, Cleddau estuary and Thames estuary. Bearing in mind these caveats, the number of Little Egrets present in Britain in September 1999 almost certainly exceeded 1,650 and may well have been over 1,700. The distribution of Little Egrets in September 1999 is shown in fig. 12. The monthly distribution of records has changed completely from that which existed before 1989 (fig. 2). Instead of a peak in May followed by smaller numbers during the rest of the summer, the pattern of occurrence during the 1990s is of a late-summer/early-autumn peak and a substantial wintering population. Like the September figures, the January core count data understate the true number present. Unfortunately, fewer supplementary counts are available for January to enable the extent of the deficit to be determined. It does, however, appear that roost counts may exceed core counts to a greater extent in winter, notably at Chichester Harbour and Pagham Harbour. When calculating the true number present in January 2000, it is, therefore, inappropriate to use the same correction factor as that derived for September 1999 (i.e. +50%, which would suggest a wintering population of 788). In addi- tion to the 513 egrets recorded on core counts in January 2000, at least 241 were seen at roosts. Roost counts were not, however, available for some key sites, and at the time of writing (December 2001) few bird reports for 2000 were avail- able. Furthermore, as dis- cussed above, it seems probable that, in some areas at least, Little Egrets disperse more widely by day during the winter than in the autumn. A likely estimate is that approximately 800-900 Little Egrets were present in Britain in January 2000. An interesting fact which emerged during this analysis is the existence of a small but significant ‘spring peak’, both nationally and at indi- vidual sites (figs. 2 & 3). Since 1993, the mean number of Little Egrets Fig. 12. The distribution of Little Egrets Egretta garzetta in Britain, September 1999. 76 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain recorded in March has been greater than the January mean at the majority of sites. Most of those sites which do not show a peak in numbers in March are located at the northern periphery of the species’ range in Britain, such as Cleddau, north Norfolk, the Medway and the Thames. There are several possible reasons for the March peak. Firstly, it could be due to a redistri- bution of individuals among the various sites, although, since the pattern exists for Britain as a whole, this seems unlikely. Secondly, it is pos- sible that the peak does not reflect a real increase in numbers, but simply that egrets become more visible at the onset of the breeding season. While this may be true to some extent, it seems unlikely to be sufficient to affect the monthly distribution pattern. More- over, Poole Harbour, which contains the prin- cipal breeding colony, does not show a peak in numbers in March. That there is a genuine influx of egrets into Britain in March seems probable, and there are two possible sources for such an arrival. One involves egrets which have wintered in the Netherlands and are returning to breeding colonies in Brittany. This seems unlikely, since the numbers wintering in the Netherlands are probably not large enough to account for the March peak in Britain (Bijlsma et al. 2001). Fur- thermore, were this hypothesis correct, a clear March peak would be expected in the Greater Thames region, whereas it is, in fact, more pro- nounced in southwest Britain. More realisti- cally, the March peak is probably due to northbound Little Egrets from southwest Europe and Africa overshooting breeding colonies in Brittany, and arriving in southwest England. Overshooting may, however, be a mis- leading term, since it implies an accidental or ‘mistaken’ movement, whereas many of these egrets will probably be actively prospecting for breeding sites around British estuaries, perhaps having visited them during the previous autumn. If this hypothesis is correct, then this spring movement suggests that a rapid increase in British breeding numbers may well occur. Prior to the 1989 influx, sightings of Little Egrets in Britain also peaked in spring, but in May rather than March (fig. 2). It seems likely that this late-spring peak involved the dispersal of failed breeders from colonies to the south, rather than prospectors seeking to expand the species’ range. The future of the Little Egret in Britain Given the strong foothold which it has now established in Britain, is the Little Egret here to stay? Predicting the future is always a fraught exercise. How many people, 20 years ago, would have nominated the Little Egret as a likely British breeding species? It is interesting to consider the situation along the Atlantic coast of France when trying to assess the future of the Little Egret in Britain. The species started to nest in the Camargue, on the Mediterranean coast, in the early 1930s, and its numbers remained fairly stable until the end of the 1960s, but increased during the 1970s (Dubois et al. 2000). Until then, about 90% of Little Egrets in France nested in the Camargue. During the 1980s, however, Little Egrets began to colonise the Atlantic coast of France, where they were so successful that, by 1998, the Camargue population, despite its continued increase, represented only 20% of the French population. By 1998, 60% of French breeding Little Egrets occurred along the Atlantic coast, with 5,000-6,000 pairs between the Pyrenees and Brittany, and small numbers on the north coast. In the light of such an increase, the colonisation of southern Britain is hardly sur- prising. The winter status of the species in France has also changed. From being largely a summer visitor, withdrawing south in the winter (apart from a small number which remained in the Camargue), the French wintering population numbered more than 20,000 by the late 1990s (Dubois et al. 2000). It seems undeniable that the recent spread of the species is linked to milder weather, and that its future success is also dependent on climate. Although some species may have difficulties in adjusting to global climate change (Harrison et al. 2001), the Little Egret shows that adaptable, mobile species can readily shift their range and distribution. There is no reason to suspect that Little Egrets will suffer significant persecution or predation in Britain, and for such a versatile species there is no shortage of suitable habitat, either during or outside the breeding season. At present, Little Egrets have penetrated farther north along the milder west coast of Britain than along the east, and it will be interesting to see what their northern limits will eventually be. During the cold winter of 1985, many Little Egrets were found dead along the French Atlantic coast, especially in Brittany (Philippe British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 77 Mike Longman Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Dubois in lift.), which implies that, during cold weather, not all birds move south but a propor- tion, at least, remain in situ. Although British winters are becoming warmer in general, it would be surprising if the Little Egret’s north- ward spread was not checked in some way by winter weather. In the autumn of 1999, numbers at some of the well-established sites along the south coast of Britain, including Chichester Harbour, con- tinued to reach new heights. At the same time, particularly large increases in peak counts were noted towards the periphery of the species’ present range, including at Burry Inlet and the Medway estuary, and to a lesser extent at the estuaries of the Colne, Aide, Stour/Orwell, Severn and sites around Liverpool Bay. The next major advance will perhaps be marked by double-figure counts from The Wash and the Humber, and from the west Wales and Liver- pool Bay estuaries. One could also predict a corresponding increase in the Republic of Ireland, away from the current epicentre of Cork and Blackwater, along with further north- ward movement on the Continental shore of the North Sea, and a consolidation inland in Britain. Large-scale monitoring schemes, such as WeBS, will continue to be of key importance for mapping the distribution and numbers of Little Egrets in Britain. Accurate counts of nocturnal roosts are also a vital supplement to the monthly WeBS counts, at both new and well- established sites. The network of county bird recorders is ideally placed for collating such information until the next review of the species is published. Postscript During the time required to collate the data used for the above analysis, the species has con- tinued to expand both its breeding and its non- breeding range in Britain. Early indications are that, at many sites, the autumn peak in 2000 was of a similar magnitude to that in 1999, although Pagham Harbour was a notable excep- tion with a count of over 100. A more spectac- ular increase occurred in autumn 2001, when a large rise in numbers was noted at many sites, including the Dee estuary, Burry Inlet (a remarkable roost of over 200 egrets), Severn estuary, Thames estuary (over 100 roosting at Northward Hill), Orwell estuary and the North Norfolk Coast. While breeding numbers at Brownsea Island stabilised (with 46 pairs in 2000 and 45 pairs in 2001), further new colonies were established, and a pair bred in Cheshire. 78 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Acknowledgments The majority of the data used within this paper were collected by the army of WeBS volunteer counters who carried out WeBS core counts and low-tide counts, In addition, roost counts were carried out by Chris Abrams, Rod Bone, Barry Collins, Simon Cox, James Diamond, Tim Edwards, John Fortey, Simon Geary, Bob Gomes, Nick Hamzij, Matthew Knott, Steve Kolodziejski, Paul Larkin, Mike Lawson, Chris Lewis, Steve Morrison, Peter Reay, Steve Rowe, Steve Smith, Jon Stokes, Tony Spiller; Gilbert Thomas, Dave Unsworth, Tony Vickery, John Wagstaff, Paul Wakelin, Gordon Waterhouse, Tom Whiley, Nigel Williams, John Willmott and Barry Yates. Many of these counters also provided useful background information about their respective sites. Extensive and useful comments were made on a first draft of this paper by John Marchant and Mark Rehfisch. Further information and advice were provided by Phil Atkinson, Graham Austin, Andy Blonden, Trevor Bowley, Peter Bradley, Jonathan Braggs, Andy Brown, Jack Burton, John Clark, Dave Conway, Greg Conway, Peter Cranswick, Jason Crook, Harvey van Diek, Philippe Dubois, Jon Easton, Dennis Elphick, Pete Fraser Ken Hall, Tim Hodge, Harry Huggins, Mark Lawlor Kevin Lover Alf Mullins, Malcolm Ogilvie, Jess Pain, Sarah Patton, Mark Pollitt, Annie Poole, Anne de PotierYvon Princen, Peter Reay, Dave Unsworth, Eddie Wiseman and Mick Wright. Apologies to anyone whose name has been omitted. WeBS is a partnership of the British Trust for Ornithology, The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (the last on behalf of English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage, the Countryside Council for Wales, and the Environment and Heritage Service in Northern Ireland). References Atkinson, R W„ & Wells, B. G. (eds.) In prep. The Birds of the Bailiwick of Guernsey. La Societe Guernesiaise, Guernsey Bijlsma, R. G., Hustings, F„ & Camphuysen, K. C. J. 200 1 . Common and Scarce Birds of the Netherlands, Avifauna van Nederland 2. Utrecht. Clark, J. M„ & Eyre, J. A. 1 993. Birds of Hampshire. Hampshire Ornithological Society. Combridge, R, & Parr; C. 1992. Influx of Little Egrets in Britain and Ireland in 1 989. Brit. Birds 85: 16-21. Dubois, RJ„ le Marechal, R, Olioso, G„ & Yesou, P 2000. Inventaire des Oiseaux de France. Paris. Fraser PA., Lansdown, R G., & Rogers, M.J, 1997. Report on scarce migrant birds in Britain in 1 995. Brit. Birds 90: 413-439. Harrison, PA., Berry, R M„ & Dawson, T R (eds.) 200 1 . Climate Change and Nature Conservation in Britain and Ireland - modelling natural resource responses to climate change (the MONARCH project). UKCIP Technical Report. Oxford. James, R 1996. Birds of Sussex. Sussex Ornithological Society. Lock, L„ &Cook, K. 1 998. The Little Egret in Britain: a successful colonist. Brit. Birds 9 1 : 273-280. Musgrove, A. J., Pollitt, M. S„ Hall, C„ Hearn, R. D„ Holloway, S. J., Marshall, R E„ Robinson, J. A., & Cranswick, RA. 200 1 . The Wetland Bird Survey 1 999-2000: Wildfowl and Wader Counts. Slimbridge. Naylor, K. A. 1 996. A Reference Manual of Rare Birds in Great Britain and Ireland. Nottingham. Ogilvie, M„ & the Rare Breeding Birds Panel. 2001. Rare breeding birds in the United Kingdom in 1999. Brit. Birds 94: 344-38 1 . Palmer; E. M„ & Ballance, D. K. 1 968. The Birds of Somerset. London. Smiddy, R, & O'Sullivan, O. 1 998. The status of the Little Egret Egretta garzetta in Ireland. Irish Birds 6: 201-206. Taylor D. W., Davenport, D. L, & Flegg, J. J. M. 1981. The Birds of Kent. Kent Ornithological Society. Taylor M„ Seago, M., Allard, R, & Dorling, D. 1999. The Birds of Norfolk. London. van den Berg, A. B„ & Bosman, C. A. W. 1 999. Rare Birds of the Netherlands. Robertsbridge. Voisin, C. 1991. The Herons of Europe. London. Andy Musgrove, British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU Appendix. Estimated numbers of Little Egrets Egretta garzetta in Britain in September 1 999. Site Number Source Wyre estuary 2 Lancashire Bird Report 1999 Ribble estuary 2 WeBS Core Count Dee estuary 5 WeBS Core Count Inland Sea 5 WeBS Core Count Foryd Bay/Lavan Sands 3 Welsh Bird Report 1999 Dysynni estuary 1 WeBS Core Count Dyfi estuary 2 WeBS Core Count Cleddau estuary 5 WeBS Core Count Carmarthen Bay 2 Welsh Bird Report 1999 Burry Inlet 86 WeBS Core Count Ogmore estuary 2 WeBS Core Count Severn estuary 5 WeBS Core Count Porlock Bay 5 Somerset Birds 1999 Taw/Torridge estuary 77 Roost Survey Camel estuary 55 Roost Survey British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 79 Non-breeding status of Little Egret in Britain Site Number Source Gannel estuary 2 WeBS Core Count Hayle estuary 8 WeBS Core Count Tresco Great Pool 18 Isles of Scilly Bird Report 1 999 Helford River 17 WeBS Core Count Fal complex 14 WeBS Core Count Fowey estuary 40 Roost Survey Looe estuary 7 Birds in Cornwall 1999 Tamar complex (incl. Plym estuary) 143 Roost Survey Yealm estuary 16 WeBS Core Count Erme estuary 13 Roost Survey Avon estuary 19 Roost Survey Kingsbridge estuary 55 WeBS Core Count Dart estuary 9 Devon Bird Report 1999 Teign estuary 39 Roost Survey Exe estuary 58 WeBS Core Count Otter estuary 2 WeBS Core Count Axe estuary 3 WeBS Core Count Fleet/Wey 3 WeBS Core Count Poole Flarbour 140 Roost Survey Christchurch Harbour 31 Dorset Bird Report 1 999 Eastern Isle of Wight 5 Isle of Wight Bird Report 1999 Newtown Harbour 46 Roost Survey Western Yar estuary 19 Isle of Wight Bird Report 1999 Sowley Pond 45 Roost Survey Southampton Water 11 WeBS Core Count Portsmouth Flarbour/Fort Elson 32 WeBS Core Count Langstone Harbour/Horsea Island 47 Hampshire Bird Report 1999 Chichester Harbour/Thorney Island 260 Roost Survey Pagham Harbour 49 Roost Survey Adur estuary 3 WeBS Core Count Cuckmere estuary 6 WeBS Core Count Rye Harbour/Pett Level 16 Roost Survey Dungeness 5 WeBS Core Count Pegwell Bay 7 WeBS Core Count Thanet Coast 3 WeBS Core Count Swale estuary 2 Kent Bird Report 1999 Medway estuary 71 WeBS Core Count Thames estuary 17 WeBS Core Count Crouch/Roach estuary 4 WeBS Core Count Colne estuary 15 Roost Survey Stour/Orwell estuary 9 Suffolk Bird Report 1999 Aide complex 9 Suffolk Bird Report 1999 Dingle Marshes 1 Suffolk Bird Report 1999 Benacre Broad 2 Suffolk Bird Report 1999 Breydon Water 4 Norfolk Bird Report 1999 North Norfolk Coast 7 Norfolk Bin 1 Report 1 999 The Wash 2 WeBS Core Count Humber 1 WeBS Core Count Somerset Levels 13 Somerset Birds 1999 Miscellaneous inland 5 WeBS Core Count Total 1,610 80 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 The BB/BTO Best Bird Book of the Year 200 1 British Birds and the British Trust for Ornithology announce the winner of the Award for the title of BEST BIRD BOOK OF THE YEAR. All books reviewed in British Birds or the BTO publications BTO News and Bird Study from July 2000 to the end of 2001 were eligible for consideration for this Award. Since this Award was last pre- sented, in October 2000 (Brit. Birds 93: 494-495), the judging period has been altered to cover a single calendar-year. Owing to this change, and for this year only, the review period for the 2001 Award spanned 18 months (rather than the usual 12), which meant an even larger selection of marvellous books for the judges to pore over. As in past years, each of the six judges was asked before- hand to select a provisional list of six titles, and the resulting group of books thus formed an initial short-list from which the winners were chosen. The judging for this Award does not follow any formal criteria, but we are looking for special merit in books which will, we believe, appeal to the readership of BB and BTO News. The judges met at Swanwick, Derbyshire, in December, just prior to the BTO’s Annual Con- ference, where all the short-listed books were available for one last look. Wide-ranging discus- sion and lively debate followed, from which a leading group of eight titles emerged as the frontrunners. Each judge was asked to rank these eight titles, which then revealed our winner and runners-up this year. WINNER: Sylvia Warblers: Identification, taxonomy and phylogeny of the genus Sylvia By Hadoram Shirihai, Gabriel Gargallo & Andreas J. Helbig. Illustrated by Alan Harris. Photographic editor and field photographer David Cottridge. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. 576 pages; 20 colour plates; 97 photographic plates; maps. ISBN 0-7136-3984-9. Hardback, £60.00. A clear winner this year: there were no dis- senting voices when this monograph emerged as our best bird book of 2001. The ‘ Sylvia project’ has clearly been a labour of love for many years for the three authors, together with illustrator Alan Harris and photographer David Cottridge. The book exudes scholarship and meticulous detail, while the originality of the authors’ research (exemplified by their approach to taxonomy) was an important point which the judges emphasised. In a similar vein, HEIM IDENTIFICATION GUIDES SYLVIA WARBLERS Identification, taxonomy and phylogeny of the genus Sylvia H.idor.im Shirihai, Gabriel Gargallo & Andreas ). I lelbig Illustrated In- Alan Harris Photographic ediloi and field photograph: David Collridge © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 81-84 81 BB/BTO Best Bird Book of the Year 2001 C > the seamless juxtaposition of information gleaned from ringing studies and from field observations provides an unparalleled identifi- cation text, and is an approach that deserves to be widely copied, for passerines at least. The mixture of sensational photographs and artwork, both of a high standard throughout, is another highlight of the book. Quite simply, Sylvia Warblers has set a new standard for the group monograph, perhaps in the same way as did the three titles Seabirds , Shorebirds and Wildfowl some 13-18 years ago. Minor quibbles raised by the judges included some inaccuracies in the indexing, while the price of the volume will doubtless deter some potential buyers. And that is a shame, because this is a book which deserves to be widely enjoyed. 2nd The North American Bird Guide By David Sibley. Pica Press, Sussex, 2000. 544 pages; colour paintings and distribution maps. ISBN 1-873403-98-4. Softback, £25.00. For the second time in three years, an out- standing field guide featured prominently in the running for this Award. Two years ago, the Collins Bird Guide was described as ‘quite simply the best field guide ever published for any region’. Had The North American Bird Guide appeared first, we would perhaps have made exactly the same comments about this book. The fact that it has been written and illustrated by one man is a further marvel. The Collins Guide and ‘Sibley’, as it is affectionately called, have independently set world standards from which producers of other field guides can learn, and by which their results will be judged. ‘Sibley’ is purely an identification guide, with little information about habitat and behaviour, but we understand that these aspects are dealt with in a companion volume, not available at the time of judging. 3rd Threatened Birds of the World By Bird Life International. Lynx Edicions and Bird Life International, Barcelona and Cambridge, 2000. 852 pages; maps; colour illustrations. ISBN 0-946888-39-6. Hardback, £70.00. This volume, to a far greater extent than the two previous titles, is a tool for conservationists, an important weapon in the battle to save the world’s threatened bird species. It describes the status of and the threats to the rarest birds in the world, and provides a fascinating biogeo- graphical view of these species. It is a book which you can open at any page and learn something from, for every species account is packed with information, and covers conserva- tion opportunities as well as threats. As a book for birdwatchers, it will be less popular than the two titles which came above it in the reckoning. Its price will deter many, even though the BB reviewer considered that ‘anyone with more than a passing interest in the world’s birds has a responsibility to [buy it]’, and some will choose simply to peruse it occasionally in a library. For all that, this work represents a true ornitholog- ical milestone, and is very worthy of a place in our top three this year. 82 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 81-84 BB/BTO Best Bird Book of the Year 2001 4th Raptors of the World By James Ferguson - Lees & David A. Christie. Illustrated by Kim Franklin, David Mead & Philip Burton. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. 992 pages; 1 12 colour plates; maps; line-drawings. ISBN 0-7136-8026-1. Hardback, £49.00. After the top three this year, there was some- thing of a gap in the points score before three more books which were extremely close in the voting, and should, arguably, be treated as ‘equal runners-up’ to the top three. In a year when the general standard was exceptionally high, this is still a fine achievement. The best of these runners-up, by a whisker, was Raptors, another monumental monograph from the Helm stable. The comments of scholarship, detail and ‘labour of love’ that we showered upon Sylvia Warblers are equally appropriate here, the last in particular, since this volume has had a gestation period of almost two decades, three years longer than that of the winner. Nowadays, it is hard to bi-eak new ground when publishing a mono- graph on non-passerines, especially since the publication of the Handbook of the Birds of the World , but Raptors contains a large amount of original information on species from various parts of the world. In addition, the assessment of the world population of every raptor species is something that has never been attempted before. HELM IDENTIFICATION CODES RAPTORS OF THE WORLD James Fcrjpuon-I er« anil David A. (.tiruiir lllu.iixicd bj turn hunklin, Dintd Uni mul Philip Buium 5th The Birds of Ecuador By Robert S. Ridgely & Paul J. Greenfield. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. Volume 1: Status, Distribution and Taxonomy; 848 pages. ISBN 0-7136-61 16-X. Volume 2: A Field Guide; 748 pages, 96 colour plates, 1,596 maps. ISBN 0-7136-6117-8. Paperback, £80.00 for both volumes (or £40.00 for Vol. 1 and £55.00 for Vol. 2 when bought individually). In many ways, The Birds of Ecuador is an ‘avi- fauna’ plus a standard field guide, and the judges felt that it deserved recognition for, in particular, the context of its achievement. The two volumes provide the only guide for a region with an immensely rich avifauna and, therefore, attend to so many gaps in existing knowledge with a single stroke. There is a great deal of originality in the information presented, partic- ularly with regard to the maps, if not the approach. The two-volume format favoured by the publishers has drawn some criticism, but those who have taken the guide into the field have reported that it ‘works’ — the acid test for a field guide. NOEL SnYHI-.R AND Jr. ^ Helen Snyder .h1 The CALIFORNIA CONDOR A Sag .1 of Natural History fsr Conservation 6th The California Condor By Noel Snyder & Helen Snyder. Academic Press, London, 2000. 410 pages; colour photographs. ISBN 0-12-654005-5. Hardback, £19.95. A conservation story which is scholarly, fasci- nating and shocking in equal measure, this book tells the history of the decline of the Cali- fornia Condor Gymnogyps californianus. Superbly illustrated, it documents one of the most fascinating bird-conservation stories there has ever been. This is one of the very few species which we can claim to have saved from extinc- tion, but the cost of leaving the diagnostic research, and the action, so late was enormous. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 8 1 -84 83 BB/BTO Best Bird Book of the Year 2001 ) 7th Albatrosses By W. L. N. Tickell. Pica Press, Sussex, 2000. 448 pages; maps; tables; diagrams; 52 colour plates. ISBN 1-873402-94-1. Hardback, £40.00. In some ways a more academic monograph than the others on our short-list this year, this book will nevertheless have widespread appeal since it draws attention to the conservation issues surrounding the albatrosses, and of which birdwatchers throughout the world have become aware in recent times. It is another extremely well-written monograph, and one which is highly deserving of a place on the bookshelves of anyone with an interest in seabirds. Its revisionary taxonomy was praised by the judges as a particular point in its favour. 8th A Field Guide to the Birds of South-east Asia By Craig Robson. New Holland, London, 2000. 504 pages; 104 colour plates. ISBN 1-85368-313-2. Hardback, £35.00. In similar vein to Volume 2 of The Birds of Ecuador, this guide to the birds of southeast Asia is not original in its approach, but is, nonethe- less, an excellent field guide which does what it sets out to do, and does it well. Southeast Asia is a deservedly popular area with European birders, and this field guide is of a sufficiently high standard to satisfy the vast majority of travellers. The lack of distribution maps was a major criticism, but the fact that this is a gen- uinely portable com- panion to a large region makes this omission more understandable. As well as the eight books selected for their special merit, a number of other titles also made the original short-list. In brief, and in alphabetical order of author, these were; Birds in Counties, written by David K. Ballance and pub- lished by Imperial College Press (a reference work which deserves great credit as a major contribution to British ornithology); Thrushes, by Peter Clement & Ren Hathway and pub- lished by Christopher Helm (a ‘traditional’ family monograph which stands out by virtue of its superb illustrations); Birders: tales of a tribe, written by Mark Cocker and published by Jonathan Cape (an entertaining and well- written review of the hireling scene in Britain, the first for over 20 years); Who Killed the Great Auk?, written by Jeremy Gaskell and published by Oxford University Press (an excellent read, tracing the demise of this charismatic seabird); and Important Bird Areas in Europe - priority sites for conservation, edited by Melanie F. Heath & Michael I. Evans and published in the BirdLife Conservation Series. The last book, like Threatened Birds of the World, is a conservation tool, and similarly it is another landmark volume. Since it deals with sites and habitats, there will perhaps be even fewer birdwatchers lining up to buy it for themselves, but it is still another major contribution in an outstanding year for ornithological publications. Finally, there is an honourable mention of a work which was not considered for the Award, but which has great merit nonetheless. We treat further volumes of a multi-volume series as relating to a single title, and the Handbook of the Birds of the World (edited by Josep del Hoyo, Andrew Elliott & Jordi Sargatal and published by Lynx Edicions, volume 6 of which appeared in 2001) has already received the accolade of ‘The “British Birds” Best Bird Book of the Year’, in 1992 (Brit. Birds 86: 569). We simply con- tinue to be so astonished by its quality that we wish to repeat that this latest volume yet again maintains the exceptional standards of that work. Boyer Riddington (BB), Colin Bibby (BTO), lan Carter (BB), Richard Chandler (BB), Peter Hearn (BTO) and John Marchant (BTO) do Chapel Cottage, Dunrossness, Shetland ZE2 9JH -A 84 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 81-84 Notes Grey Heron preying on Rabbit and Common Kingfisher On 25th April 1999, at a warren near Blakeney, Norfolk, my wife and I surprised a Grey Heron Ardea cinerea holding a half-grown Rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus, still live and kicking, by its neck. On seeing us, the heron struggled into the air with its catch, just managed to clear a hedgerow and landed by a puddle, whereupon the heron dunked the Rabbit and stabbed it a number of times before attempting to swallow it. The Rabbit was eventually gulped down head first, after which the heron, looking John Sparks Pineleigh , Church Road, Leigh Woods, Bristol BS8 3PG uncomfortably replete, took a sip or two of water and retired to the centre of a field to digest its meal. Further to this, in November 1998, at a lake near Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, my nephew, Paul Rusher, observed a Grey Heron seize and swallow a Common Kingfisher Alcedo atthis which had alighted on a low branch, within striking distance of the heron. I can find no account of Grey Herons taking this species. Grey Heron eating Rabbit On 5th May 1998, on flooded meadows near Swale NNR, Isle of Sheppey, Kent, I saw a Grey Heron Ardea cinerea struggling with a large prey item, which I noted with surprise to be a well- grown young Rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus. The heron dunked the wriggling animal twice in a pool, and then manoeuvred it head first into its bill. Three great gulps, a distended neck, and that was the last of the luckless lagomorph. BWP (Vol. 1) states that the Grey Heron usually catches prey by grabbing or stalking, and usually Martin Coath 77 Oakhill Road, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 1NU kills it before swallowing. Prey items are said to include small mammals such as Moles Talpa europaea, voles (Microtinae) and shrews (Soricidae), but there is no mention of Rabbits or similar-sized prey. It also seems unusual that the heron made no attempt to kill the Rabbit before consuming it. The whole episode lasted about a minute, and the moral for Rabbits would seem to be not to believe everything one reads in BWP. EDITORIAL COMMENT The above two observations are of interest because of the size of the mammal prey, and the fact that (at least in the latter case) it was alive when swallowed. There is a previous record of a Grey Heron swallowing a large Common Rat Rattus norvegicus [Brit. Birds 75: 181), while young Rabbits were mentioned as a prey item of this species by F. A. Lowe (1954, The Heron). The Grey Heron is an opportunistic feeder and will take birds of a variety of species; one was seen to catch, kill and swallow a Hoopoe Upupa epops in Oman (Brit. Birds 84: 57-58), but we are unaware of any records of Grey Herons taking kingfishers. Purple Heron following the plough The note by J. Ignacio Dies (Brit. Birds 92: 679) prompts me to record the following. In late August 1982, near Illmitz, by the Neusiedler See, Austria, my wife and I were cycling through an area of small fields which was waterlogged in places, following heavy thunderstorms. While watching flocks of Black-headed Gulls Larus ridibundus and Carrion Crows Corvus corone behind a tractor and plough, we noticed that a Purple Heron Ardea purpurea was also following the plough, striding along the furrows. As we watched, the heron seized a quite substantial rodent (it appeared to be a vole Microtus) and, with some effort but no apparent difficulty, © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 85-90 85 Notes > swallowed it. We were intrigued by the heron’s also by its apparent indifference to the noisy ability to swallow whole such a prey item, and tractor only a few metres ahead of it. Edward Mayer 28 Yale Court, Honeybourne Road, London NW6 IJG EDITORIAL COMMENT Although Grey Herons Ardea cinerea have been recorded following the plough (e.g. Brit. Birds 71: 270), we are not aware of any published observations of Purple Herons doing so. Nervertheless, there are verbal reports of the latter species behaving in this way. Raptors perching in close proximity Felipe Siverio recorded a female Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus and a male Eurasian Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus, in October 1989, perched 40 cm apart in a tree on Tenerife, Canary Islands (Brit. Birds 90: 190). Raptors perching in close proximity to one another, whether it be 40 cm or 140 cm, may not, however, be that uncommon a phenomenon in winter. On six occasions between 1991 and 1996, in west Galloway, Dumfries & Galloway, I observed different raptor species in winter perched close to one another on adjacent fence posts: two cases involved Common Kestrels and Merlins F. columbarius, and four involved Merlins and Eurasian Sparrowhawks. No reac- tion was shown by any of the species concerned. The situation usually arose when one raptor, having been displaced from a stob by another, simply perched on the next available stob. At their winter roosts, Merlins, Hen Har- riers Circus cyaneus and Short-eared Owls Asio flammeus will perch in close proximity on adja- cent fence posts with no apparent interaction between them (Scot. Birds 7: 24-49). Cade (1982, The Falcons of the World) also recorded Merlins and Sharp-shinned Hawks Accipiter striatus on the Yukon River, in Alaska, USA, making hunting flights from the same tree and returning to a perch close by. Perhaps one of the raptors in Tenerife had just been displaced by the other and took the next available perch, hence the close proximity. R. C. Dickson Lismore, New Luce, Newton Stewart, Dumfries & Galloway DG8 0A] Hobbies feeding on the ground On arriving at the Cotswold Water Park complex, Gloucestershire, soon after 09.00 hours on 13th May 1996, we noticed five raptors flut- tering, hovering and running about among vege- tation on the bank of one of the lakes. An individual would occasionally fly up above the vegetation, and we could then see that the raptors were Hobbies Falco subbuteo. The falcons were obviously pursuing insects, probably Common Blue Damselflies Enallagma cyathigerum , which were present in abundance at ground level throughout the complex. The morning was bright but cold, and, as the temper- ature increased, insects gradually rose into the air, followed by the Hobbies. By midday, there was a group of 16 Hobbies chasing dragonflies (Anisoptera) and damselflies above the site. During several other visits to the area, over a number of years, the temperatures were less cold, and more typical aerial feeding by Hobbies was observed. The falcons would typi- cally hunt at lower altitude in the morning, and gain height as the day warmed up, but we never again observed them hunting on the ground. L. P. Alder and C. Ettle 31 Hopton Road, Upper Cam, Dursley, Gloucestershire GL1 1 5PD EDITORIAL COMMENT Although ground-feeding is well known for this species (e.g. Brit. Birds 70: 76-77; Chapman, 1999, The Hobby), this is a good description of the phenomenon. Although the concentration of 16 Hobbies may seem unusually large, this species does gather locally in pre- breeding flocks; if this falcon continues to spread and increase in Britain, such gatherings may become a more common sight in this region. It is interesting to note that flocks of up to 100 and more occur in the African winter quarters. 86 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 85-90 Notes C Red Grouse chick eaten by sheep In the late afternoon of 25th May 1997, on Muggleswick Common, Co. Durham, I was watching a female Red Grouse Lagopus lagopus feeding with her eight small chicks. The moor is both grazed by sheep and managed (by burning) for grouse, and the brood was just one of three, all less than a week old, which were seen within a period of 30 minutes as they foraged in the patchwork of heather Calluna/ Erica and close-cropped turf. A female Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellus, her two- week-old chick and three sheep were also feeding close by. The grouse became highly visible as they moved on to the short turf, and one of the sheep, having looked up, ran for- wards, picked up a chick and ate it whole. The alarmed female grouse quickly removed her remaining chicks into the heather, but the sheep was prevented from taking a second only by my intervention. Furness (1988a, 1988b) reported previous instances of sheep eating live Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea and Arctic Skua Stercorarius para- siticus chicks on Foula, Shetland, and Red Deer Cervus elaphus eating live Manx Shearwater Puffinus puffinus chicks on Rhum, Inner Flebrides. In those cases, and in contrast to my observation, only skeletal parts (heads, legs or wings) of the chicks were eaten, and Furness suggested that the behaviour was probably a means of alleviating a mineral deficiency, perhaps of calcium, in the mammals’ diet. On both Foula and Rhum, calcium levels in the vegetation are low. The chewing of antlers and the bones of dead animals is a somewhat more common behaviour among ruminants, although Wallis- DeVries (1996) stated that such osteophagy occurs as a direct response to phosphorus defi- ciency, since calcium deficiency is rare. Furness (1988b) suggested that ruminants would eat live chicks only in areas with both mineral-deficient vegetation and high densities of ground-nesting seabirds. As the above observation shows, the behaviour may also occur on nutrient-poor moorlands where there are high densities of breeding grouse or waders (Charadriiformes). References Furness, R.W. l988a.The predation of tern chicks by sheep. Bird Study 35: 1 99-202. — 1 988b. Predation on ground-nesting seabirds by island populations of red deer Cervus elaphus and sheep Ovis. J.Zool., Lond. 216:565-573. WallisDeVries, M. F. 1996. Nutritional limitations of free- ranging cattle: the importance of habitat quality.]. Appl, Ecol. 33: 688-702. Dr Niall H. K. Burton British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU Arctic Tern chicks being fed by several adults During June 1998, a few pairs of Arctic Terns Sterna paradisaea were holding territory at Point of Ayre, Isle of Man. On 16th July, the Manx Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals received an Arctic Tern chick, about ten days old, from a member of the public, who mistakenly believed that the chick was being dive-bombed by gulls Larus. On 18th July, another chick 10-12 days old was found at the site, with at least three pairs of Arctic Terns in the immediate vicinity. It was decided to return the original chick (chick A, which at the time was thriving in captivity on a diet of tinned cat food) to the area, alongside the second chick (B), and the release took place on 24th July. Almost immediately, chick A was fed by several adult terns, and further observations revealed Chris Sharpe Manx Bird Atlas, Greenbank, 33 Mines Road, Laxey, that it was fed by a total of eight different adults over a period of ten minutes. Chick B was also fed by at least two adults at this time. Chick B was seen flying on 29th July, when chick A was at the point of fledging. BWP (Vol. 4) states, under Arctic Tern, that Tn several Spitsbergen colonies with only 1-2 surviving downy young, several adults appar- ently tended them indiscriminately . . . This pre- vented in older chicks by their voice recognition of parents’. Our observations indicate clearly that adults will tend young which are not related to them. It is surprising that there appeared to be an element of recognition, even though chick A had been absent for eight days, and that the latter was fed by adults almost to the detriment of chick B. Isle of Man British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 85-90 87 Notes High and low Green Woodpecker nest holes BWP (Vol. 4) gives the height of the nest hole of the Green Woodpecker Picus viridis as 1-5 m above the ground, while Gibbons et al. (1993) suggested that holes occur at 2-6 nr. Glue & Boswell (1994), from an analysis of BTO nest record cards, also found 2-6 m to be the typical range, with extremes of 0.6 m and 15.2 m. In spring 2000, two occupied holes were discov- ered at Elmstone, Kent, just 400 m apart, one higher and one lower than these extremes. The first of these was in a Grey Poplar Populus x canescens in a narrow strip of wood- land adjoining an orchard. Its height was calcu- lated by triangulation to be approximately 24 m, considerably higher than the previously recorded maximum. The other was within a commercial apple orchard. The diameter of the hole was 5.8 cm, and its base was only 36 cm from ground level. The diameter of the trunk at the level of the hole was 30 cm, and the height of the trunk to the first branch, above which the stems were far too narrow to contain a woodpecker hole, was 50 cm. Although a woodpecker was seen exca- vating and, some weeks later, emerging from the hole, the breeding attempt was thought to have been unsuccessful since no young were heard. In the following winter, the internal depth of the cavity was measured with a wire and found to be 28 cm. This is within the range of 20-107 cm (mean 38.1 cm) given by Glue 8c Boswell (1994), but it indicates that the base of the cavity was only about 8 cm above ground level. The presence of Green and Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major nests in apple trees on this farm is not unusual, although, with the use of dwarfing rootstocks and pruning, most trees are now no more than 3-4 m tall, and therefore too small to be used for nesting. Earlier methods of growing were such that some varieties, especially culinary apples, were up to 10 m tall and large enough for Great Spotted Woodpeckers to excavate nest holes in the branches, as well as the trunk. One remaining large ‘Bramley’ apple tree, however, has a Green Woodpecker nest hole at 1.6 m which was excavated in 1997 and used again in 1998 and 2000. Glue 8c Boswell (1994) described the re-use of nest chambers by all three British woodpeckers as only occasional. This part of east Kent has few woodlands and a paucity of large trees. The use by wood- peckers of nest sites which may be regarded as suboptimal elsewhere is not unexpected, espe- cially since, in the case of the Green Wood- pecker, local populations are larger than they have been at any time since at least 1962. We are grateful to David Glue, Norman McCanch and Don Taylor for help with the preparation of this note. References Gibbons, D.W., Reid, J. B., & Chapman, R. A. 1993. The New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland: 1 988- 1991. Calton. Glue, D. E„ & Boswell, T. 1994. Comparative nesting ecology of the three British breeding woodpeckers. Brit Birds 87: 253-269. Alastair J. K. Henderson and Andrew C. B. Henderson Island Farm, Garthorpe, Scunthorpe, Lincolnshire DN17 4AB EDITORIAL COMMENT David A. Christie has commented: ‘Although most woodpeckers appear to have a preferred height range for nesting, they are dependent on the presence of dead or dying wood in which to excavate their holes and, as a consequence, are constrained by the availability of suitable substrates within their home range. Nest holes are constructed in sites where the wood is sufficiently soft. In the context of the authors’ final paragraph, the observations recorded here are an excellent example of this.’ Great Spotted Woodpecker using a megaphone for drumming On 8th April 2001, at Tweseldown racecourse, Hampshire, I heard a Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major drumming close by. On looking for it, 1 found that it was, in fact, farther away than I had first thought. It was drumming on the base of a metal loudspeaker, part of the race- course public-address system. This comprised three horns fixed to a pole and arranged in a fan covering about 150 degrees. The woodpecker was standing horizontally on the base of the middle horn and drumming on the metal surface. Even more surprising than the choice of the metal sub- 88 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 85-90 Notes strate was the fact that the bird had chosen the latter was on a tree about 100 m away, and was horn that was pointing directly at another Great making a rather dull wooden response to the Spotted Woodpecker, probably a rival male. The vibrant, amplified drumrolls from the megaphone. John Eyre 3 Dunmow Hill, Fleet, Hampshire GU51 3AN EDITORIAL COMMENT David A Christie has commented as follows: ‘Several woodpecker species, and particularly the Great Spotted Woodpecker, use a variety of artificial substrates on which to drum. Metal surfaces are, in fact, utilised quite frequently for this purpose, the resultant sound being at times extraordinarily loud. While it seems unlikely that the individual described here had ‘pur- posely’ selected the horn that was directed at the other woodpecker, the effect was nevertheless clearly impressive.’ Yellow Wagtail feeding on berries of Elder On 29th September 1992, at the Wildfowl & Wet- lands Trust reserve, Slimbridge, Gloucestershire, I watched a number of small passerines feeding in a large, well-grown hedge along the West Finger. Eventually, the group reached a large, fruiting Elder Samhucus nigra, and a male Reed Bunting Emberiza schoeniclus perched on top of this and proceeded to feed on the berries. Almost immedi- ately, a juvenile Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava, one of a small group of this species feeding in a nearby flash, flew into the centre of the Elder, rather than perching on the top. After a few minutes, it returned to the flash, having eaten only berries and no insects while in the Elder tree. L. P. Alder 31 Hopton Road, Upper Cam, Dursley, Gloucestershire GUI 5PD EDITORIAL COMMENT Since Yellow Wagtails often perch on or in bushes, and occasionally take berries and seeds in their winter quarters (BWP Vol. 5), this is perhaps not wholly unexpected, but the observation is still worth publishing, and documents a food item not recorded in BWP. Pied Wagtail nesting in regularly used vehicle On 17th June 1998, staff at ‘Manx Bird Atlas’ received news of a pair of Pied Wagtails Motacilla alba which had built a nest in the engine of a Land Rover. The use of such unusual nest sites by this species is not uncommon, and nests on boats and motor cars in daily use have been recorded before (see e.g. Brit. Birds 55: 464- 465; 60: 486; 64: 544-545). In this particular instance, the vehicle was used daily, sometimes travelling up to 22 km on an individual journey. The owners of the vehicle first became suspi- cious after they had, on several occasions, observed the wagtail beneath the parked vehicle and jumping up on to the engine block. When the vehicle was driven away, the female remained close to the area where it was usually parked, often patrolling a nearby wall in a nervous manner. After noticing this routine several times, the owners looked under the bonnet and found a nest with four eggs between the radiator and the front grill. An attempt was made to relocate the nest on to a shelter under the vehicle, but the female did not accept this and the nest was replaced. The female continued to incubate the eggs, which hatched on 25th June, after which the owners ceased using the Land Rover. Four young fledged successfully on 7th July. Chris Sharpe Manx Bird Atlas, Greenbank, 33 Mines Road, Laxey, Isle of Man EDITORIAL COMMENT As the author points out, such nest sites are not unusual for this species. In this case, the very long periods during which the vehicle must have been absent, and the behav- iour of the female during those periods, are of interest. Perhaps even more remarkable are the instances of House Martins Delichon urbica nesting on ferry boats in Scandinavia and the English Channel (Brit. Birds76: 232-233; 78: 148-149); one of the ships made a regular nine-hour round trip of 240 km. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 85-90 89 Notes C Unusual form of distraction display by male Blackbird At about 18.00 hours on 14th May 1998, at West Bagborough, Somerset, 1 happened to surprise a male Blackbird Turdus merula which was feeding young in a nest on a ledge high in the porch of my cottage. The four young were five or six days old. I stood still while looking up at the nest as I was about to open my front door. Suddenly, the Blackbird flew down to land on the ground, where it collapsed about a metre from my feet. Its feathers were raised, and it remained in the same position for at least a minute, after which it very gradually stood up and then, when fully alert, flew off. No call was given. Subsequently, I watched both parents continuing to feed the young, which eventually fledged successfully. BWP (Vol. 5) notes that female Blackbirds with young in the nest may give distraction-lure displays, by running to and fro while in a crouched posture. I could not, however, find any mention of male Blackbirds attempting to distract while remaining collapsed on the ground, as described above. Dr A. P. Radford Crossways Cottage, West Bagborough, Taunton, Somerset TA4 3EG EDITORIAL COMMENT Members of the Notes Panel commented that this behaviour resembles ‘death-feigning’, which is usually an extreme response to a predator. It is perhaps surprising that it is not more regularly documented for such a common species. In this case, it is also strange that the male Blackbird had not become accustomed to the occupants of the house passing below the nest. Blue Tit pecking at Hedge Accentor corpse In April 2001, I noticed a freshly dead Hedge Accentor Prunella modularis lying on the patio outside my home in Maidenhead, Berkshire. At the same time, several tits Parus and Green- finches Carduelis chloris were foraging at the nearby seed and nut feeders. One of the Blue Tits P. caeruleus suddenly flew down to the corpse and began to peck around the neck and Colin Humphrey 20 Oldacres, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 1XJ face, jabbing its bill under the feathers. This behaviour continued for about a minute, before the tit returned to a hanging nut feeder. Later, 1 examined the dead Hedge Accentor and could find no significant damage to its skin, sug- gesting that the tit had been taking parasites rather than trying to eat the flesh or the eyes. EDITORIAL COMMENT The Blue Tit was most probably taking parasites; mites are recorded in the diet of tits (BWPV ol. 7). 90 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 85-90 Letters The impact of climate-related habitat loss on Arctic-breeding birds Those lucky enough to have seen the Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis near St Ives, Cam- bridgeshire, in September 2001 will be concerned to learn that this is one of the species thought to be most in danger from the effects of climate change on its Arctic nesting grounds. A recent report by Christoph Zockler and Igor Lysenko, from the World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, assesses the climate-related loss of habitat for Arctic-breeding waterfowl over the next century. Tundra-breeding Bean Geese Anser fabalis rossicus are most at risk (with a pre- dicted 76% loss of habitat), but other, more regular, visitors to Britain are also likely to be affected; these include Little Stint C. minuta (45% predicted loss), Curlew Sandpiper C. fer- ruginea (41%), Dunlin C. alpina (36%), Brent Goose Branta bernicla (16%) and Knot C. canutus (15%). Given that many of these species will suffer a double whammy (their wintering grounds will also be affected, through sea-level rise), or perhaps even a triple whammy (if their migration is made more difficult through changes in prevailing wind speed and direction), the effects of global climate change on Arctic species may be extreme. All of us who drove to see the Red-necked Stint at Somersham contributed in a small way to the probable future decline of its population. Transport emissions are now the fastest-growing category of ‘greenhouse-gas’ emissions in the UK. So, what is the solution? Does the RSPB rec- ommend that birdwatching stops now? Of course not, but we should be aware that global warming, perhaps more than any other environ- mental problem, is driven by many small indi- vidual decisions. One course of action which we can take, and one which helps salve my own con- science, is to sign up to a scheme which supplies energy from renewable sources to its customers. Dr Mark Avery Director of Conservation, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SGI 9 2DL Photographs of birds in the hand In reply to David Tomlinson’s letter {Brit. Birds 94: 442), I suggest that it is, in fact, high time that BB and similar publications made much greater use of in-the-hand photographs of birds. Mr Tomlinson states that he has no doubt that birds gripped by the legs for photography are terrified, but he does not present any evi- dence for his assertion. I would endorse all of the editorial comments published with his letter, and confirm that only a ‘settled’ bird will permit a photograph acceptable for publication. British bird-ringers, unlike other bird- watchers, are closely regulated in all their activi- ties, including any photography incidental to the ringing and identification process. Specifi- cally, the welfare of the bird must always be paramount; otherwise, the ringer may be subject to disciplinary action. Therefore, any photograph may be obtained only in circum- stances which do no harm whatsoever to the bird. In turn, the ringer is personally respon- sible for this, and is ultimately responsible to the Ringing Committee of the British Trust for Ornithology if the photograph is taken by a British-licensed ringer. The availability of cheap digital cameras makes it practical for ringers to take photographs of examples of unusual individual variation, races, or age-related plumages as a matter of routine, and without great cost. Publishing letters such as that from Ross McGregor {Brit. Birds 94: 440), concerning colour reproduction, stimulates discussion and debate which is useful in efforts to improve standards in ringers’ photography. Where appropriate, I should like to see BB promote publication of such photographs to illustrate papers, while a photo gallery of ‘diffi- cult’ plumages, species or races on a website would be a powerful tool for reference purposes. By extension of the original argument, that a photograph of a bird in the hand is a poor rep- resentation of reality, not then to use such material would imply that no description of bird calls should ever be published in BB, since it is only sound recordings that accurately rep- resent ‘real’ vocalisations. James Burgess 26 Chapel Lane, Costock, Loughborough, Leicestershire LEI 2 6UY © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 9 1 91 News and comment Compiled by Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches Opinions expressed in this feature are not necessarily those of British Birds Slender-billed Curlew added to the British List The British Ornithologists’ Union Records Committee (BOURC) has added Slender- billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris to Category A of the British List, following the acceptance of an individual seen and photographed at Druridge Bay, Northumber- land, during 4th-7th May 1998. This is probably the most important record ever consid- ered by the British Birds Rari- ties Committee (BBRC) and the BOURC, since it concerns a species which is threatened with global extinction and whose breeding grounds have never been found. Further- more, its occurrence in recent decades has been restricted to very irregular sightings at a small number of sites from south and east Europe east to Kazakhstan, and a handful of individuals which have win- tered more regularly at a single locality in Morocco. There has, however, been no verified record from the last site since February 1995. Consequently, the chances of this species appearing in Britain seemed impossibly remote. Further- more, the Northumberland individual, discovered and identified by Tim Cleeves, is considered to have been in first-summer plumage, proving that the species certainly bred somewhere in 1997, and giving some hope for its survival and conservation. The controversy sur- rounding the identification of such a rare and relatively unknown species prompted a more comprehensive, time- consuming and wide-ranging assessment than for any pre- vious record. BBRC member Jimmy Steele took on the Fler- culean task of amassing all available information on the species. This included con- sulting world experts, notably Didier Vangerluwe of the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Science, who has systematically examined and photographed most of the known skins in European collections, and who has a database of all records dating back to the nineteenth century and a collection of all known photographs. A file was then prepared which sum- marised all the information on the species, incorporating a collection of still photographs and video footage of the Druridge curlew. The assessment of the record entailed two circula- tions of BBRC, during which the possibility of the bird being a hybrid or an aberrant Eurasian Curlew N. arquata was considered. Once accepted, the record was then passed to BOURC, which discussed it in full at its meeting in December 2001. Typically, the BOURC conducts extensive research to assess the likelihood of any potential addition to the British List having escaped from captivity. Since there is no evidence that Slender-billed Curlews have ever been held in captivity, confirmation of the identification was the key matter upon which the record hinged. The outcome was a unanimous acceptance in Cate- gory A of the British List (species which have been recorded in an apparently natural state at least once since January 1950). This constitutes probably the most remarkable individual sighting in Britain in recent times. A detailed paper on the discovery and identification of the bird, the assessment process and its conclusions will be published shortly in British Birds. ‘ World Birdwatch’ One eagerly awaited publication at the ‘News and comment’ desk is BirdLife International’s World Birdwatch. This quarterly publica- tion brings you up to date on all the world’s bird conservation news and, in recent years, has increas- ingly kept the reader informed of the rediscovery of long-lost species, new species to science and (more regrettably) the extinction of certain species. The number of new species being discovered is still quite amazingly high; just when you think that your life list is reaching a greater percentage of the world list, along comes a batch of new ones. The arrival of the fourth issue of volume 23 (2001) set us looking back through the year’s issues to discover that 21 new bird species were documented, together with some very detailed national summaries, conservation actions and species accounts. Contact BirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge CB3 0NA. 92 © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 92-95 News and comment American Bittern in Essex 34. American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus, Saffron Walden Museum, Essex, 200 1 . J. K. Clayden /Saffron Walden Museum During research for the forthcoming Birds of Essex, the compilers visited Saffron Walden Museum, in December 1999. The first spec- imen examined was a Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris, but the second caused considerable excitement, for it was immediately identified as an American Bittern B. lentiginosus, a species not thought to have occurred in East Anglia. The specimen (plate 34) bore the label ‘shot at Wenden 1826’, Wenden being modern-day Wendens Ambo, near Saffron Walden, Essex. The plumage suggests that it was shot in spring. The specimen was donated from the collection of Jabez Gibson, a Trustee of the Museum, and was accepted as a female Great Bittern when the Museum opened, in 1835. Robert Miller Christy came to the Museum in 1883 to recatalogue the bird and mammal specimens, and evidence suggests that he suspected that it was an American Bittern. In 1890 he pub- lished The Birds of Essex, in which, following the Great Bittern records, he stated that ‘it is by no means improbable that some of the fol- lowing specimens would, on careful examination, prove to belong to a distinct species, the American Bittern ( B . lentiginosus), which, though a rare straggler in Britain, has occurred at least a score of times’. In the Museum’s Catalogue, the text records that ‘this bird according to the judgement of Mr H Seebhone is the American Bittern’ (the entry was originally handwritten in pencil, but was later overwritten in black ink, with Seebohm misspelt as Seebhone). It appears, therefore, that the publication of Christy’s book in 1890 encouraged Henry Seebohm to visit the Museum in about 1891 and to confirm the identification as Amer- ican Bittern, some 65 years after the bittern was shot. The record was announced in a local paper, The Saffron Walden Gazette, in 1892, but, with such a limited circulation, it did not reach main- stream ornithological circles. The BOURC considered the record, and announced in December 2001 that it had been accepted as the second record of American Bittern for Britain, fol- lowing a specimen obtained at the River Frome, Dorset, in 1804. Prospective authors of new county avifaunas should certainly make a visit to their local museum. Who knows what buried treasure lies therein? (Contributed by Nick Green) New member of the national bird-observatory network In January, at the annual meeting of the Bird Observatories Council, held in the comfortable surround- ings of the new observatory build- ings at Sandwich Bay, Kent, the application by Flamborough Head for accreditation as an official bird observatory was accepted. Flam- borough Head (North Yorkshire) becomes the 17th observatory in a network that is spread around the coasts of Britain and Ireland, from Fair Isle (Shetland) in the north to Portland Bill (Dorset) in the south and Cape Clear Island (Co. Cork) in the far west. The observatories’ main purpose is to monitor bird migration, and this is co-ordinated by the Bird Observatories Council. The importance of the data col- lected by the 17 observatories is being increasingly recognised, especially as concerns grow about the possible effects of climate change. The information amassed by the observatories shows, for example, that summer migrants are now arriving slightly earlier than they were a few years ago. At the meeting, Dick Loxton gave a short presentation on the results of his work on four species of migrants which are declining in Britain (Corn Crake Crex crex, Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur, Wryneck Jynx torquilla and Spotted Flycatcher Muscicapa striata), and we hope to include a summary of these analyses in British Birds soon. For further information, contact Peter Howlett, Secretary of the Bird Observatories Council, National Museums & Galleries of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff CF10 3NP; e-mail: peter.howlett@nmgw.ac.uk ( Contributed by Peter Howlett) New Recorder for Carmarthenshire Tony Forster is taking over from Rob Hunt as the new Recorder for Carmarthenshire. His address is Ffosddu, Salem, Llandeilo, Car- marthenshire SAW 7NS. British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 92-95 93 c News and comment > Ringers’ manual During 2001, we had cause to visit several bird-ringing stations and sites throughout Europe, including Britain. It was particularly pleasing therefore to receive, over the Christmas period, the latest copy of the Ringers’ Manual from the BTO. Compiled and edited by Chris Redfern and Jacquie Clark, this fourth edition is a worthy successor to the early ones, which started way back in 1965. Our bookshelf still contains that first edition, and it is to the BTO’s credit that the standards of British ringers have continued to improve and remain among the best in the world. In 2001, one of us (BS) witnessed several examples of bird-ringing overseas where at least partial adherence to BTO standards would have left a less uneasy feeling with the observers. The BTO is to be congratulated on running what is, without doubt, the world’s leading bird-ringing scheme; and long may it continue to do so. Contact the Ringing Unit, BTO, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU. New wagtail species honours Cambodian conservationist A new species of black-and-white wagtail from southeast Asia has been named after one of the region’s brightest young ornithologists who, tragi- cally, died in December 1999, having contracted cerebral malaria. The Mekong Wagtail Motacilla samveasnae commemorates Cambodian Sam Veasna, who was Head of the Provincial Wildlife Department in Siem Reap province, and who had already made a number of important contributions relating to his country’s birdlife. He discovered a significant wintering pop- ulation of Sarus Cranes Grus antigone in northern Cambodia and, while surveying for more cranes, he uncovered a population of the globally threatened Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis. The discovery has been documented in the latest Oriental Bird Club Bulletin (34: 56-59) by Colin Poole, Pete Davidson and Will Duckworth. See also www.orientalbirdclub.org Although specimens of the Mekong Wagtail were first collected on the Thai bank of that river almost 30 years ago, they attracted little attention, and were, in fact, misidentified as a subspecies of Pied Wagtail M. alba. The latter species, however, breeds no closer than northern Vietnam and north Laos. The only known avian endemic from the Mekong valley, the Mekong Wagtail is found along the lower stretches of the river in northeast Cam- bodia, southern Laos and northeast Thailand. Morphologically it most closely resembles African Pied Wagtail M. aguimp; there are photos on the World Conservation Society website http://wcs.org/ The newly named wagtail is not threatened at present, but there are fears that the situation could change dramatically if approval is given to any one of a number of proposals for the construction of a hydroelectric dam in the region, which could flood the bird’s breeding habitat. Moreover, since the species relies on stream flow from Thailand, Vietnam and China, only international co-operation will ensure its survival. New journal for Wales if you are interested in the environment and wildlife of Wales, you may wish to check out a new journal, Natur Cymru. The first issue of the journal, which is to be published three times a year, includes papers on Puffin Island, Red Squirrels Sciurus vulgaris, and the aftermath of foot-and- mouth. Details from Radnor Wildlife Trust, Warwick House, High Street, Llandrindod Wells, Powys LD1 6AG. New website for International Wader Study Group In 2001, the International Wader Study Group (IWSG) relaunched its own website, which can be found at www.waderstudygroup.org The IWSG is an association of amateurs and professionals from all parts of the world who are interested in Charadrii (waders or shorebirds). The interests of the group have diversified from its original focus, on ringing and migration-related studies, to embrace all aspects of wader biology. Proact update Proact, the international coalition of birders (see Brit. Birds 94: 608), is achieving impressive results on several fronts. A notable success in late November was an amendment of the Mining Law by the Slovak parliament, following sustained lobbying by Proact members. Proact was mobilised by the Slovak pressure group SOSNA, in order to protect the forest and lakes of the country’s limestone karst from quarrying. Slovak MPs agreed with the environmental groups, and voted by 102 to nil to give the karst greater protection. Hunters in Malta are beginning to feel the heat as Proact cam- paigner David Camilleri mounts a sustained letter-writing operation in the Malta Independent, warning the island’s tourist industry that enlightened holidaymakers will boycott Malta unless it stops its fellow countrymen from killing Europe’s migrant birds. In addition, like the RSPB (see page 95), Proact is working on behalf of migrants in Cyprus, too. Since the British Government, because of its permanent military presence on the island, has particular leverage with the Cypriot authorities, Proact will be lobbying the UK to stop the hunters from flouting the law within the British Sovereign Base Areas. The Proact website can be reached via http://proaction.tripod.com or www.proactnow.org 94 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 92-95 News and comment Mega birds We all have fantasy birds that we dream of seeing. In Britain, Siberian Rubythroat Luscinia cal- liope is surely high on many birders’ ‘Most Wanted’ list - and preferably alive. Others may covet exotic gems such as Gurney’s Pitta Pitta gurneyi or . . . Rook Corvus frugilegus. Yes, the first posting to the ‘Megabirds global bird alert’ newsgroup was Rook! The mailing list was set up by South African birder Trevor Hardaker, so that birders worldwide had a forum where they could share information on special birds in their own countries. Jeff Gordon, of Cyprus, was quick off the mark. The first Rook in Cyprus for four years was his megabird and attracted the island’s resident twitchers, whereas two wintering Wallcreepers Tichodroma muraria at a nearby beach were mentioned only in passing. On Fair Isle, Shet- land, another corvid is also a megabird, since there have been as many Magpies Pica pica as Siberian Rubythroats (one of each) recorded on the island. To join the Megabird newsgroup, send a blank e-mail to: megabirds - subscribe® yahoogroups.com > Songbird ‘ delicacy ’ not to holidaymakers’ taste At the time of writing (mid January 2002), we assume that many readers are currently sifting through piles of holiday brochures. This year, the RSPB is urging holidaymakers to give their potential hosts food for thought, in an attempt to reduce the hunting of migrant birds in Cyprus. An investigation by the Society suggests that millions of Robins Erithacus rubecula, Black- caps Sylvia atricapilla and other familiar species are being caught in mist- nets and on lime sticks each spring and autumn. After having their throat cut, the birds become the key ingredient of the local delicacy ‘ambel- lopoulia’ and are served up to diners at local restaurants. The dish is known to be widely available across Cyprus, despite the practice having been out- lawed many years ago. Bird-trappers are active on the outskirts of Ayia Napa, an area favoured by British tourists. So, the RSPB is asking those hol- idaymakers planning to visit Cyprus to help stop a massacre of songbirds by voicing their opposition to the illegal trapping and killing of birds on the island. The island’s authorities appear to have stepped up the arrests of trappers, thanks to pressure from the RSPB, but little action is being taken against the retailers who fuel this appalling trade. If you wish to express concerns about bird-trapping in Cyprus, write to: Mr Ioannis Cassoulides, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dem. Severis Avenue, Nicosia, Cyprus, or to Mrs Myrna Kreopas, High Commissioner, Republic of Cyprus, 93 Park Street, London W1Y 4ET. NEW A 2002 The largest open-selling exhibition of wildlife paintings and sculptures in the UK will be held in Liverpool, from 22nd March to 7th April 2002. The National Exhibition of Wildlife Art (NEWA) is being held in Road Range Gallery, Mann Island, Pier Head, Liverpool, and is open daily (admission is free). This is the eighth annual exhibition, and this year’s beneficiary will be the Wildfowl and Wetland Trust. For further information, contact Marion Tuffrey, telephone 01513-344167, or visit the website: www.newa.cwc.net Rarities Committee News — Election for 2002 member of BBRC Following the request for nomina- tions for BBRC membership pub- lished in the November issue of British Birds (94: 550), we have received one nomination. There will, therefore, be an election for the new member for 2002. The two candidates are John Sweeney and Martin Grey, both of whom are field birders of the highest order having a good knowledge of birding in Scotland. Both are keen supporters of BBRC and are widely considered to be at the forefront of modern birding. John Sweeney is the BBRC’s nominee. He is 40 and, although he has lived all his life in Scotland, he has visited nearly every part of Britain and Ireland and most of the bird observatories. He is well known to many birders in mainland Scotland and has found plenty of rare birds. His best finds include Black Duck Anas rubripes , Baird’s Sandpiper Calidris bairdii, Thrush Nightingale Luscinia luscinia and three Yellow- breasted Buntings Emberiza aureola. He has travelled extensively in the USA, Europe and North Africa, has been a ringer for 15 years and a member of the Clyde records panel for five years, and has published arti- cles on identification, distribution and other birding topics. Martin is 36, and was nominated by Eric Meek, the next Chairman of the British Ornithologists’ Union Records Committee, and seconded by Kevin Woodbridge, Chairman of the Bird Observatories’ Council. Born in Orkney, Martin lived in Northern Ireland for several years before returning to Orkney and, ulti- mately, North Ronaldsay. He has travelled extensively in North America, Europe and the Middle East, where he spent three months in Saudi Arabia monitoring passage shorebirds and trapping passerine migrants along the Gulf coast. He has been a member of the Scottish Birds Records Committee since January 1999, a joint compiler of the Orkney Bird Report from 1 998, and an identi- fication consultant to Birding Scot- land from 2000. He has published various papers on the identification and occurrence of rare birds. Among Martin’s memorable finds are Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler Locustella certhiola, Isabelline Shrike Lanius isabellinus and Pine Bunting Emberiza leucocephalos. County records committees and bird-observatory wardens vote in the election, which will take place in January, and we shall announce the results shortly. British Birds 95 • February 2002 ♦ 92-95 95 Monthly Marathon The thirty-first stage in this round of the competition was certainly difficult. Monthly Marathon photo number 183 {Brit. Birds 94: plate 315, repeated here as plate 35) clearly shows a small passerine, while the medium-length, slightly cleft tail, a rather fine bill and pale underparts all suggest a Phylloscopus warbler. The head pattern is relatively subdued. There is only a moder- ately well-defined eye-stripe, which extends from the base of the bill through the eye; it fades on the rear part of the ear-coverts, but is oth- erwise uniformly dark throughout its length. Above it, the supercilium is also fairly unremarkable, in both length and shape, although it also extends to the base of the bill, and perhaps even on to the forehead. The underparts exhibit a contrast between the breast and the belly. All these features, in combination, lead us to a choice between Willow Warbler P. trochilus and Common Chiffchaff P. collybita. The warbler appears to be singing and, since the trees are leafless but in bud, a spring date would be a reasonable assumption. True to 'mystery- pho- tograph tradition’, this is the season when silent individuals of this pair of species are most difficult to sep- arate. Thankfully, even though the wing tips are obscured and the crit- ical primary projection is not visible, there are a few additional clues. The forehead appears rather flat and backward-sloping, although this could be exaggerated by the angle of view. Nevertheless, the general head shape is not so neatly rounded as we might expect for a Common Chiffchaff, nor does the bird appear quite so pot-bellied as the latter. Although the bill is open, and its size and shape are dif- ficult to judge with confidence, it does appear reasonably stout and is undoubtedly extensively pale. There is no hint of the eye-cres- cents which are shown by many Common Chiffchaffs, while the ear-coverts appear almost hollow- centred. The supercilium behind the eye is rather too well marked for that species, but it is appro- priate for Willow Warbler. On the negative side, the toes do seem to be dark, but they can appear so on Willow Warbler and that feature is not conclusive either way. This Willow Warbler was photographed in Kent, by Richard Chandler, in April 1983. 36. 'Monthly Marathon'. Photo no. 1 86. Thirty- fourth stage in eleventh 'Marathon' or first stage in twelfth. Identify the species. Read the rules (see page 36), then send in your answer on a postcard to Monthly Marathon, c/oThe Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY or by e-mail to editor@britishbirds.co.uk, to arrive by 3 1 st March 2002. 35. Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus. Kent, April 1 983. For competitors in the 'Marathon’, this proved to be the most challenging obstacle for some months. Just over half of the entrants (53%) named the species correctly, with most of the rest opting for either Common Chiff- chaff (21%) or Iberian Chiffchaff P. brehmii (16%). Consequently, there has been some change at the head of the leader board. After a long-sustained run at the top, Peter Lansdown, who went for Common Chiffchaff, was finally caught out by this puzzle; we extend our com- miserations to him after such a fine effort. That leaves Andy Mears and Peter Sunesen to battle out the final stages, both of them now having a sequence of 18-in-a-row. lust behind our two leaders are Jon Holt (with 17) and Lou Cross (with 13), but Richard Patient, for- merly in sixth place, also fell at this hurdle, so that Robert Kelsh and Diederik Kok, each with six-in-a- row, are the next highest in the running. Paid Holt For a free brochure, write to SUNBIRD (MM), PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG 1 9 I DF. or telephone 0 1 767 682969 Sun bin I The best of hiixlwatrhing tours 96 © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 96 Richard Chandler Recent reports Compiled by Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan This summary of unchecked reports covers mid December 2001 to mid January 2002. Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Coly- ford (Devon), 28th-29th December, presumed same, over Wareham (Dorset), 30th December. Snowy Egret Egretta thula Ardrossan and Stevenston area (Ayrshire), 22nd December to 9th January, then Isle of Arran (Ayrshire), 13th- 14th January. Great White Egret Egretta alba Various localities in the vicinity of Great Budworth (Cheshire), 2nd- 15th January; Riccall (North Yorkshire), 8th- 15th January. Ross’s Goose Anser rossii Juvenile white morph still in north Norfolk, mostly between Wells and Docking, to at least 15th January. Red-breasted Goose Branta ruficollis Adult still in north Norfolk, until at least 15th January. Baikal Teal Anas formosa Male, Minsmere (Suffolk), to at least 29th December. Black Duck Anas rubripes Male, Barrow Harbour (Co. Kerry), until late December. Redhead Aythya americana Male still at Kenfig (Glamorgan), to at least 15th January. Black Kite Milvus migrans Gugh and St Agnes (Scilly), 15th December, presumed same Nanjizal Valley (Cornwall), 16th December, Sennen (Cornwall), 17th December, then again on St Agnes, 19th-20th December. Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius Pevensey Levels (East Sussex), 15th-23rd December. Spotted Sand- piper Actitis macularia Hanningfield Reservoir (Essex), 30th December. Bonaparte’s Gull Larus Philadelphia Millbrook Lake (Cornwall), 19th December to 15th 38. Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius, Pevensey Levels, East Sussex, December 200 1 . January. ‘American Herring Gull’ Larus argen- tatus smithsonianus Second-winter at Cobh (Co. Cork) throughout December; first-winter, Rossaveil (Co. Galway), to at least 26th December. Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea Adult, Dunnet Bay (Highland), 22nd-26th December; first-winter, Montrose Basin (Angus), 27th December to 4th January. Bohemian Waxwing Bombycilla garrulus Small 37. Great White Egret Egretta alba, Great Budworth, Cheshire, January 2002. © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 97-98 97 Mike McDonnell Mike Malpass George Reszeter George Reszeter Recent reports C ) 39 & 40. Adult Bonaparte's Gull Laru s Philadelphia Millbrook Lake, Cornwall, January 2002. influx, mainly into northeast England and central Scotland, including 85 in Wallsend (Northumberland), mid December, and 46 in Edinburgh (Lothian), to 20th December. Desert Wheatear Oenanthe deserti Niarbyl (Isle of Man), 5th- 15th January. Hume’s Warbler Phylloscopus humei Porthgwarra (Cornwall), 23rd December. Rosy Star- ling Sturnus roseus Adult, Stamford (Lin- colnshire), 22nd December; adult, Great Yarmouth (Norfolk), 1 4th- 1 5th January. Arctic Redpoll Carduells hornemannl Up to three, Titchwell (Norfolk), 15th December to 14th January. 4 1 . Adult Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea, Dunnet Bay, Highland, December 200 1 . HRare Bird News supplies all its information free to British Birds. Call 09063 888 1 I I for the latest, up-to-date news (28p/min cheap rate; 4 1 p/min other times; including VAT) Call 07626 923923 to report your sightings to the hotline 98 British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 97-98 Hugh Harrop Classified advertising RATES Text: 50p per word. Minimum cost: £10. Semi-display: Mono. £15 per see (width 40mm) or £32 per dec (width 85mm). Minimum 2cm. Series: 5% discount for 6, 10% discount for 12. (All rates exclude vat at 17.5%) Payment for all classified advertisements must be made in advance bv VISA, Mastercard or by cheque payable to British Birds. Copy deadline: 10th of the month. Contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd., 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2627. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BOOKS BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD. Visit our website for our online catalogue Visit our shop and see our extensive collection. Hawkridge Books, The Cruck Barn, Cross St, Castleton, Derbyshire S30 2WH. Tel: 01433 621999. Fax: 01433 621862. Email: books@hawkridge.co.uk. Web: www.hawkridge.co.uk RARE AND OUT OF PRINT books on Ornithology. Isabelline Books. Tel: 01326 210412. Fax: 0870 051 6387. HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION Scotland MORVERN (DRIMNIN) HOLIDAY COTTAGES. Beautifully situated by Sound of Mull. Superb walking and wildlife. No pets. Open all year £175-£205 fully inclusive. Tel: 01967 42 1308. Email: glasdrumtrust@aol.com Wales HOLIDAY COTTAGE TO LET in mid-Wales. Red Kite country, ornithologists’ paradise. From £160 per week. Phone Joan Morgan 01982 560402. BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS CUMBRIA, SOLWAY & LAKE DISTRICT Tours - 2 and 4 day BirdBreak tours led by local professional ornithologists. Pomarine skua, osprey, black grouse, black guillemot, barnacle & pink footed goose, peregrine falcons, puffins & lots of waders. Small groups collected at Carlisle station. Contact: BirdBreaks, Wallsend House, Church Lane, Bowness-on-Solway, Cumbria CA7 5AF. Email: birdbreaks@emgroup.org.uk; Website: www.emgroup.org.uk/birdbreaks. Tel: 016973 51055. BACK NUMBERS OF ALL leading ornithological and natural history journals, reports, bulletins, newsletters, etc. bought and sold. Catalogue details: David Morgan, Whitmore, Umberleigh, Devon EX37 9HB or www.birdjournals.com The original BIRDWATCHER’S LOGBOOK The most concise way to record your observations. Monthly, annual and life columns for 762 species, plus 159 diary pages. Send £7.45 inclusive P/P to: Coxton Publications, Eastwood, Beverley Rd, Walkington, Beverley, HU17 8RP. 01482 881833 MAPS! Ordnance Survey, UK, Overseas For helpful, specialist advice LATITUDE 27-28 The Service Road, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire EN6 1QA Tel: 01707 663090 Fax: 01707 663029 Email: enquiries@latitudemaps.demon.co.uk FOR SALE FIVE VOLUME SET OF Lars Jonsson Birds of.” (Penguin/Helm), all fine, Helm vol. in d/w, £125 ono; ‘The Dotterel’, Nethersole- Thompson, fine in d/w, £65 ono. Tel: 01629 650784. Email: jakeandtrev@hotmail.com. BIRDWATCH ISSUES 1-62 INCLUSIVE. Birding World, Vol. 2 number 10 to Vol. 9 number 9 inclusive. Yorkshire Birding, Vols. 1-5 inclusive. Offers. Buyer collects/pays postage (Norfolk). Tel: 01603 873229 or email: dreepham@yahoo.co.uk SWAROVSKI AT80HD TELESCOPE, 20-60x eyepiece, case, hideclamp, car window mount, SLR adapter. Reluctant sale, cost £1,499 - will sell for £799. Tel: 01275 847857. Email: daveburt@onetel.net.uk QUESTAR BIRDER TELESCOPE. Hardly used. Zerodur mirror and low reflective coatings. Additional eye piece, plus image errector. Cost new, over £4,000 - accept £2,300. Tel: 0115 972 8499. WANTED DESPERATELY SEEKING 6-10 old-sized British Birds binders (cordex ONLY). Nicholas Green, 020 7485 9280. Overseas PROVENCE, CAMARGUE. Two s/c cottages. Rogers, Mas d’Auphan, Le Sambuc, 13200 ARLES, France. Tel: (0033) 490972041, Fax: (0033) 490972087. SINEMORETZ, BULGARIA Villa Philadelphia is a cosy six-room Bulgarian-American Inn offering exclusive service and excellent opportunities for birding in a once closed region :www. villaphiladelphia.com Email:tours@villaphiladelphia.com Tel:2 15. 5 17. 7639 (USA), + 359. 88. 53. 56. 86 (BG). BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS KIMBERLEY, AUSTRALIA - BIRDING tours. Experienced, knowledgeable ornithological guide - George Swann. Bushwalking, 4WD safaris, coastal cruises. Small groups. Charters available. Kimberley Birdwatching, PO Box 220, Broome, Western Australia 6725 Tel/Fax: +61 8 9192 1246. Email: kimbird@tpg.com.au Web Site: www4.tpg.com.au/users/kimbird SAKERTOUR - THE CARPATHIAN Birding Company. Hungary, Slovakia, Romania. All Central European Specialities. Ten years of experience in professional guiding: Z. Ecsedi and J. Olah jr. extensive local contacts. H-4032 Debrecen, Tarjdn 6, Hungary. Tel/Fax: 36-66- 210390. Email: saker@axelero.hu www.sakertour.hu Updated Hungarian Birdnews. ELLERY ESTATE - MOST ATTRACTIVE choice of self-catering cottages and chalets situated on the shores of Loch Caolisport. While you are at Ellery you are free to go wherever you please. There are hill walks, many lochs and burns where you can fish, numerous wildlife, birds, flowers, etc. The perfect location for the true country lover. For a full colour brochure please write to: The Booking Office, Ellery 7, Lochgilphead, Argyll PA31 8 PA. Tel: 01880 770232. Fax: 01880 770386. Email: info@ellery.com BIRDWATCHING 426 Spirits “ Srl lanka 26 Endemics H|GH ELMSTRAVEL (PVT) limited Tours tailor-made 02’3rd"a'aR°ad , Sri Lanka tosuityour Tei.94 1 86i 465/94 1 861 466 Fax. 94 1 861 464 requirements e-mail, highelms@itmin.com www.highelmstravel.com MEXICO 100 ENDEMIC BIRD SPECIES Expert level small group tours, and custom trips for private parties. USA based LEGACY TOURS, guided by Michael Carmody: Fax: (509) 624-1885 Email: jigsaw@winstarmail.com References from top world listers. Come to Donana, the wild heart of Spain. Professionally led birding - botany excursions. Small groups and individuals. All year round. Charming guesthouse facing the marshes. Transfer from airport. Personalised stays. Full board from £22. All inc. 6 days from £200. "RoOeuui ud. Aguila Imperial 1 50, 2 1 750 El Rocio, Huelva, Spain. Tel: +34 959 442466/620 964369. Fax: +34 959 442466. E-mail: donana@sistelnet.es Information and prices: www.sistelnet.es/donana BIRD EXPEDITIONS Russian and Siberia Red-breasted geese: 16/2-24/2 Capercaillie & Azure Tit: 13/4-21/4 Volgadelta 8c steppe: 7/5-18/5 Altai, South Siberia: 6/6-22/6 Siberian Far East: 19/5-4/6 Central Siberia, Yenisey: 31/5-22/6 Arctic Siberia, Ross’ Gull: 29/6-12/7 Bear, Wolf, birds: 10/8-18/8 Siberian White Crane: 28/9—6/10 Bird Expeditions Tel: +31 620 400 003 Email: info@birdexpeditions.nl Website: www.birdexpeditions.nl Waterstraat 46-48, 6573 AD Beek, The Netherlands For classified advertising contact Ian Lycett Tel: 020 7704 9495 ian.lycett@birdwatcl^.co.uk BIRD NEWS CELTIC BIRD TOURS TOURIST BOARD APPROVED OPERATORS OF BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS THROUGHOUT WALES, UK AND OVERSEAS Why not join our Finland tour 26th May-5th June 2002 at the amazing price ot £1499.00 inclusive of all flights. Expert local guides for those difficult to find owls, woodpeckers and other eastern/tundra specialities. Limited availability. Other featured destinations include: Camargue & Southern Alps 1 8th— 25th May £1025.00. Eastern Austria & Slovakia 13th— 2 1 st May £999.00. Hungary 1 st— 8th June £975.00 and Romania 2nd-9th September £975.00. Closer to home we will again be running Irish Sea Pelagics in August and September £55.00 and specialist weekend breaks in Wales/UK for a wide selection of species. Whether you wish to boost your year list, find that missing UK tick or simply enjoy watching birds in beautiful and undisturbed surroundings, our programme will have something to offer you. For further details contact Neil Donaghy at rite address below: 84 Coitv Road, Bridgend, CF31 1LT Tel: 01656 645709 Mobile: 07971 983227 WALLS \CYA\RU E-mail: birds@celtictours.org.uk Burgess World Travel EILAT & SOUTHERN ISRAEL (AUTUMN/WINTER/SPRING) ★ A better quality Israel birding experience assured. ★ Tours by a team of dedicated professionals. ★ Ground prices from 160 GB pounds sterling- 240 US dollars ★ Birds on your doorstep! Almost 300 species recorded at Lotan. ★ Northern Israel itineraries from 5-8 days. ★ Perfect for self-guided birders. ★ Customized itineraries for tour companies. ★ Full details on request at www.birdingisrael.com ★ Contact - James Smith/David Dolev at Kibbutz Lotan, Doar Na Chevel Eilot, 88855 ISRAEL. Fax: + 9728-6356-937. Tel: + 9728-6356-935. ★ Email birdlotan@lotan.ardom.co.il J Birdwatching Breaks The finest in birding holidays led by professional leaders and local experts to: ★ Armenia ★ Bulgaria ★ Canada (Alberta, Churchill & Manitoba. Long Point) ★ ★ Chile ★ China (Sichuan) ★ Corsica ★ Costa Rica ★ Cuba ★ Dominican Republic & Puerto Rico ★ Finland ★ France (Pyrenees. La Brennei ★ Ghana ★ Holland ★ ★ Hungary ★ India (North & Himalayas. South & Andaman Islands) ★ Japan ★ ★ Korea ★ Malaysia ★ Mexico ★ Morocco ★ Nepal ★ Senegal ★ South Africa ★ ★ Spain (Galicia. Picos de Europa) ★ Sri Lanka ★ Sweden (Oiand) ★ Uganda ★ ★ United Kingdom ( Islay ) ★ USA ( Arizona, Colorado. New Ifl Engand & Florida ★ Texas & Washington Slate ★ Venezuela ★ TT? Check our website for special offers www.birdwatchingbreaks.freeserve.co.uk E-mail: m.finn@birdwatchingbreaks.freeserve.co.uk Tel: Of 227 740799 Fax: Of 227 363946 Birdwatching Breaks, 26 School Lane, Herne, Kent CT6 7AL to PAGERS and MOBILE PHONES Up to the minute bird news wherever you are. Local news, national news. Rare Bird Alert 01603 456789 Binoculars & Telescopes Top Makes , Top Models, Top Advice, Top Deals, Part Exchange Show Room Sales 01925 730399 "TftsiiC Oxden. 07000 247392 Credit! debit cards accepted !al( price calc!* British Birds has for sale the following back issues: Volumes 89 (1996) & 90 (1997) incomplete volumes - various issues Volumes 91-93 (1 998-2000) complete volumes Individual issues from all volumes: £3.00 Rarities issues from all volumes: £5.00 Complete volumes: £20.00 UK £25.00 Overseas Payment can be made by credit card or cheque. Contact: British Birds, Back Issues, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel: +44(0) 1 580 882039 during office hours only: Mon-Fri 9.00am - 5.30pm or Email: accounts@helm-information.co.uk * Offer extended until 31st March, 2002 me to BB Books, the new mailorder service from British Birds. In the February issue we are pleased to present some 190 over 60 of these at special offer prices (denoted in red) - including the latest HBW. >oks included in BB Books are recommended by British Birds as reliable, good value and important additions to any etcher's library. We aim to provide the most prompt, efficient and friendly service possible. aks fulfilment is provided by NHBS Ltd in association with British Birds - each sale benefits the journal, so please take tage of our excellent selection. The Complete Guide to the Birdlife of Britain Hayman & Hume jf New edition of this comprehensive guide to the 430 species that . live in or regularly visit Europe. T □ #121164 21.00 2590 hbk Threatened Birds of Asia BirdLife Provides incredibly detailed information on the 665 most threatened bird species found in Asia. □ 2 Volume Set #120107 55.00 hbk □ CDROM #125996 12.00 cd »t || A Field Guide to the Birds of Korea Woo-Shin et at. A magnificent field guide covering the whole of the Korean peninsula. The illustrations (depicting all of the 450 species recorded in the Peninsula up to August 2000) are superb, with species descriptions and maps given on facing pages. □ #119805 20.95 -24.96 pbk | The Atlantic Gannet Nelson r i . Fully revised and updated, this new edition incorporates new material about changes in British and world populations, recent Vrtl work on foraging behaviour involving satellite observations, ™ migratory behaviour and breeding biology. □ #123245 20.50 2490 hbk e? and Western Palearctic in Counties - Ballance - #106513 1 04.00 >of Europe - Jonsson - #49559 1 2.99 1 5.99 cdwatching Guide to Eastern Spain - #108192 10.95 'of Israel -Shirihai - #21254 78.95 of the Western Palearctic - Concise -Snow & Perrins- #50548 49.50 .'of the Western Palearctic - Complete 250.00 ". umes) - #32807 > s Bird Guide - Svensson et al. - #1 13220 1 2.99 1 6.99 s Bird Guide: Large Format - #106883 22.99 29-99 >of the Western Palearctic - Complete (CD) 1 16.33 ' ip & Perrins - #28660 Atlas of European Breeding Birds - #53830 59.95 of Britain & Europe - Peterson et al. - #22327 19.99 GGuide to Birds of the Middle East - Porter et al. - #45653 31.95 n$g Birds in Britain - Lee GR Evans - #123780 19.95 Mew to Britain & Ireland - Palmer -#111106 25.00 oook of Bird Identification Beaman & Madge #17061 55.00 65:09 ■ ical Atlas of Breeding birds in Britain 31.95 s and - Holloway - #44008 • fication Guide to European Passerines - Svensson - #889 36.00 I 'fication Guide to Non-passerines - Baker - #29342 19.50 ntant Bird Areas of Europe - Heath & Evans - #101969 75.00 Macmillan Birder's Guide to European and 17.99 e Eastern birds - #52543 Macmillan Field Guide to Bird Identification - #24237 14.99 \tlas of Breeding Birds - Gibbons et al. - #20923 53.95 e 9 to Watch Birds in Cumbria, Lancashire 12.99 ! heshire - Helm - #65057 eto Watch Birds in Devon and Cornwall - Helm - #119385 14.99 3 to Watch Birds in Dorset, Hampshire and 14.99 e of Wight - Helm - #120343 ej to Watch Birds in E Anglia - Helm - #125992 1 4.99 to Watch Birds in The E Midlands - Helm - #53088 12.99 5 to Watch Birds in Europe and Russia - Helm - #105248 16.99 ■>» to Watch Birds Herefordshire, Shrops, 12.99 Warwickshire, Worcs - Helm - #6S0S9 o ; to Watch Birds in Ireland - Helm - #29509 12.99 ei to Watch Birds in Italy - Helm - #35882 12.99 •' ; to Watch Birds in Kent, Surrey and Sussex 12.99 - 1 - #65058 e ; to Watch Birds in The London Area - Helm - #44408 1 2.99 i to Watch Birds in NE England - Helm - #24053 12.99 ? to watch Birds in North and East Spain - Helm - #85717 14.99 ; to Watch Birds in Scotland - Helm - #64580 1 2.99 ; to Watch Birds in Somerset, Avon, Gloucs 12.99 h;s - Helm - #2894 hbk pbk pbk hbk hbk hbk pbk hbk CD hbk hbk hbk pbk hbk hbk hbk pbk pbk pbk hbk pbk hbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk pbk Field Guide to Australian Birds Morcombe This guide was 14 years in the making, written and illustrated by Michael Morcombe, and is one of the most comprehensive field guides to Australian birds available. □ #122064 23.95 pbk Birdwatching Guide to Oman Eriksen et a I The site guide section of this excellent new birdwatching guide covers over 60 of the Sultanate's top sites - each including a detailed map, information on habitats, access and a complete species list. □ #126092 20.00 pbk □ Where to Watch Birds in Thames Valley and the Chilterns (NYP 04/2002) - Helm - #125993 □ Where to Watch Birds in Wales - Helm - #101643 □ Where to Watch Birds in Yorkshire - Helm - #69139 14.99 pbk 14.99 pbk 14.99 pbk North America □ A Birder's Guide to Florida - #779 □ A Birder's Guide to the Rio Grande Valley - #100616 □ A Birder's Guide to SE Arizona - #44527 □ A Birder's Guide to S. California - #86478 □ Collins Pocket Guide: Birds of N. America - #81054 □ Field Guide to the Birds of N. America 9.99 - National Geographic - #8871 1 □ I/D Guide to N. American Birds Part 1 - Pyle - #75330 □ North American Bird Guide - Sibley - #106918 20.99 □ The Sibley Guide to Bird Life and 8ehaviour - #124065 24.50 spr 24.50 spr 22.95 spr 24.50 spr 16.99 pbk -4*99 pbk 29.99 pbk *5:00 pbk 35.00 hbk South & Central America & Caribbean □ The Birds of Ecuador vol 1 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #21379 □ The Birds of Ecuador vol 2 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #117744 □ The Birds of Ecuador, 2-volume set - #118677 □ Birds, Mammals & Reptiles of the Galapagos #86419 □ Birds of the West Indies - Raffaele et al. - #69140 28.99 □ Birds of Southern S. America 14.99 - de la Pena & Rumboll - #66504 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Peru - Clements et al - #63442 □ Guide to Birds of Costa Rica - stiles et al - #4386 □ Guide to Birds of Trinidad & Tobago - French - #14770 □ Where to Watch Birds in Mexico - Howell - #85698 55.00 pbk 40.00 pbk 80.00 pbk 16.95 pbk ■95*0 hbk -4999 pbk 40.00 pbk 40.00 pbk 32.00 pbk 19.99 pbk Africa, Middle East & Indian Ocean Islands □ The Birds of Africa vol 1 - Fry et al. - #571 □ The Birds of Africa vol 2 - Fry et al. - #572 □ The Birds of Africa vol 3 - Fry et al. - #2780 □ The Birds of Africa vol 4 - Fry et al. - #10567 □ The Birds of Africa vol 5 - Fry et al - #19103 □ The Birds of Africa vol 6 - Fry et al. - #19104 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - #40871 □ Birds of Madagascar: a Photographic Guide - #54245 □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of Eastern Africa - #43706 □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of S Africa - #86446 □ Birds of East Africa - Stevenson & Fanshawe - #22326 □ Birds of the Gambia & Senegal - Barlow et al. - #31919 □ Field Guide to Birds of Kenya & N. Tanzania - #85718 □ Important Bird Areas in Africa and Associated Islands -#120103 84.00 130.00 hbk 84.00 130.00 hbk 84.00 130.00 hbk 84.00 1 1 5.00 hbk 84.00 120 00 hbk 92.00 1 15.00 hbk 33.99 A Pi r\r\ \J\j hbk 23.50 ~l Q AA 4U.VV hbk 14.99 -4999 pbk 14.99 9999 pbk 23.99 29.95 hbk 23.99 ~l O AA tu.w hbk 13.99 1 \J. -7 J pbk 55.00 hbk See BB Books online at www.nhbs.com/bb-books J Important Bird Areas in Uganda • RSPB, Byaruhanqa et al, - #124739 J Mammals of Madagascar - Garbutt - #54246 J Newman's Birds of Southern Africa - #115772 3 SASOL Birds of Prey of Africa & its islands - #85607 3 SASOL Birds of Southern Africa - #69110 16.00 pbk 25.00 ~>rs nn JU.UU hbk 12.99 0509 pbk 15.99 0909 pbk 15.99 0909 pbk Asia & Pacific 3 Checklist of Birds of the Oriental Region - #54331 3 Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands - #70343 14.99 3 Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - Grimmett et al - #69141 3 The Birds of Japan - #10075 3 Field Guide to Birds of Bhutan - #97388 3 Field Guide to the Birds of China - #101745 23.99 3 Field Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #66407 3 Field Guide to Birds of Nepal - #107846 3 Field Guide to the Birds of SE Asia - #64016 26.50 3 Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka - #83310 23.99 3 Field Guide to Birds of W Malaysia & Singapore #83306 23.99 3 Guide to the Birds of the Philippines - #101746 27.99 3 Guide to the Birds of Thailand - #9945 3 Guide to the Birds of Wallacea - #31250 3 Field Guide to the Birds of Seychelles - #i 161 is 3 Birdwatchers' Guide to India - #82704 3 Mammals of the Indian Subcontinent - #80720 1 3.95 10.00 pbk 0*09 pbk 55.00 hbk 40.00 hbk 16.99 pbk -2909 pbk 25.00 hbk 19.99 pbk -3500 hbk -2005 pbk -92:50 pbk 0405 pbk 45.00 hbk 41.00 hbk 25.00 pbk 18.75 pbk -4905 pbk Australasia 3 8irds of New Guinea - #1683 3 Collins Field Guide to Birds of Australia - #88226 1 4.99 3 Complete Guide to Finding Birds of Australia - #53612 3 Field Guide to Birds of Australia-Simpson a Day- #107606 1 9.99 3 Hand Guide to the Birds of New Zealand - #116574 15.50 3 HANZAB vol 1 - Marchant S Higgins - #10556 3 HANZAB vol 2 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10667 3 HANZAB vol 3 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10668 3 HANZAB vol 4 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10669 3 HANZAB vol 5 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10670 35.00 pbk -4909 pbk 14.95 pbk -24:99 pbk -49:50 pbk 150.00 hbk 72.50 hbk 75.00 hbk 135.00 hbk 125.00 hbk World 3 Birds of the World: a checklist - Clements - #101888 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 1 - #17555 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 2 - #17556 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 3 - #17557 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 4 - #17558 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 5 - #17559 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 6 - #17561 3 Handbook of Birds of the World vol7 - #17562 3 HBW volumes 1-7 set - #127049 3 Threatened Birds of the World - BirdLife - #110198 3 World Bird Species Checklist - Wells - #77401 35.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 89.00 1 10 OO hbk 623.00 770.00 hbk 70.00 hbk 29.50 hbk Monographs 3 Albatrosses - Ticked - #101886 3 Buntings & Sparrows - Byers et al. - #21255 3 The California Condor - Snyder 8 Snyder - #105565 3 Crows & jays - Madge 8 Burn - #97387 3 Cuckoos, Cowbirds & other cheats - Davies - #104272 3 Raptors of Europe, Middle East & N. Africa - Clark 8 Schmitt - #54599 40.00 hbk 23.50 28.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 16.99 pbk 24.95 hbk 21.50 -26:50 pbk □ Finches & Sparrows - Clement et al. - #97396 □ The Golden Eagle - Watson - #53818 □ The Great Auk - Fuller - #101175 □ Gulls: A guide to identification - Grant - #580 □ Swallows & Martins - Turner 8 Rose - #3929 □ The Hobby - Chapman - #103400 □ Munias and Mannikins - Restall - #54237 □ The Mute Swan - Birkhead 8 Perrins - #1165 □ New World Blackbirds - Jaramillo 8 Burke - #82707 26.25 Q New World Warblers - Curson et al - #29510 20.99 Q Nightjars - Cleere - #65487 □ Nightjars & their Allies - Holyoak - #105584 □ The Nuthatches - Matthysen 8 Quinn - #69079 □ Owls - Konig et al - #66408 □ Parrots - Juniper 8 Parr - #65486 29.50 □ The Peregrine - Ratcliffe - #858 □ Pigeons & Doves - Gibbs et al. - #66403 31.99 □ Pittas, Broadbills and Asities - #29868 21.50 □ Rails - Taylor 8 van Perlo - #66402 26.25 3 Raptors of Europe and the Middle East Forsman #55844 23.95 □ Raptors of the World - Ferguson-Lees et al. - #5601 3 The Red Kite - Carter - #115639 3 Seabirds: An Identification Guide - Harrison - #851 24.99 3 Seabirds of the Word: A photographic guide - Harrison - #63122 □ Shorebirds - Hayman et al. - #554 24.99 □ Shrikes - Lefranc 8 Worfolk - #54240 20.99 3 Shrike & Bush-Shrikes - Harris 8 Franklin - #105227 28.99 3 Skuas & Jaegers - Olsen 8 Larsen - #63425 3 Starlings & Mynas - Feare 8 Craig - #82706 24.00 3 Sunbirds & Flowerpeckers - cheke 8 Mann - #66414 3 Swifts - Chantler 8 Driessens - #86417 3 Sylvia Warblers - Shirihai et al. - #107849 3 Thrushes - Clement etal. - #107850 28.99 3 Tits, Nuthatches & Treecreepers - Harrap 8 Quinn - #13707 22.50 3 Toucans, Barbets and Honeyguides - short 8 Horne - #101743 3 Tundra Plovers - Byrkjedal 8 Thompson - #69080 3 Warblers of Europe, Asia & N. Africa - Baker - #65060 24.00 3 Wildfowl - Madge 8 Burn - #2621 22.50 3 The World of the Hummingbird - Burton - #124511 3 Wrens, Dippers & Thrashers - Brewer - #66416 19.99 31.95 45.00 25.95 -2*0 9 22.50 28.00 15.95 ICAfl jTTtU -2*09 30.00 50.00 25.95 35.00 35 QQ 36.95 ~>q An jO.W -1 C AA CD.W 35 QQ -2995 49.00 22.50 -2909 15.99 -2909 -ir AA 4- J .Uv 7 l r\r\ J J v/u 24.00 3TAA J L VU 37.00 28.00 60.00 ic nn j“.WV -2909 60.00 29.95 1 1 An Jt.w -2909 27.95 35.00 Recordings & Videos □ African Bird Sounds, 2-volume set - chappuis - #1 19048 141.00 159.95 North Africa and Atlantic Islands, West and Central Africa 3 Bill Oddies's Video Guide to British Birds - #98805 1 7.95 3 The Birds of Britain and Europe, 4-Video Set - #39466 49.94 3 Bird Songs and Calls of Britain and Europe 46.94 (Complete 4 CD Set) - #63342 3 Eastern Rarities: The Birds of Beidaihe - #86435 1 7.95 □ The Large Gulls of North America - #100756 1 7.95 3 The Raptors of Britain and Europe - video - #49316 17.95 3 Sound Guide to Nightjars & related Nightbirds - #82371 14.99 3 A Sound Guide to the Owls of the World - #84226 24.99 3 The Warblers of Britain and Europe - Video - #86434 1 70S Miscellaneous 3 Birders - tales of a tribe - Cocker - #120708 1 5.99 □ Who Killed the Great Auk? - Gaskell - #111124 15.50 18.99 BB binders are still available from Subbuteo Books, tel: 01743 709420 Prices quoted in £ (UK Sterling). All special offer prices are valid only for February 2002, other prices quoted are subject to any publishers increases and all sales subject to NHBS Ltd Terms & Conditions (available on request). VAT is included in the price of CDs, Videos etc as applicable. Make all cheques and POs payable to NHBS Ltd. Payment can also be made in US$ & C, please contact customer services for details. Orders are normally despatched promptly from stock, but please allow up to 21 days for delivery in the UK, longer if abroad. Name Address Postcode Subscriber No. Email Please sign here Please debit my Visa/Mastercard/Switch/AMEX Switch - Start date | _|_ | / |_|_| Issue No AMEX - Start date Telephone Goods total £ P&P total £ Total £ Expiry date UJ/I-U _U / l-U oH-U-l-l Standard Service (books) postage 8> packing charges and delivery times Special overseas postage rates applv to sets & heavy items Video Maps/CDs Over In transit (Per (Per Up to $nd £5.00 including £10.00 £30.00 £45.00 £65.00 £100 £100 times (from despatch) item) item) United Kingdomf 1.00 £2.00 £4.00 £4.50 £5.50 £7.50 £7.50 3 days £2.00 £1.25 Europe £1.50 £4.00 £5.00 f6.50 £8.50 £10.50 11% 5 days £2.50 £1.50 Rest of World £2.00 £4.50 £6.00 £7.00 £10.00 16% 16% 20 days £3.00 £2.00 Please send order to: BB Books, do NHBS Ltd, 2-3 Wills Rd, Totnes, Devon TQ9 5XN, UK !■ i. i. a. - - ■ - /■> hl h . h 1, hi ’ hi h . hi h h , h , h f, h h i h ■ h;|< hlj h 4 p i h ) h [ h f hi 4 hi h h. hill h hP hit hi* ■ he hi ( V V ( V V V ( 0 vl ht hf ■ • I i 5* £i^TL ' a Kaikoura, locate^ on the East Coast of the spectacular? South Island of New Zealand offers wonderful opportunities for nature lovers to enjoy a variety of marine wildlife including a large variety of seabirds. A host of pelagic birds can be found just minutes offshore due to the close proximity of the deep Kaikoura Canyon. Enjoy close at hand an array of Albatross, Petrels, Shearwaters, Terns, Gulls and more. Trips 3 times daily. Duration 3 hours. Cost: Adult $60 -Child $35 Web: www.oceanwings.co.nz Email: info^oceanwings.eo.nz Fax 0064-3319-6534 brochureline 0117 9375 689 • email wildinfo@wildwings.co.uk www.wildwings.co.uk fS) advice & bookings 0117 9658 333 FAIR ISLE BIRD OBSERVATORY Join us at one of the worlds most renowned Bird Observatories. Open mid April to late October Fair Isle is famous for over 250,000 seabirds of 1 7 species and a wealth of spring and autumn migrants. Accommodation still available for Spring, Summer and for early September and October 2002. The most recent Octobers have produced star rarities such as Harlequin Duck, Lanceolated Warbler, Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler, Pechora Pipit, Brown Shrike, Pine Bunting, Rustic Bunting and Black-faced Bunting, as well as more common rarities (OBP, Short- toed Lark, Spotted Crake, Richards Pipit, Bluethroat, GG and RB Shrikes, RB Fly, Barred and YB Warbler, Little Bunting, etc). Experience our friendly welcome, comfortable accommodation, good home cooking and spectacular island scenery. For a free brochure contact: Bookings Secretary (BB), Fair Isle Lodge, Fair Isle, Shetland ZE2 9JU Tel: 0 1 595 760 258 E-mail: fairisle.birdobs@zetnet.co.uk Website: www.fairislebirdobs.co.uk British Birds — forecasts — For a detailed weather forecast of any region (today and the week ahead) 09068 I I 00 14 For synoptic weather charts by fax (today and tomorrow) 09065 200 229 & Information Supplied by I (ffi The Met Office *>r<* 0819 calls are charged at 50p per minute. 0897 fax calls are charged at £1.50 per minute (synoptic chart is one page) SRI LANKA 08-17 Feb 2002 15-24 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 15-24 Mar 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 THAILAND 08-17 Feb 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 UAE & OMAN 24 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 31 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 10- 17 Nov 2002 WASHINGTON STATE 13 - 21 Apr 2002 ZAMBIA 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 If you would like further details of a particular tour, please call us now! Or visit www.naturetrek.co.uk These action-packed, long-haul birding tours - each led by an expert local ornithologist - offer excellent value for money, and outstanding birding. ETHIOPIA 08-17 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 NAMIBIA 18 -27 Jan 2002 08-17 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 ETHIOPIAN ENDEMICS 15-24 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 22 Nov -01 Dec 2002 NEPAL Departs every Friday throughout Jan & Feb 03-12 May 2002 17-26 May 2002 FLORIDA 08-17 Feb 2002 GAMBIA 25 Oct - 05 Nov 2002 INDIA 08-16 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 06 Apr 2002 15-23 Nov 2002 KAZAKHSTAN 16-24 May 2002 23-31 May 2002 MALAWI 08-17 Feb 2002 08-17 Mar 2002 NEPAL - THE IBISBILL TREK 10- 19 May 2002 24 May - 02 Jun 2002 SOUTH AFRICA 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 05- 1 4 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SOUTH AFRICA - CAPE BIRDING 23 Mar - I Apr 2002 23 Aug - 0 1 Sep 2002 06- 15 Sep 2002 SOUTHERN MOROCCO 15-24 Feb 2002 01 - 10 Mar 2002 05- 14 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 V Bird Life Naturetrek, Cheriton Mill, Cheriton, Alresford, Hampshire S024 ONG Tel: 0 1 962 73305 I Fax: 0 1 962 736426 e-mail: info@naturetrek.co.uk web: www.naturetrek.co.uk March 2002 Voi.95 No. 3 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks \ nJ 5 • ' Decline of Shetla Kittiwakes The Ruddy Shelduck in Britain / Unusual Brent Geese ISSN 0007-0335 British Birds Established 1907, incorporating The Zoologist, established 1843 Published by BB 2000 Limited, trading as ‘British Birds’ Registered Office: 4 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London WC2E 8SF British Birds Editor Roger Riddington Assistant Editor David A. Christie Editorial Board Ian Carter, Richard Chandler, Martin Collinson, Robin Prytherch, Nigel Redman, Roger Riddington Art Consultants Robert Gillmor &. Alan Harris Photographic Research Robin Chittenden David Tipling Design Mark Corliss Rarities Committee Chairman Colin Bradshaw Hon. Secretary Michael ). Rogers Paul Harvey, John McLoughlin, John Martin, Doug Page, Adam Rowlands, Ken Shaw, Brian Small, Jimmy Steele, Reg Thorpe, Grahame Walbridge Archivist John Marchant Statistician Peter Fraser Museum consultant lan Lewington Notes Panel Colin Bibby, Ian Dawson, Jim Flegg, lan Newton FRS, Malcolm Ogilvie, Angela Turner (Co-ordinator) Annual subscription rates Libraries and agencies - £72.00 Personal subscriptions UK and overseas surface mail - £56.50 Overseas airmail - £88.00 Concessionary rates (Available only to individual members of the RSPB, BTO, IWC, SOC, County Bird Clubs & Societies and other National or Regional organisations) UK - £42.00 Overseas surface mail - £46.00 Overseas airmail - £69.50 Single back issues - £6.50 Available from British Birds, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Rarities Issue - £10 (available as above) Please make all cheques payable to British Birds Guidelines for Contributors: see inside back cover or visit the BB website. www.britishbirds.co.uk EDITORIAL Chapel Cottage, Dunrossness, Shetland ZE2 9JH Tel &. Fax: 01 950 460080 Papers, notes, letters, illustrations, etc. Roger Riddington E-mail: editor@britishbirds.co.uk ‘News 8< comment’ information Bob Scott & Adrian Pitches, 8 Woodlands, St Neots, Cambridgeshire PF.19 1 UE Tel: 01480 214904 Fax: 01480 473009 E-mail: abscott@tiscali.co.uk ‘The Ornithological Year’ bird news Barry Nightingale & Keith Allsopp, 7 Bloomsbury Close, Woburn, Bedfordshire MK17 9QS Tel: 01525 290314 Rarity descriptions M. |. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, Cornwall TR26 3AZ CIRCULATION & PRODUCTION The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel: 01580 882039 Fax: 01580 882038 Subscriptions & Circulation Vivienne Hunter E-mail: subscriptions@britishbirds.co.uk Design & Production Philippa Leegood E-mail: design@britishbirds.co.uk Accounts & Administration Hazel Jenner E-mail: accounts@helm-information.co.uk ADVERTISING For all advertising matters, please contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd, 3D/F Leroy 1 louse, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2767. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BB Books c/o NI1BS Ltd, 2-3 Wills Road, Totnes, Devon TQ9 5XN Tel: 01803 865913 Fax: 01803 865280 Email: bb-books@nhbs.com Front cover photograph: Osprey Pandion haliactus, Poland. Marcin Karctta frit 1 HE POCKET-SIZED SPOTTING SCOPE THE SWAROVSKI BINOCULAR BOOSTER ensure that K REG1STRAt'0N Scn.l» — • of purchase ne turn of the hand and you’ll see en more, thanks to the unique . va rovski binocular booster. Simply 'ew it on to one of the ocular lenses d you have double the magnification, r example, fix the booster on to the CC 15 x 56 WB and you have a mon- : ular telescope with 30x magnification, •is so small and light that it will fit into ■ y pocket and is not a burden when [ anging location, lee main advantages at a glance: • Easy to assemble - simply unscrew one of the twist-in eyecups and screw on the booster. • Only 1 7 5g but still extremely robust, due to a sturdy alum- inium construction. • Complex optical system consisting of 7 lenses and 2 prisms; for razor-sharp and contrast-rich images right up to the periphery. • Available for all EL and 5LC models (except the SLC 8 x30 WB). For further information about the Swarovski binoculars booster visit our website at www.swarovskioptik.com or contact your Swarovski dealer. SWAROVSKI O P T I K WITH THE EYES OF A HAWK Swarovski U.K. LTD. • Perrywood Business Park • Salfords, Surrey RH1 5JQ Tel. 01737-856812 • Fax 01737-856885 • E-mail: christine.percy@swarovski.com BIRDLINE SOUTH EAST ‘FIRST WITH THE NEWS’ 09068 700 240 www.southeastbirdnews.co.uk THE MOST UP-TO-DATE, RELIABLE AND COMPREHENSIVE BIRD NEWS SERVICE IN THE SOUTH EAST ♦ PLEASE PHONE YOUR NEWS AND UPDATES TO THE B.S.E. HOTLINE ON FREEPHONE 08000 377 240 OR 07626 933 933 ♦ Calls are charged at 60p/min (inc VAT) elterwater park ♦♦♦♦ Licensed Guest I louse Kaikoura, locates*? on the East Coast of the spectacular South Island of ' , New Zealand offers wonderful appwUunties for nature lovers to enjoy a variety of marine wildlife including a large variety of seabirds. A host of pelagic birdscan be found just minutes offshore due to the close proximity of the deep Kaikoura Canyon. Enjoy close at hand an array of Albatross, Petrels, Shearwaters, Terns, Gulls and more. Trips 3 times daily. Duration 3 hours. Cost: Adult $60 - Child $35 s.c At the Gateway to Langda/e Panoramic views, lovely walks from the house, parkland setting edges Elterwater Lake. Delicious home cooked food. B&B fr £29 DB&B fr £44 Tel: 015394 32227 email: cnquiries@eltcrwater.com www.eltcrwatcr.com Birdujatching Breaks The finest in birding holidays led by professional leaders and local experts to: ★ Armenia ★ Bulgaria ★ Canada (Alberta, Churchill & Manitoba. Long Point) ★ ★ Chile ★ China (Sichuan) ★ Corsica ★ Costa Rica ★ Cuba ★ Dominican Republic & Puerto Rico ★ Finland ★ France (Pyrenees. Lit Brenne) ★ Ghana ★ Holland ★ ★ Hungary ★ India (North & Himalayas. South & Andaman Islands) ★ Japan ★ ★ Korea ★ Malaysia ★ Mexico ★ Morocco ★ Nepal ★ Senegal ★ South Africa ★ ★ Spain (Galicia, Picos dc Europa) ★ Sri Lanka ★ Sweden (Oland) ★ Uganda ★ ★ United Kingdom (Islay) ★ USA (Arizona, Colorado. New II Lngand & Florida ★ Texas & Washington State ★ Venezuela ★ ™ VISA Check our website lor special offers www.birdwatchingbreaks.freeserve.co.uk E-mail: m.finn@birdwatchingbreaks.freeserve.co.uk Tel: 01227 740799 Fax: 01227 363946 Birdwatching Breaks, 26 School Lane, Herne. Kent CT6 7AL www.birdguides.com The complete online store for birdwatchers books • videos • CD-ROMs • DVD bird news • bird food • optics HAVE YOU SEEN OUR LATEST SPECIAL OFFERS? Birdwatching holidays in France from just £495. Have a brochure flown to you today. For a great value early summer break from £495 er person, get Outthere and experience our lilored birdwatching holidays, brought to you from urocamp and Keycamp Holidays. Based in the best birdwatching regions in oouthern France, your tour leader will introduce you 3 the local bird life and will be on hand to answer our questions throughout your weeks itinerary, icluding informal soirees where you can share the ay’s experiences. The price is inclusive of meals, minibus transportation and continental style holiday home accommodation. If this sounds like the perfect holiday for you, simply call the number below and we’ll fly out a copy of our new brochure to you straight away. For a free brochure call today on: 08709 019 484 Quoting ref: BRIT 2 www.ounherebirdwatching.co.uk Heart of France- SW Mediterranean- SW France- Cantobre Argeles Messanges Look for: Look for: Look for: Griffon Vulture Purple Heron White Stork Black Vulture Greater Flamingo Spoonbill Alpine Swift Black-winged Stilt Purple Heron Hoopoe Kentish Plover Booted Eagle Purple Heron Purple Gallinule Black Kite Night Heron Penduline Tit Little Bittern Greater Flamingo Rock Thrush Mediterranean Gull Slender-billed Gull Blue Rock Thrush Short-toed Eagle Moustached warbler Penduline Tit Cetti’s Warbler Spectacled Warbler Bonelli’s Eagle Nightjar For a copy of our brochure, further offers and information, please send this coupon to: Outthere Birdwatching Holidays. Freepost CW638. Middlewich. Cheshire CWIO OBR. Address Postcode 'OUTTHERE birdwatching abta V23I0 Ref: BRIT 2 abtavs658 New Diascopes from Carl Zeiss ZEISS New Carl Zeiss Diascopes T* FL • 65 mm and 85 mm Objectives • Straight and Angled bodies. • 2 fixed magnification eyepieces and 1 variable eyepiece • Fluoride glass • Waterproof, Nitrogen filled For details of your nearest Carl Zeiss Dealer Please contact our helpline 01707 871350. rjflsr British Birds Volume 95 Number 3 March 2002 C 4 MAR 2002 pp.:-$Er’.rn=n j&mG \ IBftABV 1 00 The Bernard Tucker Memorial Lecture Roger Riddington 1 0 1 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks N. B. Davies I 1 6 PhotoSpot - Fishing Ospreys David Tipling I 1 8 The decline of Shetland’s Kittiwake population Martin Heubeck 1 23 The Ruddy Shelduck in Britain: a review Andrew H. J. Harr op 1 29 S3 From the Rarities Committee’s files: Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire John Martin, on behalf of BBRC Regular features 1 15 Looking back The urban decline of the House Sparrow Alan Prowse 122 Looking back What crisis in farmland birds? F. M. Gauntlett 137 Conservation research news 147 News and comment compiled by David Gibbons, James Pearce-Higgins and Mark Hancock Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches 139 Notes 150 (§) Monthly Marathon Is there a dark morph of the North African race of Long-legged Buzzard? 152 Killian Mullarney Andrea Corso Recent reports Difficulties in determining the age of Barry Nightingale and Anthony Arctic Terns in the field Pierre Yesou & Anthony Levesque McGeehan Eurasian Sparrowhawk extracting Great Tit from feeding cage A. P. Radford 154 S3 Rarities Committee news New BBRC member Hunting method of Merlins in the breeding season R. C. Dickson 154 Request Insectivory and kleptoparasitism by Peregrine Falcons N. J. Collar Tape recordings of crossbills 154 Correction 143 Letters The evolution of pipits and finches W. R. P. Bourne © British Birds 2002 The Bernard Tucker Memorial Lecture The first paper in this issue, ‘Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks’, is based on the Bernard Tucker Memorial Lecture given by Nick Davies to the Oxford Ornithological Society and the Ashmolean Natural History Society. This 51st Tucker Memorial Lecture took place on 6th November 2001, in Oxford, and was sponsored by British Birds. In introducing Professor Davies, Dr Andrew Gosler, the chairman of the Oxford Ornithological Society, praised Bernard Tucker’s outstanding role in the development of British ornithology during the twentieth century. Few BB readers can have known Tucker personally, for he died in 1950 at the age of just 50. Conse- quently, our knowledge of him has to be gleaned from his substantial contribution to the ornithological literature, together with obitu- aries published in Ibis, British Birds and the Oxfordshire Bird Report (e.g. Brit. Birds 44: 41- 46, 184). Max Nicholson once described him as an unremarkable man, and he was, by all accounts, an unassuming character. But he most certainly was remarkable, not least in bridging so successfully the gap between the amateur birdwatcher and the professional zoologist. The fact that, in modern times, this gap is not insur- mountable is in no small measure thanks to Bernard Tucker. Thus, while publishing his observations on the feeding habits of epi- caridian parasites in the journal Nature, he was also the editor of British Birds and of the Oxfordshire Bird Report. The latter was the annual report of the Oxford Ornitholog- ical Society, which he had helped to found in 1921, shortly before he founded the Cambridge Bird Club, in 1925. And because he realised that dedicated amateur observers could make a significant contribu- tion to the science of ornithology, he was a driving force behind the establishment of the BTO in 1934. The success of that organisation is certainly a great and lasting tribute to his foresight. Nick Davies has, like Bernard Tucker, the ability to bridge the gap between amateur and professional ornithology, and also between Oxford and Cambridge. He is a lifelong watcher of birds, who studied first at Oxford, and has since 1979 lectured at the University of Cambridge, where he has been Professor of Behavioural Ecology since 1995. He is probably best known to bird- watchers for his wonderful monographs on the Dunnock (Hedge Accentor) Prunella modularis and the Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus. His paper on the Dunnock appeared in the series ‘Studies of west Palearctic birds’ in 1987 (Brit. Birds SO: 604-624). This is the first Bernard Tucker Memorial Lecture to appear in text form in British Birds, but we intend that this will be a regular feature, bringing the work of outstanding ornithologists to the pages of BB. Roger Riddington 42. Bernard William Tucker. Reproduced from Brit. Birds 44: facing page 4 1 100 © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 00 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks N. 8. Davies ABSTRACT The sight of a small bird feeding a young Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus, even as the cuckoo grows to ten times its own body weight, is astonishing. Why are the hosts apparently being so stupid? Do they accept cuckoo eggs and chicks because they have limited capabilities, and so will never evolve perfect defences? Or could hosts be gradually improving their defences in a continuing evolutionary arms race? In this paper, these questions are discussed in the light of recent evidence from field observations and experiments, and from molecular genetics. Hosts’ rejection of foreign eggs has led to the evolution of cuckoo specialisation and wonderful host-egg mimicry, yet hosts never reject cuckoo chicks, even though they look so different from their own young. Why? Experiments reveal how the cuckoo chick’s extraordinary begging calls ‘manipulate’ the hosts into treating it as if it were a whole brood of their own hungry young. Introduction Since at least the time of Aristotle, writing some 2,300 years ago, it has been known that the Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus (hereafter referred to simply as the Cuckoo) is a cheat. It never raises its own young; instead, it relies on other, host species to do the work. The sight of a host, such as a Reed Warbler Acro- cephalus scirpaceus, feeding an enormous Cuckoo chick is one of the marvels of the bird world. Towards the end of the nestling stage, the young Cuckoo overflows the nest and the hosts seem to risk being devoured themselves as they bow deep into the Cuckoo’s enormous gape to feed it. After fledging, the situation appears even more ludi- crous: to deliver their food, the hosts often have to perch on the back of the Cuckoo chick, which has now grown to ten times their own body weight. © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 15 101 Mark Hamblin Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks c 43. Adult Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus, Worcestershire, May 1 989. To understand how people first puzzled over this, one has to imagine what it was like to live in a world before any knowledge of evolution, a world where birds were all created on the fifth day, along with sea creatures. It was within this framework of God’s creation that the first explanations for host behaviour were sought. A popular view was that hosts were only too pleased to give the Cuckoo a helping hand: ‘It is wonderful to observe what ... delight the birds show when they see a female Cuckoo approach their abode. The little Wren [Troglodytes troglodytes ] ... hops round her with such expres- sions of delight ... in thanks for the honour which the great bird confers upon her by selecting her nest for its own use’ (Bechstein, in Brehm 1869). How, then, was the Cuckoo’s lack of parental care to be explained? One idea was that the Cuckoo had defective instincts: ‘the Grand Creator hath bestowed upon this siely fowle ... witt ... to recompense ... her want of streingth [and herl ... oune frigiditie, or coldnes of nature, utterly disabl inge it to hatche her oune kind’ (Topsell 1614). Others suggested that the defect was anatomical; the French anatomist Herissant (in White 1789) proposed that the Cuckoo’s stomach was too large to permit incu- > bation. Gilbert White (1789) dissected a Cuckoo and agreed that ‘the crop placed just upon the bowles must, especially when full, be in a very uneasy situation during the business of incubation’. He went on to demonstrate, however, that some other species that cared for their own eggs and young also had Cuckoo-like guts, so he concluded that Herissant’s idea must be wrong. But White was at a loss to explain the Cuckoo’s parasitic habits, which he called ‘a monstrous outrage on maternal affection, one of the first great dictates of nature’. These quaint views were shattered forever by Charles Darwin, who, in one short paragraph in The Origin of Species (1859), produced more good ideas about cuckoos than had all previous commentators since Aristotle. First, he pointed out the advantage of being a parasite: the adult Cuckoo is relieved of all parental duties, so it should have the potential to lay more eggs. It has since been shown that parasitic birds do, indeed, lay more eggs per season than do related parental (i.e. non-parasitic) species (Payne 1977). The concern of Gilbert White should, therefore, be turned on its head: since only 1% of all bird species are obligate brood parasites, why are there not more cheats to exploit all the honest workers? Secondly, Darwin suggested how the Cuckoo’s parasitic habits might have evolved gradually from a parental ancestor. We now know that, of the world’s cuckoo species, only 40% are parasitic (57 of the 140 species in the family Cuculidae: Payne 1997), and com- parative studies confirm that parasitism evolved from parental behaviour (Kruger & Davies in press). Finally, Darwin explained how the hosts are designed by natural selection to raise their own young: they accept a Cuckoo as a result of what he called a ‘mistaken instinct’. This paper will focus on the last of Darwin’s suggestions and ask the following questions. Why do hosts make mistakes? Do they accept Cuckoo eggs and chicks because they have limited capabilities and can never, therefore, evolve perfect defences? According to this view, the hosts are simply doing the best they can. Or could some hosts be slowly improving their defences, and we are observing them at an early stage of a continuing evolutionary battle with the Cuckoo? This hypothesis presupposes that future descendants of the hosts would not be so easily tricked. Before discussing these alterna- tives, it is necessary to take a closer look at how the Cuckoo exploits its hosts. 102 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 101 -I 15 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks ( Host-specific female Cuckoo gentes In Britain, there are five main hosts of the Cuckoo, which account for 90% of the para- sitised nests recorded in the nest record scheme of the British Trust for Ornithology. These are: the Reed Warbler in marshland, the Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis in moorland and heath- land, the ‘Dunnock’ (Hedge Accentor) Prunella modularis and the Robin Erithacus rubecula in woodland and farmland, and the Pied Wagtail Motacilla alba in open country. More than 50 other species have been recorded as occasional hosts (Glue & Murray 1984). Over Europe as a whole, there are some fifteen favourite hosts. Others include the Great Reed Warbler Acro- cephalus arundinaceus, the Garden Warbler Sylvia borin, the Common Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus, the Wren, the Red-backed Shrike Lanius collurio and the Brambling Fringilla montifringilla (Moksnes & Roskaft 1995). The Cuckoo is not a common bird, so that even for the favourite hosts the overall average parasitism rates are low, usually 5% or less of host nests. On a local scale, parasitism rates can, however, vary from 0 to 60%, even between neighbouring sites, and there may be large fluc- tuations between years at a particular site, because local Cuckoo populations are often small and consequently susceptible to chance fluctuations in numbers (Lindholm 1999). It is estimated that there are currently about 21,000 female Cuckoos breeding in Britain each summer (Brooke & Davies 1987). The observations of egg-collectors over 100 years ago suggested that individual female Cuckoos specialised on one host species, and laid in another species’ nest only if their favourite host was in short supply. Radio- tracking has now confirmed this (Wyllie 1981; Droscher 1988). The most extensive study has been carried out by Nakamura & Miyazawa (1997) along the Chikuma river, in the suburbs of Nagano city, in central Honshu, Japan. They radio-tracked 22 female Cuckoos for periods of between ten and 54 days. Of these 22 females, 1 1 were Great Reed Warbler specialists, nine specialised on Azure-winged Magpies Cyanopica cyanus, and two specialised on Bull- headed Shrikes L. bucephalus. These specialisations, or ‘host races’ of Cuckoos, are called ‘gentes’ (singular ‘gens’). Recent evidence, from two sources, shows that they are restricted to female Cuckoo lineages, with cross-mating by males maintaining the ) Cuckoo as the one species. First, the Japanese study used DNA profiles to measure maternity and paternity of 136 Cuckoo chicks. The results showed that, whereas each female Cuckoo was largely faithful to one host species, many indi- vidual males (37%) had offspring in more than one species’ nest, so that they must have mated with females of more than one host specialisa- tion (Marchetti et al. 1998). Secondly, analyses of three Cuckoo gentes in Britain (specialising on, respectively, Reed War- blers, Dunnocks and Meadow Pipits) have com- pared two types of DNA which a bird inherits from its parents. The first is nuclear DNA, a random mixture, half from the mother and half from the father, brought together when a sperm fertilises an egg. No differences were found in nuclear DNA across the gentes, as would be expected given cross-mating by males. Any nuclear DNA passed on from mother to son would be transferred to another gens in the next generation if that son mated with a female raised by a different host species. The second type of DNA occurs in the mitochondria, small organelles in the cytoplasm of cells, involved in energy metabolism. A sperm is a naked nucleus containing only nuclear DNA, whereas an egg cell has cytoplasm and therefore contains mito- chondrial DNA, too. This means that all the mitochondrial DNA in an individual comes from its mother, and is passed on down female lineages only (males are a ‘dead end’ for the inheritance of this DNA). Over the generations, therefore, we would expect each Cuckoo gens to have ‘clocked up’ increasing differences in mito- chondrial DNA, simply because of the isolation of the female lines. This is exactly what has been discovered by researchers, and the degree of dif- ference in mitochondrial-DNA sequences sug- gests that these three British gentes last shared a common ancestor some 80,000 years ago (Gibbs et al. 2000). Host-egg mimicry Each Cuckoo gens lays a distinctive egg, which tends to match the egg of its chosen host (Baker 1913, 1923, 1942; Chance 1922, 1940; Jourdain 1925). For example, ‘Reed Warbler-Cuckoos’ lay greenish, spotted eggs like those of Reed War- blers, ‘Meadow Pipit-Cuckoos’ lay brownish, spotted eggs like those of Meadow Pipits, and ‘Redstart-Cuckoos’ lay immaculate pale blue eggs just like those of Common Redstarts. It is known that individual female Cuckoos lay British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 1 5 103 N. B. Davies Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks < 44. Egg of Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus in the nest of a Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus. The cuckoo egg, on the right, is very similar to the Reed Warbler's eggs both in colour and in markings, but it is a little larger exactly the same egg type throughout their lives, so that even within a particular gens some indi- vidual females can be recognised by the distinc- tive colour and spotting pattern of their eggs. It is assumed - but not known for certain - that daughter Cuckoos lay a similar egg type to that of their mother. If this is so, there must be a special mode of inheritance in Cuckoos to ensure that only the mother’s genes influence her daughter’s egg type, otherwise cross-mating by the males would disrupt the egg mimicry. As female birds have a unique sex chromosome, the W chromosome, one possibility is that genes on this chromosome code for egg colour (Punnett 1933). Consider, for example, a young female Cuckoo being raised in a Reed Warbler nest. It is assumed that when she becomes an adult she will lay a greenish spotted egg, just like the one from which she hatched. Her problem, there- fore, is to ensure that she chooses to parasitise Reed Warblers, the one host species that lays eggs for which her own will be a good match. The most likely way in which she could do this is by ‘imprinting’, namely by learning the char- acteristics of her host parents and then, later in life, choosing to parasitise that same species. The obvious way of testing whether this is true is to place newly hatched Cuckoos into another species’ nest, to see if they would then imprint on that different host. This has been tried in field experiments (Chance 1940), but none of > 45. Egg of Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus in the nest of a Dunnock (Hedge Accentor) Prunella modularis. The cuckoo egg (at top) is strikingly different from those of this host species, which shows no discrimination between eggs of different colours. the young Cuckoos returned as breeders, and in aviary experiments, but none of the captive Cuckoos laid eggs (Brooke & Davies 1991). There is some evidence from aviary experi- ments that young Cuckoos imprint on habitat features (Teuschl et al. 1998), but it seems likely that host-imprinting must be involved, too, as has been shown experimentally for parasitic indigobirds Vidua (Payne et al. 2000). Cuckoo tactics The credit for discovering exactly how the Cuckoo lays her egg goes to Edgar Chance, who studied Cuckoos parasitising Meadow Pipits on a Worcestershire common from 1918 to 1925 (Chance 1922, 1940). Chance was a passionate egg-collector. He heard that Eugene Rey had once collected a series of 20 eggs in a single season from a female Cuckoo in Germany and was determined to beat this record. Chance got to know one female (‘Cuckoo A’) particularly well; she was recognisable by her distinctive egg, and she returned to the same territory on the common for five successive summers. Chance was a brilliant observer, and his egg- collecting exploits led to many new discoveries. He showed that the female Cuckoo was also a superb bird-watcher, monitoring the host nests in her territory and carefully selecting her victims so that her egg was deposited during the host’s own laying period. Chance found that the Cuckoo laid on alternate days, in the afternoon 104 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 101 -I 15 W. B. Carr George Reszeter/Windrush c Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks 46. Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus laying in a Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus nest. The cuckoo first removes a host egg, and then, holding this in her bill, she lays directly into the nest and departs. The whole process takes only ten seconds. or early evening (unlike host species, which lay soon after dawn). Before the laying visit, she perches motionless in a tree nearby, for between 30 minutes and two-and-a-half hours. Then she glides down to the host nest, picks out an egg and, holding it in her bill, she lays her own egg directly into the nest. She then flies off, without another glance at the clutch. Incredibly, her laying visit lasts just ten seconds. In 1922, Chance got his ‘world record’, col- 47. Recently hatched Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus in a Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus nest. lecting 25 eggs from ‘Cuckoo A’. This total, however, was achieved with his assistance, because he destroyed any completed pipit clutches which the Cuckoo had missed, thereby forcing the pipits to start a replacement clutch which would, potentially, be suitable for para- sitism. Chance thought that his record would ‘never be equalled so long as Cuckoos continue to lay’, but even he underestimated the Cuckoo’s cunning. He knew that Cuckoos sometimes 48. Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus chick, just a few hours old and still naked and blind, ejecting the host eggs, one by one, from a Reed Warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus nest British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 15 105 George Reszeter/Windrush Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks ( depredated whole clutches of eggs, but subse- quent studies have shown that this is a regular tactic used by female Cuckoos to force their hosts to lay a new clutch (Gartner 1981). Unwittingly, Chance had been doing exactly what the Cuckoo normally does for herself. In 1988, a ‘Reed Warbler-Cuckoo’ in Oxfordshire equalled Chance’s record, this time without human help (Bayliss 1988). The Cuckoo’s egg requires about half a day’s less incubation than the host eggs, so that it usually hatches first. This may be due to the fact that newly laid Cuckoo eggs already have partly developed embryos (Perrins 1967). Since it takes just 24 hours for an egg to be fully formed, from ovulation to the laying-down of the shell, the female Cuckoo’s habit of laying on alternate days means that she is likely to carry a hard egg in her oviduct for about a day before it is laid. This internal incubation must give the Cuckoo chick a head start, helping it to hatch before the host eggs (Liversidge 1961). The next act in this strange and eventful history was known to Aristotle (Hett 1936), but first described in detail by Edward Jenner in 1788. Just a few hours old, and still naked and blind, the Cuckoo chick balances each of the host eggs on its back, one by one, and heaves them out of the nest. Any host chicks receive exactly the same treatment. As a result, the Cuckoo gets the nest to itself, and the host parents then slave away to feed it for about three weeks in the nest, and for a further two to three weeks after fledging. For a typical host, such as a Reed Warbler, this is two weeks longer than it takes to raise a brood of its own to inde- pendence, so that, if a host is lumbered with a Cuckoo in its first nest of the summer, it will have no time to breed again in that season and its reproductive gain from five weeks’ hard work will be zero. Co-evolution In theory, these interactions between the hosts and the Cuckoo should provoke an evolu- tionary arms race (Dawkins & Krebs 1979). In response to parasitism, hosts should evolve defences. These, in turn, should select for the evolution of improved Cuckoo trickery, which will provoke further improvements in host defences, and so on. This cycle of reciprocal selection pressures, as each party evolves in response to the other, is known as co-evolu- tion. > HOST CUCKOO better defences better trickery Fig. I . Simple representation of co-evolution of Cuckoo and host. See text for explanation. Does this actually occur in nature? If so, what is the outcome? Cuckoos evolve in response to hosts Consider the top part of fig. 1 first. We would have good evidence that the Cuckoo has evolved its trickery in response to host defences if we could show that its laying tactics were designed to beat host rejection. Michael Brooke and I tested this by some simple field experiments, in which we played the part of the Cuckoo, and parasitised host nests with variously coloured model eggs. We were once apprehended by a policeman on a remote Derbyshire moor, on suspicion of egg-collecting. When we announced that we were not collecting eggs but, on the contrary, were putting extra eggs into birds’ nests, the policeman found this hard to believe until we showed him our licence from English Nature. The model eggs were made from resin and were painted to resemble the types laid by the various Cuckoo gentes. They were sufficiently realistic to fool the late Bruce Campbell (the best nest-finder I have ever met) into recording one as a real Cuckoo egg on a nest record card. Our experiments revealed that each Cuckoo gens has evolved a mimetic egg (one which matches the host eggs) only if its respective host is fussy and rejects badly matching model eggs (ones resembling those of other gentes). So, for example, Reed Warblers rejected badly matching eggs, resembling those of the Pied Wagtail-, Meadow Pipit- or Redstart-Cuckoo gentes, at two-thirds of nests, but almost always accepted a green-spotted mimetic egg, resem- bling that of their own Cuckoo gens. Similarly, we were most likely to fool a Meadow Pipit with a brown-spotted model, like that of its Cuckoo gens. The Dunnock is the odd one out which proves the rule. It accepts model eggs of any colour, which explains why ‘Dun nock-Cuckoos’ have not evolved a mimetic egg for their host (Brooke & Davies 1988; Davies 8c Brooke 1989a). 106 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • I0I-II5 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks ) c Host discrimination explains not only egg mimicry but also other Cuckoo tactics (Davies & Biooke 1988). First, if we placed a model egg into a Reed Warbler nest before the warblers had started their clutch, then they always rejected it, even if it was mimetic. This explains why the Cuckoo waits until the host begins to lay before it parasitises the nest. Secondly, Cuckoo eggs are unusually small (similar in size to those of a Sky Lark Alauda arvensis) , much smaller than those of non-parasitic cuckoos of the same body size, which lay eggs about the same size as those of a Mistle Thrush Turdus viscivorus (Payne 1974). When we placed such giant-sized model eggs into Reed Warbler nests, they were much more likely to be rejected than were Cuckoo-size eggs; so, host discrimination selects for small Cuckoo eggs, too. A large egg may also be impossible for a small host to incu- bate. Why does the Cuckoo remove a host egg before she lays? The obvious possibility is that the hosts can count, and would recognise an extra egg in their nest. Surprisingly, however, our experiments showed that the model eggs, provided that they were a good match, would be accepted irrespective of whether we removed a host egg or simply added the model to the clutch. So, hosts do not count the number of eggs as a defence strategy. The Cuckoo may remove a host egg to improve the incubation of her own and, because she swallows the host egg, to obtain a free meal. Why not, then, remove all the host eggs? The reason is that hosts always desert if their final clutch is reduced to one egg, and sometimes do so if it is reduced to two eggs. This sets a limit to the number of host eggs which a female Cuckoo can remove (usually one, sometimes two). Although hosts always desert a single egg, they never desert a single chick. This explains very neatly why it is the Cuckoo chick, and not the female Cuckoo earlier during laying, that has to eject the host eggs (Davies & Brooke 1988). Finally, why is the laying female Cuckoo so incredibly quick? We tested host responses to a ‘slow’ female, by placing a stuffed Cuckoo on a Reed Warbler nest and allowing the warblers to mob it for five minutes. After this experience, they were much more likely to reject a mimetic model egg (Davies & Brooke 1988). Meadow Pipits are also incited to increased egg rejection by the presence of a stuffed Cuckoo (Moksnes et al. 1993), and video-recording at Reed Warbler nests reveals that the warblers are more likely to reject a real Cuckoo egg if they have been present during the brief laying visit (Moksnes et al. 2000). Thus, it pays the Cuckoo to be quick, in order to decrease the chance that it alerts the host. Flexible host defences This last point raises an interesting question. Why do the hosts need to be alerted in order to reject the Cuckoo egg? Why not always reject it? Recent experiments reveal that there are two costs ol rejection. First, the hosts may damage their own eggs while attempting to eject a Cuckoo egg; and, secondly, they may make recognition errors when the Cuckoo egg is mimetic, and eject one of their own eggs rather than the parasitic egg (Davies & Brooke 1988; Marchetti 1992; Welbergen et al. 2001). In theory, therefore, it pays hosts to reject, and to incur these costs, only above a certain frequency of parasitism (Davies & Brooke 1989a; Lotem et al. 1995; Davies et al. 1996). To use a human analogy, it is worth investing in costly defences of our property only if we live in areas where burglary is likely. These costs of rejection prob- ably explain why hosts have flexible defences, with individuals increasing their rejection levels if they judge that they are more likely to be par- asitised, for example because they have seen a Cuckoo at their nest. Such individual flexibility may explain why parasitised Reed Warbler populations show stronger rejection of model Cuckoo eggs than do unparasitised populations (Lindholm & Thomas 2000). Two results suggest that this dif- ference in rejection behaviour is unlikely to be due entirely to genetic differences between host populations. First, these behavioural differences can occur between neighbouring populations just 11 km apart (Brooke et al. 1998), which is well within the 47-km average natal dispersal distance (from site of birth to site of first breeding) of Reed Warblers (Paradis et al. 1998). Secondly, there can be dramatic changes at a site even within a few years. Our observa- tions at Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire, have recorded a decrease in Cuckoo parasitism of Reed Warblers, from 16% in 1985-86 to 2-6% in 1995-97, owing to a decline in Cuckoo numbers. Our experiments with model eggs showed that, during this 12-year period, there was a marked reduction in host rejection of non-mimetic eggs, which occurred at 75% of British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 1 5 107 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks C nests in 1985-86 but at only 25% of nests in 1997. Calculations suggest that this decline in host defences is too rapid to reflect only genetic change, and so is more likely to be an outcome of individual flexibility. We also found a sea- sonal decline in parasitism, and this, too, was accompanied by a strong seasonal decline in rejection (Brooke et al. 1998). In Spain, Alvarez (1996) found less rejection by Rufous-tailed Scrub-robins Cercotrichas galactotes later in the season, when Cuckoos left his study area. By testing the same host individ- uals at different stages of the summer, he showed that this was due to individuals changing their responses. These results suggest that hosts must monitor Cuckoo activity in their local area and adjust their defences accordingly. Hosts evolve in response to Cuckoos There is now good evidence that host defences select for both the Cuckoo’s egg mimicry and its laying tactics. What about the lower part of the proposed co-evolutionary cycle shown in fig. 1? Have host defences, in turn, evolved specifically in response to Cuckoos? If they have, then it would be predicted that small birds with no history of Cuckoo parasitism would show no rejection of foreign eggs. There are two groups of such ‘unsuitable’ hosts which, we can be sure, have been untainted by Cuckoos. One is hole-nesters, such as tits Pants, Pied Flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca and Northern Wheatears Oenanthe oenanthe, whose nests are inaccessible to a laying Cuckoo. The other is seed-eaters, such as many finches (Fringillidae), which have an unsuitable diet for raising young Cuckoos. Experiments with model eggs confirm that these two groups of species show little, if any, rejection of eggs that are unlike their own (Davies & Brooke 1989a; Moksnes et al. 1991). Some comparisons between closely related species suggest that egg rejection is not constrained by taxonomy, but is likely to evolve whenever a species is subjected to Cuckoo parasitism. For example, Spotted Flycatchers Muscicapa striata have open nests, are occasional victims of Cuckoos, and show strong egg-rejection behaviour, whereas the hole-nesting Pied Flycatcher does not reject eggs, even those which are very different from its own. The Common Chaffinch Frirtgilla coelebs and the Brambling, the two finches which feed their young on insects and so are suitable hosts for Cuckoos, are also strong rejec- tors of unusual eggs, whereas the seed-eating finch species, such as Greenfinch Carduelis chloris , Linnet C. cannabina and Lesser Redpoll C. cabaret , show little of this behaviour. This comparison between suitable and unsuitable species reveals that Cuckoo hosts evolve not only egg rejection as a defence against Cuckoo parasitism, but also changes in their egg markings, an idea first suggested by Swynnerton (1918). Species exploited by Cuckoos exhibit less variation in the appearance (both colour and markings) of eggs within a single clutch, and more variation between clutches of different females, than do species with no history of Cuckoo parasitism (0ien et al. 1995; Soler & Moller 1996; Stokke et al. in press). This makes life harder for the Cuckoo, since it is easier for the hosts to spot a foreign egg if all their own eggs look exactly the same, and distinctive markings for individual host females (‘signatures’) make it harder for the Cuckoo to evolve a convincing forgery of that species’ eggs. New and old hosts ? These results suggest that the egg rejection which we now see in the suitable host species, namely those with open nests and which feed their young on invertebrates, has evolved specif- ically as a defence against Cuckoo parasitism. How, then, can the Dunnock’s lack of rejection be explained? One possibility is that this species finds rejection peculiarly costly, so that accep- tance is better. It is not, however, obvious why rejection should be more costly for Dunnocks than for other hosts. Another possibility is that parasitism levels are too low to favour the evo- lution of egg rejection. Although current levels of parasitism of Dunnocks (2%) are similar to those suffered by species which have evolved rejection (Meadow Pipit 2.5%), or are even higher (cf. Pied Wagtail 0.4%; Glue & Murray 1984), it may be that the rejection by these other hosts evolved in response to stronger selection in the past, whereas the parasitism level to which the Dunnock is subjected may have always been low (Takasu et al. 1993). The third possibility is that Dunnocks are relatively new victims which have not yet had time to evolve defences, and that we have caught them at the start of their arms race with Cuckoos (Kelly 1987; Davies & Brooke 1989a, b). Model-egg experiments show that there are 108 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 I 5 49. Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus chick in the nest of a new host in Japan, the Azure-winged Magpie Cyanopica cyanus. also some suitable host species, now rarely used by Cuckoos, which exhibit stronger rejection than do many of the Cuckoo’s favourite hosts (Davies & Brooke 1989a; Moksnes et al. 1991). These include Willow Warblers Phylloscopus trochilus, Blackcaps Sylvia atricapilla , Reed Buntings Emberiza schoeniclus, Yellowhammers E. citrinella and Common Chaffinches. If egg rejection evolves only in response to Cuckoos, then this implies that these were once favoured hosts which now retain rejection as a legacy of the arms race which their ancestors fought long ago, just as humans retain the stamp of their evolutionary past in the form of an appendix and wisdom teeth. Perhaps these Cuckoo gentes were driven to extinction by their hosts’ strong defences, or by ecological changes which reduced host numbers or density and so made specialisation on them unprofitable for the Cuckoo. These findings imply that the Cuckoo changes its use of hosts with time, and we may now be observing snapshots of a continuing arms race (Davies & Brooke 1989b; Rothstein 1990). The best evidence that the Cuckoo does indeed change its hosts comes from recent studies in central Honshu, Japan (Nakamura 1990; Nakamura et al. 1998; Yamagishi & Fujioka 1986). Sixty years ago, the three most common gentes there were those which spe- cialised on Bull-headed Shrikes, Great Reed Warblers and Meadow Buntings E. cioides. Nowadays, the first two of these continue to be Cuckoo favourites, but the bunting, although still abundant, has become a rare host. In its place, a new gens is evolving, one which para- sitises the Azure-winged Magpie. In recent years, the magpies have spread to higher eleva- tions and now come into increasing contact with Cuckoos. The first record of their being parasitised in Japan was in 1956. Since then, the magpie has rapidly become one of the main hosts in central Honshu, with 30-60% of its nests being parasitised in several areas. The spread of this gens began when female Cuckoos of the three old gentes started to exploit the Azure-winged Magpie as a secondary host as the magpies spread into their range. The Cuckoo eggs in the magpie nests are particularly variable and reflect the multiple origins of the layers. Radio-tracking now shows, however, that some female Cuckoos specialise on this new host (Nakamura 8c Miyazawa 1997). So, the rapid rise in parasitism of the magpie probably reflects not only its increased use as a secondary host by other Cuckoo gentes, but also the spread of their female descendants, which have presumably imprinted on the new host and now use it as their favourite. Genetic analysis confirms that these ‘Magpie-Cuckoos’ are of the same genetic stock as those of the old gentes, so there has not yet been time for this new gens to evolve a dis- tinct genotype (Gibbs et al. 2000). In some areas, the magpies are already British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 1 5 109 I Yoshino Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks ( beginning to fight back and now reject Cuckoo eggs at 30-40% of nests. This response has been so fast that it seems likely that the magpie is not, after all, a completely naive host. Perhaps this species was parasitised before historical records began, and its increased recent contact with Cuckoos has ‘switched on’ again the defences which it evolved long ago (Nakamura et al. 1998). Of course, the magpie’s response could reflect both genetic change and flexible behaviour. Individuals may be already equipped to show some defences, and these could now be in the process of being refined by natural selec- tion (see also Soler et al. 1998). It will be fasci- nating to see how soon this new Cuckoo gens begins to evolve egg mimicry. The initial stages in the creation of such new Cuckoo strains must be happening all the time, whenever female Cuckoos lay eggs in the nests of alternative hosts. Edgar Chance’s ‘Meadow Pipit-Cuckoos’, for example, occasionally laid in Tree Pipit Anthus trivalis or Yellowhammer nests when there was no suitable Meadow Pipit nest available. From an analysis of museum egg collections, Moksnes & Roskaft (1995) esti- mated that, in 5-10% of cases, a Cuckoo lays in the ‘wrong’ host nest. Radio-tracking studies in Japan suggest a similar level of ‘mistakes’, with 8% of eggs laid in the nests of alternative hosts (Nakamura & Miyazawa 1997). Many of these eggs will be a poor match of the host eggs and will therefore be rejected. Even if eggs are accepted, there may not be enough surviving young female Cuckoos imprinting on the alter- native host species for a new strain to persist for very long. Only if the alternative host accepts a good proportion of the eggs, and only if several female Cuckoos switch to it at the same time, will the new habit really take off, and a new gens will then be born, as seems to be happening in Japan today. A co-evolutionary sequence These observations and experiments suggest the following sequence (fig. 2) in the evolutionary ) battle between the Cuckoo and its hosts at the egg stage. The stages in the sequence are as follows. 1. Before a species is exploited by the Cuckoo, it accepts any egg. 2. In response to parasitism, the host evolves rejection of eggs unlike its own. 3. In response to host rejection, the Cuckoo evolves a mimetic egg. 4. If the mimicry is suffi- ciently good, then, provided that parasitism levels are not too high, it may be best for the host to accept and so avoid costly recognition errors, unless it has extra information to tell it that it has been parasitised (e.g. if it has seen a Cuckoo on its nest). This is the situation for the Reed Warblers which we have studied at Wicken Fen, where 80% of Cuckoo eggs are accepted (Davies & Brooke 1988). If a host becomes freed from parasitism, then it may lose the ability to reject eggs unlike its own if rejection is a costly trait. As a result, there will always be a pool of ‘acceptor species’ available to the Cuckoo for subsequent recy- cling through the co-evolutionary sequence. If rejection of odd eggs has little cost, however, then old hosts may retain this behaviour and so it will be harder for the Cuckoo to exploit them the next time around. In this case, the option of changing to a different host every time the current favourite evolves strong rejection will become unviable. Once all suitable hosts have evolved rejection of eggs unlike their own, the only option for the Cuckoo is to evolve better mimicry, and the outcome will then be spe- cialist gentes, or sometimes cuckoo speciation (for further discussion, see Davies 2000 and Rothstein 2001). Why accept the Cuckoo chick ? Although most hosts reject eggs unlike their own, there is no evidence that any host ever rejects the Cuckoo chick. This is extraordinary. For example, there are at least three cues that Reed Warblers could use to tell them that a Cuckoo is not one of their own young. It is too big, its gape is of the wrong colour (orange Accept HOST Reject No mimicry CUCKOO Mimicry 1 | ^ L ♦ j Fig. 2. The evolutionary battle between the Cuckoo and its hosts at the egg stage. For explanation, see text. I 10 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 1 5 c Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks } 50. Twelve-day-old Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus chick being fed by a Reed Warbler Acrocephalus s cirpaceus. instead of yellow), and it lacks tongue spots. These cues, namely size, colour and spotting, are the very ones which the warblers use to reject foreign eggs. Why not use them at the chick stage, too? At first sight, the answer seems obvious: the hosts can compare a Cuckoo egg with their own eggs, but the ejection behaviour of the Cuckoo chick means that the hosts cannot compare the young Cuckoo with their own chicks. Nonethe- less, when we enabled Reed Warblers to make this comparison, by strapping two nests side by side, one with a Cuckoo chick and the other with Reed Warbler chicks, the Reed Warbler adults fed the young in both nests (Davies & Brooke 1988). Furthermore, Reed Warblers, together with other hosts which reject foreign eggs, will accept a different-looking chick of another species among their own brood and will raise it as if it was their own (Davies & Brooke 1989b). The hosts seem to follow the rule ‘any chick in the nest is mine’. Why the fussiness over odd eggs but not over odd chicks? Lotem (1993) proposed an ingenious solu- tion. His experiments with Great Reed Warblers suggest that hosts come to reject foreign eggs by first learning the appearance of their own eggs during the laying of their first clutch. If they then encounter an egg which looks different from this learnt set, they reject it (Lotem et al. 1995). This learning rule is a good defence, but it is not perfect. If the hosts are unlucky, and are parasitised with a foreign egg during their first clutch, they may learn that this is part of their ‘own’ set, and so would be doomed to accept that type, as well as their own eggs, for ever more. This cost of mis-imprinting is not too serious, however, because in most of their future breeding attempts their clutches will be unparasitised and the young which they raise will, therefore, be their own. Such a learning strategy would, however, be a disaster for Cuckoo hosts if applied at the chick stage. There would then be a much bigger cost of mis-imprinting. Imagine a host which is parasitised in its first breeding attempt. It would now imprint only on the Cuckoo chick, because its own eggs have been ejected before they hatched. In future, unparasitised breeding attempts, it would then see its own young as ‘foreign’, and would reject them. Some calcula- tions show that, at the chick stage, it is best to avoid these heavy costs and not to learn at all, but rather to follow the rule ‘accept any chick in my nest’ (Lotem 1993). And that is exactly what hosts of the Cuckoo seem to do. Although Cuckoo chicks do not need to look like the host’s young, they still have a problem. A single Cuckoo chick is fed at about the same rate as a whole brood of Reed Warbler young (Brooke & Davies 1989; Grim 8c Honza 1997). How can a single Cuckoo chick persuade the host parents to bring so much food? Our first idea was that the Cuckoo’s orange gape might be a ‘super-stimulus’, a sort of bird lipstick. Some finch chicks signal their hunger by a flush I I British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 1 5 George Reszeter/ Wmdrush David Cottridge/ Windrush Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks ( > 5 1 . Two- to three-week-old Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus chick being fed by a Reed Warbler Acrocephatus s arpaceus. of blood to the gape; the hungrier the chick, the stronger the flush, hence a redder gape. Experi- ments in which chicks had their gape painted with food dye showed that their parents pre- ferred to feed the chicks with a redder mouth (Kilner 1997). The young Cuckoo’s gape does not flush in this way. It is made permanently bright by pigment. Could it be cheating the system by giving a signal that it is always hungry? We studied three Cuckoo hosts, namely Robins, Reed Warblers and Dunnocks. Unlike the finches, none of these hosts’ chicks showed a red flush when they were hungry (Kilner & Davies 1998), and food-dye experiments showed that their parents did not favour chicks with a redder mouth, nor did they work harder if all their brood had a red mouth (Noble et al. 1999). The next idea was that the Cuckoo chick’s large size might be stimulating for the hosts. Parents often favour the largest chick in their brood; perhaps they regard the Cuckoo as an especially strong and healthy chick of their own? If that is the case, then an equally large chick of another species should be fed just like a Cuckoo. We tested this by temporarily removing the young from a Reed Warbler nest and replacing them with a single Blackbird Turdus merula chick. The Reed Warblers readily accepted the Blackbird chick, but they fed it at a much lower rate than they would a Cuckoo chick of the same mass (Davies et al. 1998). Large size is not, therefore, the key to the Cuckoo chick’s attractiveness. Parents do not just look at their young, but they listen to them, too, so we next examined begging calls. The Cuckoo’s begging call is very strange, a continuous and rapid ‘si, si, si, si ...’, quite unlike that of a single Reed Warbler chick, which is a much slower ‘tsip .... tsip’. In fact, to our ears, the Cuckoo did not sound like a single chick at all; rather, it sounded like a whole brood of hungry chicks. At seven days of age, the young Cuckoo called at the same rate as does a week-old brood of four Reed Warblers. To test whether this rapid calling is the key Cuckoo trick, the experiment with the single Blackbird chick was repeated, but this time it was accompanied by a small loudspeaker next to the nest. Every time the Blackbird chick begged we broadcast the begging calls of a Cuckoo chick. This had a dramatic effect on the Reed Warblers. They now worked much harder and brought about as much food to the Black- bird as to a Cuckoo chick of the same size (Davies et al. 1 998). I 12 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 101- 1 15 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks 52. Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus chick, just before fledging. ( Although a week-old Cuckoo chick sounds, from its begging rate, just like four Reed Warbler chicks, we no longer believe that it is simply mimicking a host brood, because an older Cuckoo chick increases its calling rate still further. By two weeks of age it sounds more like eight Reed Warbler chicks, yet it is still fed at the same rate as a brood of four host young. Subsequent experiments show that the Cuckoo’s problem is that it pre- sents a deficient visual stimulus, namely a single gape, whereas the hosts are designed to expect to see a whole brood of gapes. Although the Cuckoo chick is much larger than any one host chick, its gape area can never match that of four host chicks, and this deficiency in its visual stimulus becomes increasingly marked as it becomes older. Measurements show that the Cuckoo’s ever more rapid calls are designed to compensate for this increasingly deficient visual stimulus, so that the Reed War- blers will still bring it sufficient food. Thus, the Cuckoo chick’s key trick is to ‘tune in’ to the way in which the host parents inte- grate visual and vocal stimuli from their own young (Kilner & Davies 1999; Kilner et al. 1999). It will be interesting to discover whether the Cuckoo chick has to beg in differing ways in the nests of different host species. Conclusion The observations and experiments described here certainly support the view that the Cuckoo and its hosts have engaged in an evolutionary arms race. Some species may be new hosts, yet to evolve defences, others may be old hosts whose Cuckoo gentes have become extinct, and still others may be rearming themselves as the Cuckoo begins to exploit them the next time around. Further molecular-genetic analyses of Cuckoos will help us to understand the time course of these changes in host use; by using the sequence divergence in their mitochondrial DNA as a molecular clock, it should be possible to infer the ages of the various gentes. More observational studies are needed, too. After more than a century of speculation, we still do not know whether daughter Cuckoos lay the same type of egg as their mother, nor whether they imprint on their hosts. Hosts are unlikely ever to evolve perfect defences. Their need to learn what their own eggs and chicks look like creates chinks in their armour which the Cuckoo can exploit, and their strong parental instincts are susceptible to manipulation by a Cuckoo chick. Perhaps these imperfections can be a gentle reminder of our own vulnerability, too, and the ease with which we are exploited by the advertising industry. 113 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 1 5 George /VlcCorthyAA/indrush Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks Acknowledgments I thank the Natural Environment Research Council for funding this work and English Nature for licences to carry out the field experiments. The lecture on which this paper is based was originally given by kind invitation of the Oxford Ornithological Society and Ashmolean Natural History Society, and I thank the President of the OOS, Andrew Gosler for this privilege. References Alvarez, F. 1 996. Model Cuckoo Cuculus canorus eggs accepted by Rufous Bush Chats Cercotrichas galactotes during the parasite's absence from the breeding area. Ibis 1 38: 340-342. Baker E. C. S. 191 3. The evolution of adaptation in parasitic cuckoos' eggs. Ibis (1913): 384-398. — 1 923. Cuckoo eggs and evolution. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1923:277-294. — 1 942. Cuckoo Problems. London. Bayliss, M. 1988. Cuckoo X breaks records. BTO News 159: 7. Brehm, E. 1869. Dr. Brehm's Ornithology. In: Jones, T R. (ed.), Cassells Book of Birds. Vol. III. London. Brooke, M. de L., & Davies, N. B. 1 987. Recent changes in host usage by cuckoos Cuculus canorus in Britain. J.Anim. Ecol. 56: 873-883. — & — 1 988. Egg mimicry by cuckoos Cuculus canorus in relation to discrimination by hosts. Nature 335: 630-632. — & — 1 989. Provisioning of nestling cuckoos Cuculus canorus by reed warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus hosts. Ibis 131: 250-256. — & — 1 99 1 . A failure to demonstrate host imprinting in the cuckoo Cuculus canorus and alternative hypotheses for the maintenance of egg mimicry. Ethology 89: 1 54- 166. — , — , & Noble, D. G. 1998. Rapid decline of host defences in response to reduced cuckoo parasitism: behavioural flexibility of reed warblers in a changing world. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B) 265: 1 277- 1 282. Chance, E. R 1 922. The Cuckoo's Secret. London. — 1 940. The Truth about the Cuckoo. London. Datw/in, C. 1 859. The Origin of Species. London. Davies, N. B. 2000. Cuckoos, Cowbirds and Other Cheats. London. — & Brooke, M. de L. 1988. Cuckoos versus reed warblers: adaptations and counteradaptations. An/m. Behav. 36: 262-284. — & — 1 989a. An experimental study of co-evolution between the cuckoo Cuculus canorus and its hosts. I Host egg discrimination.], Anim. Ecol. 58: 207-224. — & — 1989b, An experimental study of co-evolution between the cuckoo Cuculus canorus and its hosts. II Host egg markings, chick discrimination and general discussion.]. Anim. Ecol. 58: 225-236. — , — , & Kacelnik, A. 1996. Recognition errors and probability of parasitism determine whether reed warblers should accept or reject mimetic cuckoo eggs. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B) 263: 925-93 1 . , Kilner R. M„ & Noble, D. G. 1 998. Nestling cuckoos Cuculus canorus exploit hosts with begging calls that mimic a brood. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B) 265: 673-678. Dawkins, R.. & Krebs, J. R. 1 979. Arms races between and within species. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B) 205: 489-5 1 I . Droscher L. 1988. A study on radio-tracking of the European cuckoo Cuculus canorus. Proceedings of the Int. 1 00 Do-G. meeting: I 87- 1 93. Gartner K. 1981. Das Wegnehmen von Wirtsvogeleiern durch den Kuckuck Cuculus canorus. Orn. Mitt. 33: I 1 5- 131. Gibbs, H. L„ Sorenson, M. D„ Marchetti, K„ Brooke, M. de L.. Davies, N. B., & Nakamura, H. 2000. Genetic evidence for female host-specific races of the common cuckoo. Nature 407: 1 83- 1 86. Glue, D., & Murray, E. 1984. Cuckoo hosts in Britain. BTO News 1 34: 5. Grim.T, & Honza, M. 1997. Differences in parental care of reed warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus to its own nestlings and parasitic cuckoo Cuculus canorus chicks. Folia Zoologica 46: 135-142. Hett, W. S. 1936. Aristotle: Minor Works. On Marvellous Things Heard. London. Jenner E. 1788. Observations on the natural history of the Cuckoo. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. 78: 2 1 9-237. Jourdain, F. C. R. 1925. A study on parasitism in the cuckoos. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1 925: 639-667. Kelly, C. 1 987. A model to explore the rate of spread of mimicry and rejection in hypothetical populations of cuckoos and their hosts.]. Theor. Biol. 125: 283-299. Kilner R. M. 1 997. Mouth colour is a reliable signal of need in begging canary nestlings. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B) 264: 963-968. — & Davies, N. B. 1 998. Nestling mouth colour: ecological correlates of a begging signal. Anim. Behav. 56: 705-7 1 2. — & — 1 999. How selfish is a cuckoo chick? Anim. Behav. 58: 797-808. — , Noble, D. G., & Davies, N. B. 1999. Signals of need in parent-offspring communication and their exploitation by the common cuckoo. Nature 397: 667-672. Kruger O., & Davies, N. B, In press. The evolution of cuckoo parasitism: a comparative analysis. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B). Lindholm, A. K. 1 999. Brood parasitism by the cuckoo on patchy reed warbler populations in Britain.]. Anim. Ecol. 68: 293-309. — & Thomas, R. J. 2000, Differences between populations of reed warblers in defences against brood parasitism. Behaviour 1 37: 25-42. Liversidge, R. 1961. Pre-incubation development of Clamator jacobinus. Ibis 1 03: 624. Lotem, A. 1993. Learning to recognize nestlings is maladaptive for cuckoo Cuculus canorus hosts. Nature 362: 743-745. — , Nakamura, H„ & Zahavi, A. 1995. Constraints on egg discrimination and cuckoo-host co-evolution. Anim. Behav. 49: I 1 85- 1 209. Marchetti, K. 1992. Costs to host defence and the persistence of parasitic cuckoos. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B) 248:41-45. — , Nakamura. H., & Gibbs, H. L. 1 998. Host-race formation in the Common Cuckoo. Science 282: 47 1 - 472. Moksnes, A.. & Roskaft, E. 1995. Egg-morphs and host preference in the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus: an analysis of cuckoo and host eggs from European museum collections.]. Zool. 236: 625-648. — , — , Braa, A.T., Korsnes, L„ Lampe, H. M.. & Pedersen, H. C. 1991. Behavioural responses of potential hosts towards artificial cuckoo eggs and dummies. Behaviour I 1 6: 64-89. — , — , & Korsnes, L, 1993, Rejection of cuckoo Cuculus canorus eggs by meadow pipits Anthus pratensis. Behav. Ecol. 4: 1 20- 1 27. — , — , Hagen, L. G„ Honza, M.. Mork, C., & Olsen, R H. 2000. Common cuckoo Cuculus canorus and host behaviour at reed warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus nests. Ibis 142:247-258. Nakamura, H. 1 990. Brood parasitism by the Cuckoo Cuculus canorus in Japan and the start of new parasitism on the Azure-winged Magpie Cyanopica I 14 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 101 -I 15 Cuckoo tricks with eggs and chicks ) cyana.Jap.J. Orn. 39: I- 18. — & Miyazawa.Y 1 997. Movements, space use and social organisation of radio-tracked common cuckoos during the breeding season in Japan. Jap. J. Orn. 46: 23-54. , Kubota, S., & Suzuki, R. 1 998. Coevolution between the Common Cuckoo and its major hosts in Japan. In: Rothstein, S. I., & Robinson, S, K. (eds,), Parasitic Birds and Their Hosts. Oxford. Noble, D. G„ Davies, N. B„ Hartley, I. R„ & McRae, S. B. 1 999. The red gape of the nestling cuckoo Cuculus canorus is not a supernormal stimulus for three common hosts. Behaviour 1 36: 759-777. 0ien, I. J. Moksnes, A., & Roskaft, E. 1995. Evolution of variation in egg colour and marking pattern in European passerines: adaptations in a coevolutionary arms race with the cuckoo Cuculus canorus. Behav. Ecol 6: 166-174. Paradis, E„ Baillie, S. R„ Sutherland, W. J., & Gregory, R. D. 1 998. Patterns of natal and breeding dispersal in birds. J.Anim. Ecol. 67: 5 1 8-536. Payne, R. B. 1 974. The evolution of clutch size and reproductive rates in parasitic cuckoos. Evolution 28: 169-181. - l977.The ecology of brood parasitism in birds. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 8: I -28. - 1 997. Family Cuculidae (Cuckoos). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., & Sargatal, J. (eds.), Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 4. Barcelona. — , Payne, L. L., Woods, J. L„ & Sorenson, M. D. 2000. Imprinting and the origin of parasite-host species associations in brood parasitic indigobirds Vidua chalybeata. Anim. Behav. 59: 69-8 1 . Perrins, C. M. 1 967. The short apparent incubation period of the Cuckoo. Brit. Birds 60: 5 1 -52. Punnett, R. C. 1 933. Inheritance of egg-colour in the 'parasitic' cuckoos. Nature 1 32: 892. Rothstein, S. I. 1990. A model system for coevolution: avian brood parasitism. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2 1 : 48 1 -508. — 200 1 . Relic behaviours, co-evolution and the retention versus loss of host defences after episodes of avian brood parasitism. Anim. Behav , 6 1 : 95- 1 07. Soler; J. j., & Moller; A. R 1 996. A comparative analysis of the evolution of variation in appearance of eggs of European passerines in relation to brood parasitism. Behav. Ecol. 7: 89-94. — , Soler J.J., Martinez, J. G., Perez-Contreras.T, & Moller A. R 1 998. Micro-evolutionary change and population dynamics of a brood parasite and its primary host: the intermittent arms race hypothesis. Oecologia I 1 7: 38 1 - 390. Stokke, B. G„ Moksnes, A., & Roskaft, E. In press. Obligate brood parasites as selective agents for evolution of egg appearance in passerine birds. Evolution. Swynnerton, C. F. M, 191 8. Rejections by birds of eggs unlike their own: with remarks on some of the cuckoo problems. Ibis Tenth Series 6: 127-154. Takasu, F., Kawasaki, K., Nakamura, H„ Cohen, J. E., & Shigesada, N. 1 993. Modeling the population dynamics of a cuckoo-host association and the evolution of host defences. Am. Nat. 1 42: 8 1 9-839. Teuschl.Y.Taborsky, B„ & Taborsky, M. 1998. How do cuckoos find their hosts? The role of habitat imprinting. Anim. Behav. 56: 1425-1433. Topsell, E. 1614. The Fowles of Heauen or History of Birdes. (1972 edition, edited byT R Harrison & F. D. Hoenigen University ofTexas Press, Austin.) Welbergen, J„ Komdeur; J., Kats, R., & Berg, M. 200 1 . Egg discrimination in the Australian reed warbler (Acrocephalus australis ): rejection response toward model and conspecific eggs depending on timing and mode of artificial parasitism. Behav. Ecol. 1 2: 8- 1 5. White, G, 1789. The Natural History and Antiquities of Selbome. London. Wyllie, I. 1981. The Cuckoo. London. Yamagishi, S., & Fujioka, M. 1 986. Heavy brood parasitism by the Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus on the Azure-winged Magpie Cyanopica cyana. Tori 34: 9 1 -96. Prof. Nick Davies, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ Ax Looking back Seventy-five years ago: ‘Willow-Tits in Lanarkshire. — Mr. Walter Stewart contributes an interesting article to the Scottish Natu- ralist (1926, pp. 147-150) on the distribution, appear- ance, habitat and nesting of the Willow-Tit ( Parus atricapillus kleinschmidti) in Lanarkshire. In certain parts of this county the bird seems more plentiful, more so than any other part of Scotland according to the author. It particularly affects valleys in the bottoms of which the ground is somewhat water- logged, with a rank, dense undergrowth in summer. Here it nests in the stumps of decayed alders and willows, and about 90 per cent, of the nests are in holes bored by the birds themselves, and in nearly every case the chips are removed to at least a short distance. Among the localities outside Lanark in which Mr. Stewart has identified the bird, he men- tions near Kincardine O’Neil in south Aberdeenshire, a part from which we are not aware of any previous record.’ (Brit. Birds 20: 252, March 1927) ‘Goosander Nesting in Dumfriesshire. — Mr. H. S. Gladstone records (Scot. Nat., 1926, p. 140) that a gamekeeper informed him that he frequently saw two pairs of Goosanders (Mergus m. merganser) on the River Annan in April and May, 1926, and that on July 17th he saw one female with six young and at an earlier date the other female with ten young. On Sep- tember 4th the keeper shot a young male Goosander and sent it to Mr. Gladstone by way of confirmation. In his Birds of Dumfriesshire, Mr. Gladstone did not accept a previous record of breeding about thirty years ago as substantiated. Proof of breeding so far to the south in Scotland is interesting.’ (Brit. Birds 20: 252, March 1927) 115 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 0 1 - 1 15 David Tip/ingAA/indrush David Tipling A/Vindrush PhotoSpot Fishing Ospreys The image of an Osprey Pandion haliaetus exploding from the surface of a lake while clutching a writhing fish is one which has remained largely elusive to bird-pho- tographers in Europe. Four years ago, I heard of a fish farm in southern Finland which was being visited by more than 50 Ospreys every day. Furthermore, the owner of the farm, in conjunction with the Finnish Osprey Founda- tion, had constructed a special Fishpond, just for the birds. This pond is only about a metre deep and, stocked with fish, is a huge attraction to Ospreys. I have made several visits to the site and, during my best days in the hide, have wit- nessed in excess of 100 dives, most of which (over 95%) were successful. Ospreys sometimes emerge from the water with two fish, and I have seen three carried off on one occasion. The raptors are believed to come from the thriving local population, within a radius of about 40 km of the farm. The highest frequency of visits occurs on windy, overcast days, when the Ospreys struggle to fish successfully in vast natural lakes in the area, and when food is much easier to find in the small, sheltered ponds on the farm. For the best pictures, the wind must be in the appropriate direction, encouraging the birds to fly towards the camera when leaving the water. Some have dived so close to the hide that my camera gear has been soaked from the splash as they plunged into the water. 53 & 54. Osprey Pandion haliaetus, southern Finland, August 1998. I 16 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • I 1 6- 1 1 7 55. Osprey Pandion haliaetus, southern Finland, August 1 998. David Tipting/ Windrush 56. Osprey Pandion haliaetus fishing pool, southern Finland, August 1 998. David Tipling, 99 Noah’s Ark, Kemsing, Sevenoaks, Kent TNI 5 6PD I 17 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • I 1 6- 1 1 7 The decline of Shetland’s Kittiwake population Martin Heubeck ‘There are few prettier sights for a naturalist than a flock of Kittiwakes [Rissa tridactyla] feeding in a secluded Shetland voe. The birds will hover above the water for a few seconds, and then dash suddenly in, almost always going right under out of sight, and will then rise lightly and easily, the wings appearing first, raised above the back. A visit to the Kittiwakes at home is no less interesting than a study of them upon the voes. They delight in building upon the ledges of the highest and steepest cliffs, and in the breeding season form an adjunct to the wild and beautiful regions of their choice.’ (Saxby 1874) The words of Henry Saxby, Shetland’s foremost naturalist of the nineteenth century, encapsulate the magic of Kitti- wakes, which are an integral part of the summer scene in Shetland. From the great cliffs of Fair Isle, Foula, Hermaness and Noss to tiny, little- known islands such as North Benelip, the Dore Holm and Gruna Stacks, Shetland’s Kittiwake colonies have long attracted the interest of vis- iting ornithologists, as well as fishermen and seafarers. The Shetland population is, however, now in serious decline, with many former colonies abandoned and most others severely depleted in numbers. Detailed counts of the major breeding stations (a ‘breeding station’ comprises a group of colonies separated by less than a mile of land or sea) began in the early 1960s, and continued during the Operation Seafarer survey of 1969-1971 (Cramp et al. 1974) and in a survey by the Institute of Terres- trial Ecology (now the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology) in 1974 (Harris 1976). Most of these counts were made from land, but, in fact, a high proportion of Shetland’s Kittiwakes nest on offshore stacks or around cave entrances which are not visible from the cliff-tops. It was not until 1981 that a comprehensive sea-borne census of the population was made, by the Nature Conservancy Council (in Scot- land, now Scottish Natural Heritage), using an inflatable boat to cover long stretches of coast- line in a single day, and to gain access to colonies where it is too risky to take a hard- hulled boat. That 1981 census revealed 54,264 apparently occupied nests (AONs) in the whole of Shetland (Richardson 1985), later revised to 54,600 nests (AONs plus trace nests) (Heubeck et al. 1999). This represented almost 10% of the British & Irish population, and perhaps 1-2% of the North Atlantic population (Lloyd et al. 1991). The Shetland Oil Terminal Environmental Advisory Group (SOTEAG), the Nature Con- servancy Council, and Fair Isle Bird Observa- tory continued to monitor Kittiwake numbers during the early 1980s. By 1985/86, however, once the first counts had been made for the Seabird Colony Register census, it became clear that some colonies in Shetland had increased while others had declined, and that these changes were happening at very different rates (Heubeck et al. 1986). Consequently, SOTEAG abandoned its attempts to monitor population change by repeated counts of fixed study plots at specific breeding stations, opting instead to survey all Shetland Kittiwake colonies by inflat- able boat at intervals of (ideally) no more than three years, and to check suitable coastlines for newly established colonies. This methodology has continued to the present day, and a popula- tion trend for Kittiwakes in Shetland has been derived by calculating the average annual rate of change between actual counts of nests at each breeding station, and then summing these esti- mates and actual counts for each year (Heubeck et al. 1999). The total Shetland population has declined progressively since 1981, and most dramatically © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 118-122 The decline of Shetland's Kittiwake population during the late 1980s and the 1990s (fig. 1). By 2001, the population in Shetland was down to an estimated 16,500 breeding pairs, a decline of almost 70% since 1981, with a loss of more than 38,000 pairs. In 1981, a third of the Shetland population bred on Fair Isle, the southernmost ot the islands. As colonies farther north have diminished or been abandoned, Fair Isle’s pro- portion of the total population has increased to 50% (by 2001), even though numbers on Fair Isle have also decreased sharply, from 19,340 nests in 1988 to 8,204 in 2001. There are two key reasons for this dramatic decline. First, breeding success has been generally low since monitoring began in 1986 (fig. 2). The years of low breeding success during the ‘sandeel crisis’ in the late 1980s were followed by a resurgence in fortunes in the early 1990s, as stocks of sandeels Ammodytes marinus recovered some- what. Since then, breeding success has been highly vari- able, but generally declining, with virtually complete breeding failure in 1998 and 2001. In 2001, for example, the season was progressing well until the first chicks hatched, towards the second week of June. Suddenly, chicks began to die in the nest, and most Shetland colonies had failed com- pletely by early July. Food shortage was undoubtedly the cause, in particular the lack of sandeels, which are the staple diet of Kittiwakes in Shetland during the summer, although the small local sandeel fishery, which is closely regulated to reduce its impact on breeding seabirds, cannot be blamed for this in recent years (see Brit. Birds 94: 151). The factors which cause periodic food shortages such as that experienced in 2001 are likely to be complex, but diving seabirds, such as Shags Phalacrocorax aristotelis. Common Guillemots Uria aalge and Razorbills Alca torda, are typi- cally affected less than are surface feeders, such as Kittiwakes and terns Sterna. Dietary studies in the Firth of Forth, Fife/Lothian, have shown that Kittiwakes feed on sandeels aged one year or older during May but switch to feeding mainly on ‘0-group’ sandeels (those hatched in Nests Annual % decrease 5-year running mean ii 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 Year Fig. I . The decline in the Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla population in Shetland, 1 98 1 -200 1 . Filled circles show the whole Shetland population, and open circles the Fair Isle population, The points on the graph are a mixture of actual counts and interpolation between such counts (see text). Rate of decline is indicated on the right-hand axis, showing a five-year running mean of the annual percentage decrease of the whole Shetland population. Fig. 2. Average breeding success of Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla in Shetland, 1 986-200 1 . Breeding success is calculated from mean number of chicks fledged from nests at which incubation was recorded or assumed. I 19 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 118-122 P. K. Kinnear The decline of Shetland’s Kittiwake population 57. Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla colonies at Corbie Geo, Noness, Shetland, June 1 977. A total of 7 1 3 nests was counted at this station from photographs taken on 25th June 1 977. The station held 707 nests in 1981, but by 1991 this number had declined to 1 32 nests, and the station was completely deserted by 1 994. the current year) during early June, as the older fish begin to spend more time buried in the seabed sediment and the 0-group fish meta- morphose from a planktonic larval phase to form shoals (Lewis et al. 2001). In that study, Kittiwake breeding success was lowest in years of late appearance and low growth rates of 0- group sandeels. It is likely that a similar situa- tion exists in Shetland, but, whatever the cause, the breeding output of Kittiwakes in Shetland in recent years (on average, during 1986-2001, 0.44 chicks fledged per AON) has been well below that required to maintain the population. For comparison, this productivity is lower than in nearby Orkney (1.01 chicks fledged per AON, 1989-2000), and also lower than in northeast Scotland (0.64 chicks per AON, 1986- 2000) and southeast Scotland (0.74 chicks per AON, 1986-2000) (Mavor et al. 2001). The second factor involves predation at colonies by Great Skuas Catharacta skua, which increased in numbers during the late 1980s. Skuas were also affected by the scarcity of sandeels during the late 1980s, since they fed directly on these fish and kleptoparasitised other seabirds carrying sandeels. Great Skuas then ‘discovered’ an alternative food source to sandeels: the direct predation of species such as Kittiwakes and Atlantic Puffins Fratercula arctica. Great Skuas are extremely efficient predators, and as long ago as the 1950s concerns had been voiced about their potential impact on Kittiwake numbers (Venables & Venables 1955). More recent studies have also drawn attention to the predation of other seabirds by Great Skuas (e.g. Furness 1997; Heubeck et al. 1997; Phillips et al. 1999; but see also Votier et al. 2001). The predation of Kittiwake chicks and, at some colonies, adults and their eggs, and the increase in this behaviour during the past 15 years, have undoubtedly been the major cause of the collapse of certain breeding stations, for example those at Eshaness and the nearby sker- ries, which have declined from 3,050 pairs in 1989 to just I 10 pairs in 2001. In addition, Great Skuas have contributed to the general population decline of Kittiwakes by further reducing breeding success and, almost certainly, increasing adult mortality rates, too. At many breeding stations, the greatest declines have been at colonies in ‘open’ situations, most vul- nerable to attack by skuas. Gonsequently, an increasing proportion ol Shetland’s Kittiwakes now breeds in colonies at the heads of narrow inlets (‘geos’) or in cave entrances, where skuas lind it difficult to manoeuvre. 120 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 118-122 The decline of Shetland's Kittiwake population 58. Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla colony at Brei Geo.Troswick, Shetland, June 1 977. This geo held 360 nests in 1977. and 354 nests in 1 98 I . By 1991, these had declined to 1 49 nests and, following heavy predation during 1 993 and 1994, numbers collapsed in 1995. Only 20 nests were counted in 2001. Of a total of 58 breeding stations known to have existed in Shetland since 1980, 14 small ones have now been abandoned, two new ones have become established, and one has been reoccupied after having been deserted for a decade. Only three stations (the islands of Fair Isle, Foula and Noss) now hold more than 1,000 pairs, compared with nine in 1981. Even some of those colonies which held more than 1,000 pairs in 1981 may soon be abandoned: for example, Ramna Stacks supported 1,350 pairs in 1981, still held 886 pairs in 1992, but had been reduced to just 51 pairs by 2001. The Kittiwake is not a globally threatened species, and in 1981 the Shetland population, despite being important in a European context, was still only a tiny fraction of that breeding in the North Atlantic. In contrast, the Shetland population of Great Skuas comprises almost 42% of the world population (Lloyd et al. 1991), which presents an extremely difficult conserva- tion issue. The results of the Seabird 2000 census of British and Irish breeding seabirds are not yet available, but it is probable that Shetland still holds 3-5% of the British & Irish breeding pop- ulation of Kittiwakes. Further declines in Shet- land, possibly to below 10,000 pairs by the end of the present decade, are almost inevitable, however, and there seems to be nothing that we can do to halt it. Fluctuations in local sandeel abundance and their availability to Kittiwakes are now driven probably by physical factors rather than by fishing regimes, and the preda- tory habits of Great Skuas have become too widespread among the population for limited ‘intervention’ by Man to be of any help. Not so long ago, it took considerable time and skill to count colonies such as those on the Skerry of Eshaness, Fogla Skerry off Papa Stour, or Horse Island off the southern tip of Main- land. Nowadays, the same boating skills are still necessary to negotiate tide rips and Atlantic swells, but all too often we come across a blank, grey cliff-face, silent and deserted, where once clicker-counters were set to zero amid the noise and clamour of a vibrant Kittiwake colony. References Cramp, S., Bourne, W. R. R, & Saunders, D. 1 974. The Seabirds of Britain and Ireland. London. Furness, R. W. 1 997. The impact of predation by Great Skuas on other seabird specie s, with particular reference to special protection areas in Shetland. Report to Scottish Natural Heritage. Harris, M. R 1 976. The seabirds of Shetland in 1 974. Scot. Birds 9: 37-68. British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 118-122 121 P. K. Kinnear Roger Riddington The decline of Shetland’s Kittiwake population 59. Part of a Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla colony at South Gunnawark, Fair Isle, Shetland, June 1 995. Kittiwakes nesting in more inaccessible sites such as this are less prone to suffer from predation than are those in more open sites, such as those in plates 57 & 58. Heubeck, M„ Mellon R. M„ & Harvey, RV. 1 997. Changes in the breeding distribution and numbers of Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla around Unst, Shetland, and the presumed role of predation by Great Skuas Catharacta skua. Seabird 19: 12-21. — , — , — , Mainwood, A. R., & Riddington, R. 1 999. Estimating the population size and rate of decline of Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla breeding in Shetland. Bird Study 46: 48-61. — , Richardson, M. G„ & Dore, C. R 1986. Monitoring numbers of Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla in Shetland. Seabird 9: 32-42. Lewis, S.,Wanless, S„ Wright, RJ„ Harris, M. R, Bull, J., & Elston, D. A. 200 1 . Diet and breeding performance of black-legged kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla at a North Sea colony. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 22 1 : 277-284. Lloyd, C., Tasker M. L, & Partridge, K. 1 99 1 . The Status of Seabirds in Britain and Ireland. London. Mavor R. A„ Pickerell, G., Heubeck. M„ & Thompson, K. R. 200 1 . Seabird numbers and breeding success in Britain and Ireland, 2000. JNCC, Peterborough. Phillips, R. A., Thompson, D. R„ & Hamer, K. C. 1 999. The impact of great skua predation on seabird populations at St Kilda: a bioenergetics model.]. Appl. Ecol. 36: 218- 232. Richardson, M. G. 1985. Status and distribution of the Kittiwake in Shetland in 1981. Bird Study 32: I I - 1 8. Saxby, H. L. 1 874. The Birds of Shetland. Edinburgh. Thompson, K. R„ Pickerell, G„ & Heubeck, M. 200 1 . Seabird numbers and breeding success in Britain and Ireland, 2000. JNCC, Peterborough. Venables, L. S.V., & Venables. U. M. 1955, Birds and Mammals of Shetland. Edinburgh. Votier S. C„ Bearhop, S., Ratcliffe, N„ & Furness. R.W. 2001. Pellets as indicators of diet in Great Skuas Catharacta skua. Bird Study 48: 373-376. Martin Heubeck, University of Aberdeen, do Sumburgh Head Lighthouse, Virkie, Shetland ZE3 9JN Looking back Twenty-five years ago: Bald Ibis breeding Work has started on construction of special cages for captive breeding of the last Bald Ibises Geronticus eremita in Eurasia, at the Turkish village of Birecik. The cages, which are being con- structed by the Turkish National Parks and Wildlife Directorate with World Wildlife Fund aid, will be on cliffs by the River Euphrates; the hope is that wild individuals will settle near the captives and establish a new breeding colony safe from human disturbance. (WWF News)' (Brit, birds 70: 142, March 1977) 122 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 118-122 The Ruddy Shelduck in Britain A review Andrew H.J. Harrop ABSTRACT The BOU Records Committee has reviewed early British records of Ruddy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea, including those up to 1892, and post- 1 950 sightings, in particular those relating to the 1994 influx. None of the pre-1892 records was accepted, but those which occurred in 1892 were considered to justify the species’ retention in Category B of the British List. None of the post- 1 950 records was accepted. The probability that records of this species relate to individuals of feral or captive origin is very high, yet vagrancy remains possible and is perhaps most likely to involve males in their second calendar-year. * On behalf of the British Ornithologists’ Union Records Committee © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 23- 1 28 123 The Ruddy Shelduck in Britain ) The position of any species on the British List ultimately rests on the unequivocally accepted identification, and wild origin, of at least one individual: the first record. Fol- lowing the evidence provided by Jessop (1999), that the earliest British record of Ruddy Shel- duck Tadorna ferruginea, at Blandford, Dorset, in winter 1776, involved, in fact, a misidentified Cape Shelduck T. cana, the Records Committee of the British Ornithologists’ Union undertook a formal review to determine the earliest acceptable record (BOU 2001). At the same time, following the alleged influx of wild Ruddy Shelducks in 1994 (Vinicombe & Harrop 1999; Duff 2001), BOURC undertook to review post- 1950 records, in particular those from 1994, to ascertain whether any of these merit inclusion in Category A of the British List. Ageing, sexing and movements Ruddy Shelducks can be aged in the hand by examination of the tips of the tail feathers (which are pointed on adults, while those of juveniles are notched and have the shafts exposed), and can be sexed by cloacal examina- tion, but ageing and sexing in the field are much more difficult. The most reliable feature for ageing immatures is the presence of grey, not white, greater coverts, which are retained until the summer of the second calendar-year (Cramp & Simmons 1977, and confirmed by reference to skins in the Natural History Museum, Tring). The greater coverts are, however, often concealed when the birds are at rest, and are most likely to be seen when they are preening, or on take-off. The buff tips of juvenile tail feathers are difficult to use reliably, since worn and faded adult tail feathers can also show buff fringes. Sexing immatures in the field is not recom- mended. Adult females can sometimes be dis- tinguished from non-breeding males (which lack a black ring around the lower neck) if they show a whitish patch at the base of the bill and around the eye, and by darker inner webs of the inner tertials. Individuals do vary, however, and females from Siberia and other parts of the species’ range in Asia apparently lack white face patches (Anastasia Popovkina in lilt.). In Ukraine, juveniles begin to fly in the middle of July (Igor Gorban in lift.), and rnoult- migration (presumably of both adults and immatures) takes place at the end ol July. Adults moulting their remiges are flightless for about four weeks between mid July and September (Cramp & Simmons 1977). In Moscow and Askania-Nova, young Ruddy Shelducks remain in broods until late autumn or even during their first winter, often accompanied by their parents (Anastasia Popovkina in lift.). Evidence concerning the dispersal of Ruddy Shelducks reintroduced in Ukraine and Bul- garia has been documented by Zubko et al. (1998) and Bogdanova & Zehtindjiev (2000), while data from Ukraine were summarised in Duff (2001). The reintroduction project in Bul- garia began in 1996, and in autumn 1997 three of the released birds migrated south to Greece, where they were observed in the Evros delta in November. Findings to date suggest that females are strongly attached to their natal territory while males disperse more widely. It seems probable, therefore, that those Ruddy Shelducks which are most prone to vagrancy will be males in their second calendar- year, when, by analogy with Common Shelduck T. tadorna (Cramp & Simmons 1977), males are likely to be unpaired. Immature Common Shel- ducks begin their moult-migration in June, with adults following in July. The first British record After formal rejection of the 1776 record, exam- ination of subsequent records during the early and middle parts of the nineteenth century (for example, those listed by Harting 1901) led to the conclusion that they were not acceptable, either because they were inadequately docu- mented or because their provenance was ques- tionable, as, for example, when the possibility of captive origin was very high. In the late nine- teenth century, several authors (notably Vyse 1892 and Anon. 1896) referred to known escapes, or the likelihood that apparently wild birds were in reality escapes. In these circum- stances, the 1892 influx was considered to be the only substantial reason for the retention of Ruddy Shelduck in Category B. The 1892 influx has already been discussed by Ogilvie (1892) and Vinicombe & Harrop ( 1999). During the course of the review, the fol- lowing 1892 records, not mentioned by those authors, were found: three killed at Braunton, Devon, in June (Evans 1892); ‘some’ said to have been shot at Woolacombe Sands, Devon, in September (Gould 1892); and one shot at Widnes, Lancashire, on 9th October (Oldham 1905). Unfortunately, the Committee was 124 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 123-128 The Ruddy Shelduck in Britain 60. Case no. 85 of the Ogilvie Collection, now in Ipswich Museum, containing adult male Ruddy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea (left), with apparent second-calendar-year male (centre) and female (right). All shot at Thorpe Mere, Suffolk, in July/August 1 892. «".)P ( ? X~A A t: 5 3. C. which were obtained in the wild also have notably frayed tertials, this should not be con- sidered a sign of captive origin. Specimen A is, in fact, an adult, since it has both adult tail feathers and white greater coverts, while the other two appear to combine adult tail feathers with grey greater coverts, and were thus in their second calendar-year when obtained (as Ogilvie suggested). Since the primaries of the males appear worn and faded, they had presumably not been moulted when the birds were obtained. Those of the female seem to be fresher. The first record during the 1892 influx was of five individuals at Durness, Sutherland, on 20th June. Since the only extant British speci- mens from that year had been correctly identi- fied, and since there are also existing specimens from Iceland and Greenland which were col- lected during 1892, the Committee felt that it would be inappropriate to reject the other records from that year. The provenance of those involved in the 1892 influx was discussed by Ogilvie (1892), whose conclusion that they were wild became widely accepted and cited. The Committee also agreed with his conclusion, for three main reasons. First, two of the flocks in 1892 (14 in Sutherland and ‘about 20’ in Donegal) were larger than any of those recorded in Fennoscandia in 1994. Secondly, the timing of the 1892 influx into Britain & Ireland was similar to the timing of the influx into Fennoscandia in 1994. Thirdly, there were no further Icelandic records until 1999 (Gunnlaugur Petursson in lift.), so that those in that country in 1892 were certainly exceptional. The five at Durness thus become the first British record of Ruddy Shelduck. 1892 specimens from Iceland and Greenland Since there are so few extant British specimens from 1892, a request for information about other specimens from the 1892 influx was made to the Association of European Rarities Com- mittees. Gunnlaugur Petursson and Jon Fjeldsa kindly provided data concerning three in Iceland and another three in Greenland. All three Icelandic birds were considered most likely to be males. RM474 in the Icelandic Museum of Natural History is in poor condi- tion, but the wings indicate that it is an adult, while the bill length of 47 mm strongly indi- cates a male. ZM69.980 and ZM69.981 are both in the Zoological Museum in Copenhagen; the first has a bill length of 42 mm and tarsus length of 62 mm (clearly a male), while the second has a bill length of 47 mm and tarsus length of 57 mm. The collector of ZM69.981 has stated in print that it was a male. The three individuals which reached Green- land were, however, considered to be females. Although the only information on the labels of the specimens is the collector’s name (Fencher) and the respective accession numbers, the birds are smaller than the Icelandic ones and have a distinctive white face. Since both these and the female specimen from Suffolk have a white face, they are unlikely to have come from the eastern part of the species’ range ( contra Vinicombe & Harrop 1999). I 994 ‘influx’ Regrettably, the Committee did not receive a single description in support of the 1994 records, despite a request to the County Recorders of Cheshire and Cornwall, nor was any information about the age and/or sex of those individuals forthcoming. Nonetheless, the evidence presented by Vinicombe & Harrop (1999) was reviewed. Despite the very high probability of the occurrence of captive or feral birds, members of the Committee were receptive to the possibility that some genuine vagrants may occur, at least occasionally. Admission to Category A was not, however, felt to be justified, for four main reasons. First, as previously noted by Vinicombe & Harrop (1999), the total number of Ruddy Shelducks reported in Britain & Ireland in 1994 was not greater than in other years during the early 1990s. Secondly, the pattern of records, with the largest flocks recorded in northwest and southwest England, does not suggest an arrival from Fennoscandia, where exceptional numbers were recorded in 1994. Thirdly, the pattern of monthly occurrence was similar to that during the period 1965-79 (Rogers 1982). Fourthly, the largest flock recorded (up to 12 in Flintshire/Cheshire/Wirral) was thought likely to have included one or two escaped birds which had been in the area for several years (Vinicombe & Harrop 1999), and certainly included one with a red colour-ring. Moreover, the flock of up to six in Cornwall/Scilly/Devon occurred over a month later than the main influx into Fennoscandia, which was during July-August. Since there was an influx of apparently wild British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 123-128 127 The Ruddy Shelduck in Britain > Ruddy Shelducks into Fennoscandia in 1994, the possibility that wild individuals of this species occasionally reach Britain remains. The Committee agreed, therefore, to place post- 1950 records in Category D. Observers who encounter this species in circumstances which suggest that genuine vagrants may be involved are encouraged to make every effort to establish the age and sex of each individual, and to submit this information to the relevant County Recorder. The information thus compiled will be most helpful to the Committee during any subsequent review. Acknowledgments Mark Adams (Natural History Museum, Tring) and David Lampard (Ipswich Museum) granted access to specimens in their respective collections; David Lampard also pro- vided a copy of the relevant pages of Ogilvie's original manuscript index to his collection. Jon Fjeldsa and Gunnlaugur Petursson provided data on 1892 specimens from Iceland and Greenland. Igor Gorban and Anastasia Popovkina answered queries about Ruddy Shelducks in Ukraine and Russia, respectively. Alan Knox undertook most of the research into pre- 1 892 British records, and members of the BOURC commented on the file during circulation and on a draft of this paper. References Anon. 1 896. Review of Supplement to 'The Birds of Devon1, by W. S. M. D'Urban and M. A. Mathew, 1 895. Zoologist 1 896: I 1 9- 1 20. Baikie.W. B., & Heddle, R. 1848. Historia Naturalis Orcadensis. Edinburgh. Bogdanova, M. I„ & Zehtindjiev. P H. 2000. Experimental release of Ruddy Shelducks in the nature (preliminary results). Casarca 6: 253-256. Booth, E.T., & Griffith, A. F. 1927. Catalogue of Cases of Birds in the Dyke Road Museum, Brighton. 5th edn. Brighton. British Ornithologists’ Union. 200 1 . British Ornithologists' Union Records Committee: 27th Report (October 2000). Ibis 143: 171-175. Buckley. T. E., & Harvie-Brown, J. A. 1 89 1 . A Vertebrate Fauna of the Orkney Islands. Edinburgh. Campbell, D. C. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrakes in Ireland. Zoologist 1 892: 359. Cramp, S.. & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.) 1 977. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.V ol. I . Oxford. Duff, A. 2001. The alleged influx of wild Ruddy Shelducks in 1 994; and reply by A. H. J. Harrop and K. E. Vinicombe. Brit. Birds 94: 9 1 -92. Evans. H. A. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrake in North Devon. Zoologist 1 892: 427. Frost, C. 1989. The Ogilvie bird collection: an illustrated guide to the F. M. Ogilvie collection of cased British birds prepared by T. E. Gunn of Norwich and presented to the Ipswich Museum in 1918. Long Melford. Gould, F. H. C. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrake in North Devon. Zoologist 1 892: 426. Gray, K 1871. The Birds of the West of Scotland. Glasgow. Gurney, j. H. 1893. Ruddy Sheldrake in Norfolk. Zoologist 1893: 152-153. Haigh, G. H. C. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrake in Lincolnshire. Zoologist 1 892: 360. Hart, H. C. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrake in Co. Donegal. Zoologist 1 892: 359. Harting, j. E. 1 90 1 . A Handbook of British Birds. 2nd edn. London. Harvie-Brown, J. A., & Buckley T. E. 1 887. A Vertebrate Fauna of Sutherland, Caithness and West Cromarty. Edinburgh. Ipswich Corporation Museum. 1 928. Guide to the Ogilvie collection of British birds collected mainly in Suffolk and Scotland. Ipswich. jessop, L. 1999. George Allan's Grey-headed Duck: Two Centuries of Confusion Partly Resolved. Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. Northumbria 59: 83-92. Langton, H, 1 890. Ruddy Sheldrake in West Sussex. Zoologist 1 890: 395. Oldham. C. 1905. Ruddy Sheld-drake ( Tadorna casarca) in Lancashire. Zoologist 1 905: 1 07- 1 08. Ogilvie. F. M. 1 892. On the recent occurrence in the British Islands of the Ruddy Sheldrake. Zoologist 1 6: 392-398. — Undated. Manuscript: Index to Collection of Birds. Ipswich Museum. Parkin, T. 1884. Ruddy Sheldrake on Romney Marsh. Zoologist 1 884: 469. Pennie, I. D„ & Gunn, J. M. 1951. Birds in the Wick Museum. Scot. Nat. 63: 196-197, Popovkina, A. B. 1999. History and current status of Ruddy Shelduck population in Moscow. Casarca 5: 245-246. - - & Gerasimov, K. B. 2000. Classification of the Ruddy Shelduck ducklings into age classes according to the stages of their plumage development. Casarca 6: 181- 186. Rogers, M. J. 1982. Ruddy Shelducks in Britain in 1965-79. Brit. Birds 75: 446-455. Selby. R j. 1 833. Illustrations of British Ornithology.Vol. 2. Edinburgh. Shearer R. I., & Osborne. H. 1 862. Notes on the Ornithology of Caithness. Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. E dinb. 2: 334-341. Ussher R. J. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrakes in Ireland. Zoologist 1892:334-335. Vinicombe, K. E.. & Harrop, A. H. j. 1 999. Ruddy Shelducks in Britain and Ireland 1986-1994. Brit. Birds 92: 225-255. Vyse, H. H. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrakes in Buckinghamshire. Zoologist 1 892: 359-360. Williams, E. 1 892. Ruddy Sheldrake in Co. Dublin. Zoologist 1892: 359, Wilson, J. 1 842, A Voyage Round the Coasts of Scotland and the fs/es.Vol. 2. Edinburgh, Zubko, V. N„ Popovkina, A. B„ Gavrilenko.V. S., & Semenov, N. N. 1 998. Population of the Ruddy Shelduck in Askania-Nova: History and Current Status. Casarca 4: 242-243. Andrew H. /. llarrop, 30 Dean Street, Oakham, Rutland LEI5 6 AF; e-mail: andrew.harrop@virgin.net 128 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 123-1 28 From the Rarities Committee’s files: Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire Two unusual Brent Geese Branta bernicla, seen in winter in Norfolk and Hampshire, are discussed in this paper.They appeared superficially similar to the North American and east Siberian race nigricans (‘Black Brant’), but a number of discrepancies in their appearance compared with typical individuals of nigricans caused great debate among observers and BBRC. Following an investigation of the range of variation within nigricans, especially of the neck- collar pattern, it was concluded that to accept these two geese as ‘Black Brants’ was unsafe. The Committee will continue to accept only well- documented records of individuals which show a range of characteristic features associated with nigricans. The three forms of Brent Goose referred to in this paper are sometimes treated as distinct species: Dark-bellied Brent Goose Branta bernicla, Pale-bellied Brent Goose B. hrota and Black Brant B. nigricans (e.g. Sangster 2000). Their treatment here as subspecies of Branta bernicla is in line with that of the BOU (although that policy is currently under review). Throughout this paper the product of the interbreeding of individuals of different races is referred to by the term 'intergrade' rather than 'hybrid', since the latter term is more correctly applied to a cross between two species. ZEISS © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 129-136 129 Julian 8 halerao c Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire ) Brent Geese Branta bernicla of the North American and east Siberian race nigricans (‘Black Brant’) occur in small numbers in Britain & Ireland each winter (see table 1), almost always with flocks of dark-bellied B. b. bernicla or pale-bellied Brent Geese B. b. hrota. The identification of this form was discussed recently by Millington (1997). Adult nigricans can be distinguished from nominate bernicla by a few characters which, in combination, are dis- tinctive. In summary, the body is darker, choco- late-brown, often looking almost black, and shows little or no contrast between the fore- flanks and both the mantle/scapulars and the black ‘neck sock’. There is a striking pale flash on the flanks, which is whiter than that of ber- nicla, and shows greater contrast with the darker body. The white neck patches are broader, and meet at the front of the neck. A less obvious feature is that the black of the belly extends farther back, to the vent. Structurally, nigricans tends to be large and stocky, but there is much overlap with bernicla. This short paper examines the identification of two well-documented Brent Geese which showed most, but not all, of the key features of nigricans. It also considers whether the current BBRC policy of accepting only those individuals which show all the characteristics of nigricans, so-called ‘classic individuals’, is still appropriate. The Norfolk bird This individual was present at various localities on the north Norfolk coast during the winters of 1998/99 and 1999/2000 (plates 63-65). It was one of up to three geese claimed as ‘Black Brants’ which were seen in the Cley/Blakeney area from 7th November 1998 into 1999. The precise arrival date of the individual discussed here is not certain, but all three were present from 14th November. It remained throughout the winter, and was seen in Blakeney Harbour until at least 13th March 1999 (A. M. Stoddart, verbally); it also visited nearby Sheringham during 27th-29th December 1998. In the fol- lowing autumn, the same individual was again Table I. Numbers of ‘Black Brants' Branta bernicla nigricans recorded in Britain & Ireland, 1 990-99. Totals are from the annual 'Report on rare birds in Great Britain', published in British Birds. Only those individuals which are considered to be new arrivals are included. 63. Adult Brent Goose Branta bernicla of race nigricans ('Black Brant', centre) and Brent Goose of undetermined race but possibly an intergrade between dark-bellied race bernicla and 'Black Brant' (left; the 'Norfolk bird'), Cley, Norfolk, November 1 998. The plumage tones and flank pattern of the possible intergrade are similar to those of ‘Black Brant', but the much-reduced white neck patch and smaller size are noticeable. 130 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 129-1 36 Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire > 64 & 65. Adult Brent Goose Branta bernida of undetermined race, possibly an intergrade between dark-bellied race bernida and 'Black Brant' B. b. nigricans, Cley, Norfolk, November 1 998. The indistinct neck patch is confined to the neck sides. Two generations of scapulars and wing-coverts are visible, with the older browner feathers contributing the rufous tinge to the upperparts. reported, at Kelling on 23rd November 1999, and subsequently at Cley and Salthouse until at least late December. In the absence of reports from the finders, A. M. Stoddart provided descriptions of the three individuals in the Cley/Blakeney area in autumn 1998. All three were adults (as with nearly all British records of nigricans ) and all shared the following features: • Mantle and scapulars significantly darker than bernicla , showing little contrast with hindneck • Belly and foreflanks similarly dark, almost black, noticeably darker than bernicla and hardly contrasting with head, neck and breast • Mid and rear flanks strikingly bright white, contrasting sharply with almost black foreflanks Two possessed the broad, complete neck collar typical of nigricans, and both were subse- quently accepted by BBRC {Brit. Birds 92: 562). The third individual was duller, showed a rufous-brown tone to the upperparts (as did one of the accepted nigricans), and had some fawn colour intermixed in the flank patch (which was, however, still striking). More signif- icantly, it had a thin and wholly unremarkable neck collar, confined to the sides of the neck and less pronounced even than on many exam- ples of bernicla present at the same time. Pho- British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 29- 1 36 131 Julian Bhaierao Julian Bhalerao Kevin Crisp Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire tographs show that it was also somewhat small when compared directly with a typical, bulky- looking nigricans (plate 63, perhaps a male), and therefore lacking significant size or struc- tural differences from bernicla. Further accounts of this goose were received from Tim Wright (observations at Sheringham, from 27th to at least 29th December 1998) and T. Lowe (sightings at Kelling, on 23rd November 1999). It was seen by many observers, which generated some debate about its parentage, although it was captioned as a ‘Black Brant’ in at least two published pho- tographs. The observers’ descriptions were circulated around BBRC members on three separate occa- sions. Each time, discussion centred on three main points: • Whether the poorly defined neck collar was within the range of variation of nigricans • The problems of intergrades, and the separation of these from pure nigricans • BBRC’s policy of accepting only ‘classic individuals’ showing the full suite of characters associated with nigricans Some members thought that the small neck patches were best explained by individual varia- tion within nigricans, and favoured acceptance of the record on the basis that the bird was easy to locate among bernicla, and only the neck collar was at odds with its identification as nigricans. Others considered that some bernicla influence could equally explain the indistinct neck collar, and requested further information on the individual variation of nigricans and proof that known nigricans with a similar pattern can exist. At the more cautious end of the spectrum were those who stuck to the line that the Committee should really accept only ‘classic individuals’. They argued that, even if nigricans proved rather variable, and even if it could show characters similar to those of the Norfolk bird, the true parentage of such an individual would still be hard to prove, since intergrades are known to exist and may perhaps also look like this. The Hampshire bird Another unusual Brent Goose was present at North Hayling and South Moor, Langstone Harbour, Hampshire, during February and March of both 1998 and 1999, from 12th November 1999 to 13th March 2000 and, subse- quently, during the winters of 2000/01 and 2001/02. Jason Crook found it in November 1999, and he provided a detailed description and a number of photographs (plate 66), these showing the goose in the company of bernicla. His submission was not a claim of nigricans but, instead, a request for the opinion of the Com- mittee on a difficult and interesting bird. JC had also had the opportunity of studying a ‘Black Brant’ at nearby Farlington Marshes in November 1999 (Brit. Birds 94: 460) and was able to compare the two individuals (albeit indirectly), and to make direct comparison with numerous bernicla. 66. Brent Goose Branta bernicla of undetermined race, possibly an intergrade between dark-bellied race bernicla and 'Black Brant' B. b. nigricans, with dark-bellied Brent Geese, Hampshire, February 2000.The rather harsh light makes it difficult to assess plumage tones accurately, but the contrast between the black neck and the paler mantle and lower breast is evident. The neck collar and the white flank patch are both striking, recalling 'Black Brant'. 132 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 129-136 < Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire > The Hampshire bird showed a number of features associated with nigricans, but differed in plumage from the ‘classic’ nigricans at Far- lington Marshes in four key areas: * It was slightly paler on both the mantle/ scapulars and the belly, which consequently showed greater contrast with the black ‘neck sock’ * The flank patch was smaller and of a different shape * The neck patches were also shaped differently, although they were still strikingly large and met at the front * It was unusually small, described by JC as ‘by far the smallest Brent Goose in this part of the harbour, and probably the smallest adult I have ever seen’ There were subtle changes in this individual’s appearance during the course of the winter. The contrast between the neck and the body was enhanced as the latter became paler, presumably through wear and bleaching. The flank patches became less intense as abrasion of the broad pale tips revealed more of the darker feather bases. In JC’s own discussion, he concluded that the goose could be either a nigricans (though not a typical individual) or an intergrade between nigricans and bernicla. The Committee considered that the neck collar and the flank patch were well within the range of variation of nigricans. The paleness of the body was, however, felt to be more of a problem. The harsh light in the photographs may exaggerate the degree of contrast in the bird’s plumage, but the careful notes of JC clearly indicate an indi- vidual paler than a normal nigricans. This paler body plumage was already evident in November, so that it could not be attributed wholly to wear and bleaching. The fact that the goose was the smallest one in the flock is also strange, especially since nigricans is often (though not always) large and thickset. Discussion As concluded by BBRC members, more research was required into variation in the neck collar of nigricans before a more satisfactory decision could be reached on the identification of the Norfolk bird. Flumm (1991) and Conn- bridge (1994) have documented wintering ber- nicla, in Devon and the Netherlands respectively, with the neck collar joined at the front. If bernicla can be so variable, is the same perhaps true of nigricans ? To investigate the possible range of variation in the prominence of the neck collar, JPM visited the headquarters of the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust at Slimbridge, Gloucestershire, on 24th August 2000, and studied the neck pat- terns of 22 adult nigricans in the collection there. All the nigricans at Slimbridge showed a complete neck collar which was joined across the front of the neck, although on two individ- uals it was distinctly narrow, and on one of these it was actually broken into a series of dashes (and therefore, arguably, was not joined across the front). The neck patches on these two were also narrower at the sides, with reduced ‘webbing’ (thin, ‘spidery’ lines of white above the more solid white part of the patch), than were those of the other nigricans. In August, adult Brent Geese should be starting their post- breeding body moult, but it is unclear how sig- nificantly, if at all, this may affect the size and brightness of the neck collar. The study sample, although small, demonstrated that significant variation does occur in the neck collar of nigri- cans. Following this, 13 skins of adult nigricans held at the Natural History Museum, Tring, were examined in June 2001 (plates 67 & 68). Four specimens, collected between December and March, all had a broad, bold neck collar which was joined at the front. The other nine, collected at other times of the year, or undated, also showed a good collar which was complete at the front on at least seven, and probably all (the posture of two specimens was such that this feature could not be checked). There are also several skins of so-called ‘ orientalis ’ at Tring. This scientific name has been applied to the population of ‘Black Brants’ breeding in east Siberia and wintering in eastern Asia. It is said to be paler and browner above than nigricans, but it is not recognised by Cramp & Simmons (1977). The skins of 'orientalis’ appeared virtu- ally identical to nigricans in terms of upperpart coloration, and all the adults also had a com- plete bold neck collar. In order to investigate variation in the neck- collar pattern of a larger sample of nigricans, it was necessary to seek advice from North America. Steve Howell (verbally) reported that, of 150 nigricans studied in California in December 1998, all had a full neck collar. These included first-winters (approximately 10-20%) British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 129-136 133 John Martin John Martin Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire J- and some distinguishable second-winters (it seems that post-juvenile moult produces an adult-like head and neck early in the winter). SH also studied some 500+ nigricans at close range in Baja California, Mexico, in December 2000, and 100+ in Alaska, in June 2001: all had a complete, bold neck collar. He also provided photographs of an interesting nigricans , an adult on the Farallon Islands, California, in Sep- tember 1994 (plates 69 & 70). At first sight, this looks like a ‘classic individual’, but head-on views reveal that the bold neck patches do not quite meet at the front. The bird may well be in body moult at this season (similar to those at 67 & 68. Adult 'Black Brants' Branta bernida nigricans, Natural History Museum. Tring, June 2001. The individual in plate 67 shows a typical nigricans neck collar; while those in plate 68 demonstrate the extent of variation in nigricans. Slimbridge in August), which may have affected the neck collar, or it may simply represent part of the spectrum of natural variation in nigricans. As might be expected, then, there is some variability in the pattern of the neck collar of nigricans , and a very few individuals may show an incomplete but still bold and bright collar. Some captive nigricans have also been observed to have a complete but thin collar. The appar- ently high percentage of captives showing a reduced collar (9% of the small sample exam- ined at Slimbridge) raises questions about their ‘purity’. It is possible that there has been some input of bernida genes in the Slimbridge popu- lation, although the opinion of WWT staff is that this is unlikely to have happened in the past ten years. In any case, known nigricans with a neck collar as poor as that of the Norfolk bird remain elusive. They could occur, but they are clearly extremely rare. A further consideration is the appearance of known intergrades. At least three family parties, each comprising nigricans and bernicla parents and their intergrade offspring, have recently been documented in Britain and the Netherlands (Bloomfield & McCallum 2001; Berrevoets & Erkman 1993). In their first winter, known intergrades have been somewhat variable in appearance, but often closely resem- bling nigricans. The young of the recent Norfolk family party were variably darker and browner than first-winter bernicla, with flank patches similar in shape to those of nigricans but more mottled, and neck markings ranging from a complete collar, as on nigricans, to white patches confined to the neck sides. Two of the six intergrades in Sussex (plate 71) returned in four suc- cessive winters. By their second winter, they resembled nigri- cans even more closely, differing only in that they sported a slightly weaker neck collar (Barry Collins, ver- bally). In view of the small sample, and the fact that first-winters are much less distinc- tive than adults, it is presently unclear just 134 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 129-136 c Unusual Brent Geese In Norfolk and Hampshire 69 & 70. Adult 'Black Brant' Branta bernicla nigricans, Farallon Islands, California, USA, September 1 994. This is a typical nigricans, although the neck patches, while still deep and bold, do not quite meet at the front of the neck. what a ‘typical’ intergrade would look like as an adult. We do, however, know that at least some can look very similar to nigricans. This suggests that a cautious approach is required to the identification of vagrant nigricans, and that, even then, not all individuals will be identifi- able with certainty. Syroechkovski et al. (1998) claimed further evidence of intergradation from their studies on the breeding grounds in east Siberia. Pho- tographs published with their paper which pur- ported to show mixed pairs of bernida and nigricans have, however, proved somewhat con- troversial. Those geese identified as nigricans look rather pale on the upperparts and fore- flanks, apparently little different in tone from their bernicla mates. Nevertheless, rings recov- ered from local hunters include six from North America and one from the Netherlands, which at least supports the idea that both forms may be breeding in the area. Conclusions Although it seems that nigricans is somewhat variable in terms of the appearance of its neck collar, individuals with a collar as indistinct as that of the Norfolk bird appear to be, at best, rare (and possibly unknown). Of the few docu- mented intergrades between bernicla and nigri- cans, some appear very similar to the latter form. Two which were observed as adults dif- fered from nigricans only in a slightly reduced neck collar. It seems, therefore, that the Norfolk bird was more likely to have been an intergrade than an extreme example of the natural varia- tion within nigricans, although the latter cannot British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 29- 1 36 135 Steve N. G. Howell Steve N. G. Howell Barry Collins c Unusual Brent Geese in Norfolk and Hampshire ) 71. 'Black Brant’ Branta bernida nigricans and dark-bellied Brent Goose B. b. bernida parents, with six intergrade young, in flock of dark-bellied Brent Geese, Thorney Island, West Sussex, February 1 989. The group is along the shoreline, and the third goose from the left is the adult 'Black Brant'. be ruled out. It is, therefore, considered not acceptable as a record of nigricans. Similarly, although it is also conceivable that nigricans could, exceptionally, look much like the Hampshire bird, the latter is also close in appearance to known intergrades. The Com- mittee members were, however, unanimous in the opinion that this individual was also not acceptable as nigricans. The view of JC and other local birders, that it was more likely to have been an intergrade than a pale nigricans , was shared by the Committee. With increasing numbers of wintering nigri- cans being found in southeast Britain, many observers have gained familiarity with this form. Some recent claims have, however, been poorly documented, and in some cases amounted simply to a list of the known identifi- cation criteria of the form, rather than a detailed description of the relevant individual(s). The two well-documented cases discussed here demonstrate the need for great care when a suspected nigricans is discovered in Britain. Following this investigation of the range of plumage variation, and the appearance of inter- grades, the Committee’s policy of accepting only ‘classic individuals’, showing the full suite of characters associated with nigricans , appears to be justified. Acknowledgments Thanks are due to the following for help with this paper: The Natural History Museum atTring for access to skins; Julian Bhalerao for photographs and discussion of the Norfolk bird; Kevin Crisp for photographs of the Hamp- shire bird; Barry Collins for comments and for slides of the Sussex family party; Steve Howell for studying nigricans in America, for supplying photographs of nigricans from the New World, and for comments on an earlier draft of this paper; Adam Rowlands for valuable comments on birds at Tring and on an earlier draft of this paper; Colin Bradshaw, Andy Stoddart, Reg Thorpe, Keith Vinicombe and Grahame Walbridge for suggesting improvements to the text; and, of course, those who found the geese discussed and sent in records of them. References Bernevoets, C., & Erkman, A. 1993. Gemengd paartje Rotgans en Zwarte Rotgans met twee 'hybride' jongen bij Oude Tonge in winter van 1 99 1 192. Dutch Binding 1 5: 6 1 -63, Bloomfield, A., & McCallum, J. 200 1 . Changing fortunes of the Black Brant. Binding World 1 4: 66-68, Combridge, R 1994. Brent Geese with white neck bands. Brit. Birds 87: 626. Cramp, S„ & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.) 1 977, The Birds of the Western Palearctic.V ol. I . Oxford. Flumm, D. S. 1991. Brent Geese with white neck bands. Brit. Birds 84: 220-22 1 . Millington, R. 1 997. Separation of Black Brant, Dark-bellied Brent Goose and Pale-bellied Brent Goose. Birding World 10: I 1-15. Sangster, G. 2000. Taxonomic status of bernida and nigricans Brent Geese. Brit. Birds 93: 94-97. Syroechkovski, E. E., Zockler, C., & Lappo, E. 1998. Status of Brent Goose in northwest Yakutia, East Siberia. Brit. Birds 9 1 : 565-572. van den Berg, A. B„ Lambeck, R. H. D„ & Mullarney, K, 1 984. The occurrence of 'Black Brant' in Europe. Brit. Birds 77: 458-465, John Marlin , on behalf ofBBRC 34 Cranmoor Green, Pilning, South Gloucestershire BS35 4QF The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd 136 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 129-136 Conservation research news Compiled by David Gibbons, James Pearce-Higgms and Mark Hancock Arctic-breeding waders Summers in the Arctic are extremely short, so that wading birds, when they return to their Arctic breeding grounds, quickly start to nest. It has long been assumed that these migrants bring nutrients for egg production with them from their winter quarters or migration stopover sites. A recent study by Klaassen et al. (2001) has, however, shown that this is not the case. During winter and migration, most Arctic- breeding waders feed on estuarine inverte- brates. Upon arrival at their breeding grounds, however, they switch to a diet of terrestrial or freshwater invertebrates. The ratios of the various forms (isotopes) of carbon within the tissues of invertebrates from these different habitats are quite different. These differences are subsequently expressed in the growing tissues, such as eggs and feathers, of those birds which feed on them. Klaassen et al. looked at the carbon-isotope ratios of the eggs and down feathers of the chicks of ten different waders, including Great Ringed Plover Charadrius hiaticula , Red Knot Calidris canutus , Sanderling C. alba , Purple Sandpiper C. maritima and Dunlin C. alpina , from a range of sites in Greenland and Arctic Canada. The isotope ratios were typical of ter- restrial and freshwater systems, rather than estuarine ones, suggesting that the eggs and hatchlings were produced from local nutrients on the tundra breeding sites. This does not mean that feeding conditions on the wintering grounds have no effect on what happens during breeding. Gill et al. (2001) showed that Black-tailed Godwits Limosa lirnosa which winter on British estuaries, where they can achieve high prey-intake rates in spring, arrive on their Icelandic breeding grounds earlier than those from sites where intake rates are low. Although it has not (yet) been proven in the case of this species, many birds benefit from early arrival on their breeding grounds, which leads to improved breeding success, and this may still be true for these godwits. Gill, J. A., Norris, K„ Potts, R M„ Gunnarsson.T. G„ Atkinson, RW, & Sutherland, W. J. 200 1 .The buffer effect and large-scale population regulation in migratory birds. Nature 4 1 2: 436-438. Klaassen, M„ Lindstrom, A., Meltofte, H„ & PiersmaT 200 1 . Arctic waders are not capital breeders. Nature 4 1 3: 794. Population trends of Red Knot wintering in Britain Studies of survival and recruitment rates, which allow population trends to be modelled, are important research tools for conservation. These parameters are difficult to measure for long-lived species, owing to the timescale involved, but Boyd & Piersma (2001) have accomplished this for Red Knots Calidris canutus by using a combination of British ringing data and midwinter counts. They used their results to describe changes in the British wintering population between 1969 and 1995. The annual survival rate of adults averaged 79% during the study period, although varying from one year to another. Estimates of recruit- ment on the breeding grounds were obtained from the proportion of juveniles in catches of birds; this averaged 13%, but was also highly variable. Juvenile mortality was four times greater than that of adults. Fluctuations in the wintering population were related to changes in © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • I 37-138 137 Conservation research news C > survival and recruitment, as follows. From 1969 to 1977, high adult mortality and low recruit- ment resulted in a population decline of 9% per year. A subsequent increase in recruitment and a decline in adult mortality produced a 5% annual rise in the population from 1977 to 1985, although, beyond 1985, the level of recruitment fell, and the population remained largely stable thereafter. It is interesting that, for such a long-lived wader, fluctuations in popula- tion size were related to changes in recruitment as well as adult survival. Boyd & Piersma then examined a number of factors which may determine breeding success and mortality. There was some evidence that both high numbers of Arctic Foxes Alopex lagopus and periods of severe weather in summer reduced the number of Red Knots returning to Britain in the following winter. Most intriguingly, levels of recruitment were negatively correlated with population size in the previous winter. This suggests that recruitment may be density-dependent, although the under- lying mechanism for such a process remains unclear. Such information is important for determining conservation strategies, by indi- cating which factors influence population trends. This paper is a tribute to all those involved in collecting long-term data, and Boyd & Piersma conclude with an encouragement to wader-ringers and an appeal for greater collab- oration between volunteer ringers and profes- sional biologists. Boyd, H„ & Piersma, T. 2001. Changing balance between survival and recruitment explains population trends in red knots Calidris canutus islandica wintering in Britain, 1 969- 1 995, Ardea 89:301-317. The ‘edge effect’ on nest predation - does it really exist? New forestry in the uplands of Britain has often been opposed by conservationists, who argue that not only do populations of some vulner- able species disappear when trees are planted, but also an increase in forest-dwelling predators causes an ‘edge effect’, whereby birds nesting near forests face greater predation risk. As upland open regions become increasingly frag- mented, such factors could affect areas as large as those originally lost to forestry. This became a major issue in Britain in the 1980s, when large areas of the blanket bogs of northern Scotland were afforested. Thousands of hectares of prime wader breeding habitat were ploughed and planted with trees. When researchers looked for edge effects (using bird counts and dummy nests), however, they found little evidence for the existence of any (e.g. Avery et at. 1989). It now appears that these findings conform to a general pattern of results shown in ‘edge- effect’ research worldwide. A review of 55 such studies published between 1978 and 1998, increased near habitat edges (Lahti 2001). This was true for a wide variety of habitats, from forest, open grassland and moors to wetlands and agricultural land. The only situation which seemed to make it more likely that an edge effect might be found concerned highly frag- mented landscapes, where the habitat preferred by species subject to predation occupied less than half of the study area. Relatively few studies looked in detail at the predators respon- sible for nest losses, and their behaviour in rela- tion to habitat features. Those which did so tended to be the most successful in explaining the observed patterns of nest predation, sug- gesting that this may be a more fruitful approach to nest-predation studies in frag- mented landscapes, rather than a continued focus on habitat edges by themselves. Avery, M. I. .Winder F. L. R„ & Egan.V. M. 1 989. Predation on artificial nests adjacent to forestry plantations in northern Scotland. Oikos 55: 321-323. Lahti, D. C. 2001. The 'edge effect on nest predation' hypothesis after twenty years. Biol. Conserv. 99: 365- 374. carried out in a range of habitats, revealed that the majority failed to find that nest predation Dr David Gibbons, Dr lames Pearce-Higgirts and Dr Mark Hancock, Conservation Science Department, RSPR, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SGI 9 2DL This feature, contributed by the RSPB's Research Department reports the most interesting recent scientific news relevant to the conservation ofWestern Palearctic bird species. 138 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 137-1 38 Notes Is there a dark morph of the North African race of Long-legged Buzzard ? It seems to be widely assumed that the dark morph of the Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus is found only in the nominate race rufinus (e.g. Beaman & Madge 1999; Shirihai & Forsman 1991; Svensson et al. 1999), and also that this morph is more frequent among easternmost popula- tions of the species (Shirihai & Forsman 1991). In 1999, Hichem Azafzaf gave me a video- recording of raptors in Tunisia (compiled by J.-M. & M. Terrasse, in 1987). While studying the tape, I noticed that one member of a breeding pair of Long-legged Buzzards was clearly a dark-morph individual. F1A confirmed that the nest was filmed in Tunisia and that the pair was of the North African race cirtensis. Although Carmela Cardelli and I failed to find any dark-morph individuals among a number of Long-legged Buzzards observed in Tunisia in January 2001, this record, supported by the video evidence, indicates that this race, too, can occur in a dark morph. The apparent existence of a dark morph of this species in North Africa, rare though it may be, complicates the separation of dark-morph Andrea Corso C.I.R., Via Camastra, 10- 96100 Siracusa, Italy Long-legged Buzzard from dark-morph Common Buzzard Buteo buteo of the form vulpinus (‘Steppe Buzzard’). The nominate race of Long-legged Buzzard is larger and longer- winged than ‘Steppe Buzzard’, and with practice these structural differences may be used to dis- tinguish similar morphs of the two species. The North African race cirtensis, however, is smaller and more compact than nominate rufinus, and is consequently much more similar to ‘Steppe Buzzard’. Like the dark morph of the nominate race, the Tunisian buzzard reported here appeared to have duller secondaries with dark bars wider and less evenly distributed than on a ‘Steppe Buzzard’ of similar age and colour morph, while the dark trailing edge of the wing was less striking. References Beaman, M„ & Madge, S. 1999. The Handbook of Bird Identification. London. Shirihai, H„ & Forsman, D. 1991. Steppe Buzzard morphs at migration and their separation from Long-legged Buzzard. Dutch Birding 13: 197-209. Svensson, L., Grant, RJ„ Mullarney, K„ & Zetterstrom, D. 1 999. Collins Bird Guide. London. Difficulties in determining the age of Arctic Terns in the field On 9th May 2001, AL and Alain Saint- Auret discovered an unfamiliar tern Sterna resting on a beach at the Petite-Terre nature reserve, Guadeloupe, West Indies. AL obtained a series of photographs, from which PY later identified the bird as an Arctic Tern S. paradisaea, which proved, in fact, to be the first ever recorded on Guadeloupe (Levesque & Jaffard in press). The age of this tern caused some debate when the photographs were shown to other observers. Most considered that it was an adult, but our opinion is that it was an immature, for reasons which are developed below. The general impression was that of an adult Arctic Tern in full summer plumage (plates 72 & 73). A slightly darker carpal bar is, however, visible at the bend of the wing in some photos (plate 74). A line of slightly worn lesser coverts, marked with brown, is seen clearly on some photographs (see plate 72), although these were obscured by the scapulars at times. These indi- cators of immaturity were, however, so slight that they were easily overlooked in the field, and also by a number of observers who examined the photographs. The lightly barred appearance of the underparts was apparent only through detailed scrutiny of the photographs, and was not evident in the field. The legs and bill (par- ticularly the distal portion of the bill) were of a darker, browner red than those of a typical adult, although this is hard to appreciate with the lack of direct comparison. According to BWP (Vol. 4), those Arctic Terns which, in summer, show less obvious signs of immaturity than one-year-old birds, but retain slightly worn, non-breeding upperwing- coverts with a distinct or spotted slate-grey carpal bar, are presumably in their third cal- © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 139-142 139 Anthony Levesque Anthony Levesque Anthony Levesque Notes ) 73. Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea, presumed to be in second-summer plumage. Guadeloupe, West Indies, May 200 1 . Lesser wing-coverts are hidden by the scapulars. endar-year. BWP also sug- gests that such individuals may retain scattered white non-breeding feathers on the forehead, lores or belly (which is sometimes paler grey than on adults), as well as a few old scapulars or tail feathers. Mailing Olsen & Larsson (1995) added that Arctic Terns in second- summer plumage (i.e. in their third calendar-year) normally have a duller or more brown-toned cap, with variable white in the fore- head and lores (sometimes appearing as a white blaze), and that their underparts generally show a whiter breast. The tail feathers are shorter than on adults, but the primaries are adult-like. The tern photographed in Guadeloupe did not conform to the above pub- lished descriptions. In par- ticular, although it retained a few brown, immature upperwing-coverts, which led us to believe that it was in its third calendar-year, its cap was complete and jet- black, the tail feathers were the same size as those of an adult, while the underparts were far less heavily marked than shown in Mailing Olsen & Larsson (1995). As a result of our observations, we are of the opinion that the age of Arctic Terns cannot be determined in the field so easily as has been suggested in the literature. The discrepancies between the plumage reported here and the published descriptions of immatures in summer suggest that individual variability in moult strategy and subsequent plumage pattern is wider than has previously been acknowl- edged. Very probably, the situation is analagous to that found with Common Tern S. hirundo , a species with a similar moult strategy to Arctic Tern’s, and in which the accurate ageing of indi- viduals in the field is not always possible (White & Kehoe 2001 ). 72. Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea, presumed to be in second-summer plumage, Guadeloupe, West Indies, May 2001. Note the exposed lesser wing-coverts, which are marked with brown. 74. Arctic Tern Sterna paradisaea, presumed to be in second-summer plumage, Guadeloupe, West Indies, May 200 1 . Note the darker carpal bar. 140 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 39- 1 42 Notes References Levesque, A., & Jaffard, M, E. In press. Quinze nouvelles especes pour la liste des oiseaux de la Guadeloupe. El Pitirre. Mailing Olsen, K„ & Larsson, H. 1995. Terns of Europe and North America. London. White, S. J., & Kehoe, C.V. 200 1 . Difficulties in determining the age of Common Terns in the field. Brit. Birds 94: 268-277. Pierre Yesou Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage, 53 rue Russeil, 4400 Nantes, France Anthony Levesque Office National des Forets, Reserve Naturelle des Ilets de la Petite-Terre, Jardin d’Essais, 97139 Les Abynies, Guadeloupe, French West Indies Eurasian Sparrowhawk extracting Great Tit from feeding cage During heavy rain on 5th April 2001, in my garden at West Bagborough, Somerset, I watched a female Eurasian Sparrowhawk Accip- iter nisus hanging by one leg beneath a ‘squirrel- proof’ cylindrical feeding cage containing peanuts. At first, 1 thought that the spar- rowhawk, which remained motionless, was trapped by its leg. I then saw that one of its talons had, from beneath the cage, grasped a male Great Tit Parus major, which had evidently been feeding inside the cylinder’s guard wiring, while the raptor’s other leg hung free. Slowly, and by means of its own weight alone, the spar- rowhawk pulled the tit downwards through an aperture of 2.5 cm x 3 cm. Once the tit was through the aperture, which took about a minute, the sparrowhawk righted itself with remarkable agility and flew off with its prey. It seemed to me that the hawk relied on the force of gravity to extricate its prey from the cage, and that the weight of a male Eurasian Sparrowhawk would perhaps have been insuffi- cient to secure the prey by this same method. Furthermore, had the tit been seized trans- versely, rather than longitudinally, it could not have been removed without considerable butchery. Dr A. P. Radford Crossways Cottage, West Bagborough, Taunton, Somerset TA4 3EG Hunting method of Merlins in the breeding season There are few quantitative data on the hunting methods used by Merlins Falco columbarius in the breeding season. During this period, the falcons probably forage widely over rough terrain away from the nest site. Bengtson (1975) recorded 61 hunts by Merlins in Iceland, of which 30 (49%) were surprise attacks and 31 (51%) were persis- tent chases. Sodhi et al. (1991) documented 80 hunts by radio-tagged Merlins in urban Canada, of which 46 (58%) were attacks from a perch and 30 (38%) were by cruising flights. Between 1969 and 1999, during long-term studies of Merlins in Galloway, Dumfries & Gal- loway, I have directly observed only 31 hunts during the breeding season. Sixteen (52%) involved a low flight from a perch, 14 (45%) were at a height or in a stoop and were again initiated from a perch, and one (3%) involved ‘tail-chasing’ from a perch (table 1), but a com- bination of all three methods was sometimes used. Hunting perches used in the summer included the tops of heather (Callunal Erica), stone walls, fence posts, rocky outcrops and the tops of hillocks. The species most commonly attacked was the Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis (71%), which also accounted for 57% of prey remains found at nest sites in Galloway (unpub- lished data; see also Watson 1979). Although no quantitative data were given by Newton et al. (1984) or Petty (1995), those authors considered that still-hunting from a perch was one of the main techniques used in Northumbria and Wales. My data in summer, though few, agree with previously published accounts that a low flight attack from a perch is the principal hunting method used by Merlins during the breeding season. Pertinently, the techniques used in summer are the same as those used in the majority of hunts made by Merlins in winter (Dickson 1995). References Bengtson, S.-A. 1 975. Jaktbeteende och bytesval hos en islandsk population av stenfalk. Fauna och Flora Uppsala 70: 8- 1 2. British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 39- 1 42 141 Notes Dickson. R. C. 1 995. The hunting behaviour of Merlins in winter in Galloway. Scot. Birds 1 8: 1 65- 1 69. Newton, I., Meek, E. R, & Little, B. 1 984. Breeding season foods of Merlins in Northumbria. Bird Study 3 1 : 49-55. Petty, S. J. 1 995. Merlins and Forestry. Forestry Commission Research Information Note 254. Sodhi, N. S., Warkentin, I. G., & Oliphant, L. W. 1991. Hunting techniques and success rates of urban Merlins. J. Raptor Res. 25: 127-131. Watson, J. 1979. Food of merlins in young conifer forests. Bird Study 26: 253-258. Table I . Hunting methods used by Merlins Falco columbarius in the breeding season, Galloway. 1 969-99. Method Prey species attacked No. Frequency Low flight attack Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis 13 41.9% Common Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs 1 3.2% Unidentified passerine 2 6.5% Height/stooping Sky Lark Alauda arvensis 4 13.0% Meadow Pipit 9 29.0% Unidentified passerine 1 3.2% Tail-chasing Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago 1 3.2% R. C. Dickson Lismore, New Luce, Newton Stewart, Dumfries & Galloway DG8 0A] Insectivory and kleptoparasitism by Peregrine Falcons The record of a Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus apparently catching and eating insects in flight (Brit. Birds 90: 358-359) prompts me to report a similar event and another, equally unusual, feeding habit of this species. On 15th September 1996, on farmland north- west of Reach, Cambridgeshire, Allan Rackham and I watched two Peregrine Falcons hunting along Reach Lode by occasionally dropping from high in the sky down to the level of the embank- ment and sweeping rapidly along its length for hundreds of metres. We saw no obvious manoeuvres to take insects, but on that day there was a great abundance of dragonflies (Odonata), and we surmised that the falcons were picking them out of the air in extremely fast low-level attacks. We saw one pick at something in its talons as it circled high after one sortie. If drag- onflies were indeed the target, perhaps they were taken less for nutrition than as objects in a skill- honing exercise (although we were not able to establish whether the falcons were juveniles). On 1st November 1997, west of Start Point, Devon, Frances Sword and I watched a male Peregrine Falcon perched on a rock overlooking open ground which sloped steeply down to the sea. After ten minutes, the falcon took off in a purposeful, rapidly accelerating flight towards another bird, which attempted to evade the approach. At first, looking through binoculars, Dr N. J. Collar 25 Springfield Road, Cambridge CB4 I AD I thought that the other bird was a pigeon Columba, but better views soon established that it was, in fact, a Merlin F. columbarius. The Pere- grine Falcon swung back on the Merlin, and in this second attack the latter dropped a bird from its talons; the Peregrine instantly caught this and took it back to its original perch, where the food was consumed. I could not identify the prey, but it was about the size of a Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica, four or five of which had earlier been flying along the hill face and which may well, in the excellent weather, have been about to set out across the English Channel. Certainly, the Merlin appeared to have caught its prey some way out over the sea, judging by the way in which the Peregrine Falcon tracked it in the moments before it launched the attack. In this case, the uncertainty is not whether nutritional interests dictated the attack, but whether the Peregrine Falcon had intended to take the Merlin or merely its prey, since the smaller falcon is a known, if unusual, victim of the larger (Ratcliffe, 1993, The Peregrine Falcon). Kleptoparasitism seems to be as rare as insec- tivory among Peregrine Falcons. BWP (Vol. 2) mentions it, citing a source dated 1942. Never- theless, since the observations described here represent consecutive records of the species for me, I am tempted to suggest that such behav- iours may be commoner than is supposed. 142 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 139-142 Letters The evolution of pipits and finches It is an old principle that, in reviewing a group of organisms, a systematist should try to cover the whole group, and a much more recent one that it is also helpful to look at what happens in the field. So, for example, it was disappointing to find that a review of the molecular affinities of Berthelot’s Pipit Anthus berthelotii of the North Atlantic archipelagoes (Arctander et al. 1996), which concluded that it is most closely related to the Tawny Pipit A. campestris, had omitted to consider the widespread Long-billed Pipit A. similis. I suspect, partly on behavioural grounds, that the latter may be the closest rela- tive of both of them (Bourne 1995). The accounts of the evolution of the Atlantic-island chaffinches Fringilla, reviewed by Martin Collinson (2001), also ignore wider considera- tions. Firstly, in addition to the current islands in the eastern North Atlantic, there are a number of sea-mounts between them and the mainland which may have been exposed in the past, notably when sea-level was lower during the glaciations, so that the present islands may not always have been so isolated. Secondly, most of their current bird visitors are strong partial migrants, sometimes from as far away as America, so that the island residents, including the chaffinches, are not necessarily derived from the nearest coast, but may originate from some distance away (though once they had arrived, of course, any that continued to migrate would soon be eliminated, giving the multiplying sedentary survivors an important advantage over any subsequent migratory immigrants). The first thing that emerges from the most recent contribution by Marshall & Baker (1999) is that the Atlantic-island chaffinches appear to be more closely related to each other than to any other taxon, in proportion to the distance between them. This suggests that they must have been there for a long time, possibly since the first dispersal of the genus Fringilla (fig. 1), and have not been much influenced by numerous major events on the mainland. Considering the history of the whole of the genus Fringilla further (Harrison 1982: 21, 285), presumably a widespread common ancestor in the Tertiary period initially gave rise to three isolated populations in the south during an early glaciation: the sedentary Blue Chaffinch F. teydea in the mild, oceanic climate of the west; the moderately migratory Common Chaffinch F. coelebs in the Mediterranean area and Middle East; and the more highly migra- tory Brambling F. montifringilla in the harsher climate farther east. Furthermore, I assume that the last two spread north again to a varying extent and developed an overlapping distribu- tion in the interglacial periods. The Common Chaffinch has since given rise to three groups of forms (Cramp & Perrins 1994): canariensis, overlapping with the Blue Chaffinch in Macaronesia (North Atlantic islands); spodiogenys in Barbary (northwest Africa); and coelebs in most of the rest of the western Palearctic. It appears to be assumed by Marshall & Baker (1999) that the Common Chaffinch is derived from a glacial relict of spodiogenys type in Barbary which spread north during an interglacial period. In view of those authors’ evi- dence that northern Common Chaffinches as far south as the form africana in Morocco are Fig I. Glacial refugia of populations of Fringilla, and direction of their subsequent expansion and contraction to give rise to sedentary (S) and migratory (M) populations during later interglacial periods; possible origin of F. coelebs africana (X) and of North Atlantic forms (Y). © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 143-146 143 Letters molecularly rather distinct from spodiogenys, it seems equally arguable that it may derive from a more highly migratory eastern population which regularly spread north faster than the more sedentary western birds during the inter- glacial periods, and then retired south again to leave a series of sedentary glacial relicts in the southwest (fig. 1). It also seems particularly interesting that two haplotypes have been found in the Common Chaffinches of Madeira and the Canaries, implying that repeated colonisation (which probably involves inter-island movements but possibly further immigration from the main- land) may leave distinct genetic residues in the same populations without necessarily giving rise to recognisably distinct forms (Marshall & Baker 1999), raising doubts about the extent to which molecular biology defines species. Fur- thermore, whereas the variability of the songs of Common Chaffinches is well known, less atten- tion seems to have been paid to their more stable call note. This is a notable omission, since the familiar ‘chink’ gives way to a very distinct ‘chew’ in the Atlantic islands (Cramp & Perrins 1994; pers. obs.) and, reputedly, also in parts of the adjacent mainland. It is, therefore, desirable that, before final conclusions are drawn about the evolution of chaffinches, the investigation of their molecular constitution should be extended to the eastern populations, and attention paid to any variation in a wider range of characters in the field. Similar phenomena are found in many other Palearctic groups, though in some of the more migratory ones, such as the Rufous Luscinia megarhynchos and Thrush Nightingales L. lus- cinia, more postglacial expansion occurred from the west. References Arctander, R, Folmer, O., & Fjeldsi, J. 1 996. The phylogenetic relationships of Berthelot's Pipit Anthus berthelotii illustrated by DNA sequence data, with remarks on the genetic distance between Rock and Water Pipits Anthus spinoletta. Ibis 1 38: 263-272. Bourne, W. R. R 1 995. The origin and affinities of Berthelot's Pipit Anthus berthelotii. Bull. Brit. Orn. Cl. I 1 5: 22-24. Collinson, M. 200 1 . Evolution of the Atlantic-island Chaffinches. Brit. Birds 94: 1 2 1 - 1 24. Cramp, S., & Perrins, C. M. (eds.) 1994. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.Vol. 7. Oxford. Harrison, C. 1 982. An Atlas of the Birds of the Western Palearctic. London. Marshall, H. D„ & Baker A. J. 1999. Colonization history of Atlantic Island Chaffnches ( Fringilla coelebs) revealed by mitochondrial DNA. Mol. Phyl. Evol. I 1 : 20 1-212. Dr W. R. R Bourne Department of Zoology, Aberdeen University, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ The urban decline of the House Sparrow In suggesting that local factors are responsible for the decline of the House Sparrow Passer domesticus in the London Parks, Roy Sanderson (Brit. Birds 94: 507) ignores the severe decline of this species in the whole of the London area. The House Sparrow has been declining steeply in a number of large cities in Europe, such as London, Edinburgh, Dublin and Hamburg. In others, such as Manchester, no such trend is evident (J. Smith in lift.). In London, the decline has spread far outside the centre (Caine 1998), and now extends beyond the M25 (pers. obs.). Figures from the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) of the British Trust for Ornithology for 1994-99 reveal a decrease in the London area of more than 50%, from a population level which was already low (Noble et al. 2000; London Bird Reports 1994-1999). The decline in northeast London was slower than that elsewhere (Coleman 200 1 ). In table I, BBS indices for those species for which there were ten or more paired squares in London in 1994-95 are compared with similar data for east and southeast England. Many con- clusions can be drawn from this table. About half of the species performed better in London than they did outside. There is little evidence here of severe environmental degradation. The theory that a lack of insects for House Sparrow nestlings is the cause of that species’ decline is not borne out. The Common Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs (and to a lesser extent the Greenfinch Carduelis clitoris) also feeds its young nestlings on insects, yet, during 1994-99, it increased in London by 34%, a much greater increase than in the surrounding region. The Common Chaffinch was London’s most abun- dant finch until the 1970s, when it suffered a decline of over 70%, and present population levels are only about 35% of previous values (Osborne 1998). During the study period, however, it more than held its own. Similarly, 144 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 43- 1 46 Letters C Table I . Population indices derived from the London Breeding Bird Survey during 1 994-99, compared with those for east and southeast England (East Anglia and southeast England, extending to Oxfordshire) during the same period. Figures in columns I and 2 give the index values for species in the two regions in 1 999, where 1 00 represents the value in 1 994. (London data derived from London Bird Reports 1 994- 1 999; east and southeast England data from Noble et al. 2000.) Column 3 gives the ratio between the two, indicating the relative performance of each species in the two regions: a ratio higher than 1 .0 shows that the species performed better within the London area than outside it, while a ratio of less than 1 .0 indicates that the reverse is true. London (L) East 8< southeast England (ESE) L/ESE Blue Tit Parus caeruleus 126 68 1.84 Great Tit Parus major 192 106 1.81 Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus 142 99 1.44 Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major 192 148 1.30 Green Woodpecker Picus viridis 179 143 1.25 Common Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs 134 109 1.23 Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla 164 141 1.16 Song Thrush Turdus philomelos 93 81 1.15 Feral Pigeon Columba livia 122 109 1.12 Carrion Crow Corvus corone 145 131 1.11 Wren Troglodytes troglodytes 107 100 1.07 Robin Erithacus rubecula 115 110 1.05 Common Swift Apus apus 133 128 1.04 Magpie Pica pica 122 118 1.03 Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris 77 77 1.00 Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus 71 72 0.99 Long-tailed Tit Aegithalos caudatus 93 97 0.96 Hedge Accentor Prunella modularis 101 106 0.95 Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto 135 142 0.95 Greenfinch Carduelis chloris 98 109 0.90 Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus 69 79 0.88 Eurasian Jay Garrulus glandarius 57 76 0.75 Blackbird Turdus merula 70 102 0.69 Mistle Thrush Turdus viscivorus 45 66 0.69 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica 54 86 0.63 House Sparrow Passer domesticus 48 83 0.58 Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis 41 80 0.51 House Martin Delichon urbica 34 80 0.43 the Greenfinch did not suffer a decline. Species which feed on insects in the tree or shrub canopy, such as Blue Tits Parus caeruleus and Great Tits P. major, did exceptionally well, and those feeding on ground-dwelling invertebrates, such as Wrens Troglodytes troglodytes, Hedge Accentors Prunella modularis and Robins Erithacus rubecula, did not suffer, either. The Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris fared equally poorly in both regions, and its decline, there- fore, presumably has a different cause from that affecting the House Sparrow. That the House Sparrow has suffered through cross-infection with the Trichomonas parasite carried by Feral Pigeons Columba livia seems unlikely. Not only have the two species been in close contact for a long time, but the sparrow’s decline in London extends to the peripheral areas, where the Feral Pigeon is largely replaced by the Wood Pigeon C. palumbus (pers. obs.). It is nevertheless of interest that in Bristol, where Bland (1999) investigated the winter distribution of the House Sparrow over 138 1-km squares, none of the 24 ‘sparrow-rich’ squares contained large numbers of Feral Pigeons; of 24 ‘sparrow-poor’ squares, on the other hand, 20 were dominated by high numbers of Feral Pigeons, Magpies Pica pica or Carrion Crows Corvus corone. At the BTO’s Annual Conference of 2000, Denis Summers-Smith expressed the opinion that the House Sparrow’s decline may be related British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 143-146 145 Letters to constituents of lead-free petrol, in particular to a MTBE-derived toxin. He has also com- mented {in litt.) on the possibility of aircraft fuel being involved. A Boeing 747 landing or taking off, from and to 900 m, produces nitrous oxides equivalent to the amount released by a car travelling more than 41,500 km (data from USA’s Natural Resources Defense Council). Whatever the causes of the decline of the House Sparrow in London, the problem is a widespread and serious one, and local factors ultimately make little contribution. Dr Alan Prowse 46 Badingham Drive, Leatherhead, Surrey KT22 9HA References Bland, R. 1 999. House Sparrow densities in Bristol. Avon Bird Report 1 998, Caine, T 1998. Garden Bird Survey. Surbiton and District Bird Report 1 997 . Coleman, D. 200 1 , Breeding Bird Survey in London 1 998. London Bird Report 1 998. Noble, D. G., Bashford, R I.. & Baillie, S. R. 2000. The Breeding Bird Survey 1 999. BTO Research Report No. 247. Osborne, K. C. 1 998. The Breeding Birds of Inner London 1970-95. London Bird Report 1996. What crisis in farmland birds ? For more than 2,000 years the British landscape has been altered by humans to increase crop production, and several species of bird have benefited greatly from this unnatural interven- tion. Should we be so concerned that the situa- tion now is less favourable for certain species than it once was? The simultaneous reduction in the populations of forest species during this period, and the concomitant elimination of the Brown Bear Ursus arctos , Wolf Cards lupus, Lynx Felis lynx, Wild Boar Sus scrofa. Elk Alces alces and European Beaver Castor fiber from the British fauna, have not prompted comparable interest. If we are trying to turn back the clock to some bygone golden age, how far should we go? The medieval warm period of Saxon Britain, 1,000 years ago, offered perhaps the most abun- dant and diverse avifauna of historic times. There would have been enough clearance to provide habitat for open-country species, yet with sufficient forest and undrained fens for woodland and wetland species to thrive. The social upheaval associated with large-scale restructuring of the countryside (a reverse of the Soviet-style ‘virgin lands’ policy) which would be required to return to a Saxon land- scape is clearly unacceptable. The opportunity may occur for a few hundred hectares here and there, but not on a scale larger than that. More recently, the diverse, labour-intensive, F. M. Gauntlett 55 Larkfield Avenue, Harrow, Middlesex HA3 SNQ chemical-free agriculture of the 1930s was more bird-friendly. Farm mechanisation, rural elec- trification and mains water are largely post-war phenomena, along with the rise of amateur ornithology and surveys of farmland birds. Before 1940, British agriculture did not need to be very efficient because of the amount of cheap food imported from the overseas parts of the empire. The wartime crisis prompted the government to offer a guaranteed price for all the food that British farmers could produce, a policy perpetuated through the ‘cold war’ and now the Common Agricultural Policy. The problem now is that the British taxpayer has very little say on how these subsidies are used, because the CAP is driven by the political agenda of the Continental farming lobby. There seems to be a notion that each species has an ‘ideal’ population size, and panic sets in if it deviates substantially from that level. That a few species ‘never had it so good’ for a few decades cannot be a valid reason for trying to perpetuate that situation. So many other species are now dependent on managed nature reserves that consideration could be given to providing organic, pre-mechanisation farmland reserves for those species under threat, but one must question the economic priorities of such a strategy for species which are widespread and numerous in world terms. 146 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 143-146 News and comment Compiled by Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches Opinions expressed in this feature are not necessarily those of British Birds Horrors in Malta The ‘News and comment’ desk has many friends in Malta who keep us informed of the happenings on the island, and we have always been pleased to report on news there (both good and bad) and to ask for support for BirdLife Malta. Recently, however, we have been contacted with some reports that even the hardened Maltese have described as ‘disgusting’ and ‘awful’. The full story is reported in The Times and in Malta Independent for 21st and 22nd January 2002. On 20th January, eight Mute Swans Cygnus olor flew into the sheltered waters of St Thomas’ Bay. As it was a Sunday, many families were enjoying a day by the sea, and a number of folk were watching the birds while others were feeding them. What happened next was almost unbelievable. Three men appeared in a speedboat, and began shooting at the swans. Some were shot on the water, others as they took off to escape. Pellets rained down among children and families on the beach from the shot swans as they headed inland. All but one swan was killed, and that survivor was eventually taken into care with gun-shot injuries. The police were called, and the culprits made off, leaving the swans’ bodies floating in the water. The action of the Maltese authorities was swift and compre- hensive. The armed forces were called in, complete with patrol boats and helicopters, and the per- petrators were captured and taken into custody. They appear to have broken several laws, not least shooting from a boat, shooting Mute Swans and endangering human life. Subsequently, there has been an outcry, even in the Maltese Parlia- ment, with all political parties con- demning this barbaric act. All local daily papers have carried several articles and letters on the matter, while even two hunters’ associa- tions, for the first time ever, con- demned the events publicly in the press. BirdLife Malta congratulated the authorities on the swiftness of their action and hopes that the results will act as a deterrent in the future. To support BirdLife Malta, contact them at 57/28 Rigord Street, Ta’Xbiex MSD 12, Malta; e- mail: blm@orbit.net.mt RSPCA demands even tougher sentences as bird-trafficker gets six years in jail The recent jailing of Norfolk fal- coner Raymond Humphrey for six- and-a-half years, for smuggling endangered species out of Thai- land, has prompted the RSPCA to demand even tougher sentences for such crimes. Globally, the illegal trade in wildlife, which includes the sale of rare birds of prey, exotic reptiles, ivory and rhino horn, is estimated to be worth more than £5 billion annually, and is second only to the illegal drugs trade. It is estimated that 350 million animals and plants are traded every year, and, according to Interpol, about a quarter of the wildlife trade is thought to be illegal. RSPCA chief superintendent Barry Fryer commented: ‘We would welcome stiffer penalties which reflect the suffering involved in these animals’ capture and transit, and their fate at the end of their journey. For every animal that survives, hundreds die a most hor- rific death, and in the twenty-first century it is appalling that birds and animals are smuggled into the country to fuel this cruel and unnecessary trade. The animals protected by CITES [the Conven- tion on International Trade in Endangered Species] are on that list because they need protection. All too often we see the gruesome consequences of these animals which have suffered at the hands of inexperienced handlers.’ In the Humphrey case, Thai smugglers wedged rare birds of prey into 15-cm-diameter plastic tubes in a bid to import them ille- gally into Britain. Twenty-three birds, with a black-market value of £35,000, were taken from the wild and, with their feet bound and no access to food or water, were put on a 14-hour flight from Thailand. The birds, which included eagles, kites and owls, were found in two suitcases by customs officers at Heathrow Airport. Six were dead, and another died soon after. Raymond Humphrey was arrested as he met two men arriving from Bangkok with the birds. He was found guilty of 22 charges relating to the possession of and trafficking in protected species, and was jailed for six-and-a-half years, one of the longest sentences ever imposed for this offence. New Recorders for Orkney and Guernsey Jim Williams is taking over from Tim Dean as the new Recorder for Orkney. His address is Fairholm, Finstown, Orkney KW17 2EQ; tel: 01856 761317; e-mail: jim@geniefea.freeserve.co.uk The new Recorder for Guernsey is Mark Lawlor, Pentland, 15 clos des Pecqueries, La Passee, St Sampson’s, Guernsey GY2 4TU; tel: 01481 258168; e-mail: mplawlor@gtonline.net © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 147-1 49 147 News and comment In search of Slender-billed Curlew BOURC’s acceptance of the record of a Slender-billed Curlew Nume- nius tenuirostris at Druridge Bay, Northumberland, in May 1998 (see Brit. Birds 95: 92), coincided with an announcement from RSPB about the research now planned to track down any remaining Slender-billed Curlews. There has been at least one unconfirmed sighting since 1998, in Hungary in 2001. Hope remains, therefore, that the species is still breeding somewhere, perhaps in the depths of western Siberia or on the steppes of Kaza- khstan, and wintering at an undis- covered location in southeast Europe or in north Africa. Carl Zeiss , long-time sponsor of British Birds and BBRC, is spon- soring another expedition in search of a mythical species, in this case the Ivory-billed Woodpecker Campephilus principalis, ‘the princely eater of grubs’. This 30- day expedition took place in early 2002 in Louisiana, USA, and fol- lowed a credible sighting of a pair of Tvorybills’ in the Pearl River area in 1999, made by Louisiana State University student David Kulivan. This magnificent woodpecker is widely believed to have been extinct for at least 50 years, but RSPB scientists will analyse the atomic composition of feathers from Slender-billed Curlew speci- mens held in museums. Any feathers grown on the breeding grounds will reflect that area’s dis- tinctive ‘signature’ of isotopes of metals found in the soil. The data will enable researchers to study maps showing these signatures, and to narrow down the search from a potential area three or four times the size of Britain to one which could be more easily covered by fieldworkers. RSPB research scientist Dr Debbie Pain commented that, although there are few people living in the species’ most likely there have been persistent rumours of sightings ever since. The Cuban subspecies bairdii is also likely to be extinct, but there have been continued claims of sightings on Cuba, too. Regular updates on the hunt for the Ivorybill were posted on the Zeiss website at www.zeiss.com, while more information is avail- able at www.ivorybilledwood- pecker.com, which includes some excellent photographs of Ivory- billed Woodpecker, one in colour, taken in Louisiana in 1937. Ivorybills once ranged from breeding range, it would be wrong to assume that these areas are safe. ‘Several habitats are undergoing rapid change. For instance, the fens of western Siberia are being drained rapidly, and climate change and desertification appear to be affecting the steppe grass- lands of Kazakhstan and southern Russia. If we are to save this bird, we need to find its breeding grounds as a first step and then work to ensure their adequate protection.’ No doubt RSPB staffer Tim Cleeves, who found the Druridge curlew, hopes that his employers will give him a well-deserved sab- batical to join any expedition mounted in search of any remaining populations. Texas to North Carolina. Averaging 50 cm in length, with a wingspan of 80 cm, they occurred primarily in the southeastern and Gulf Coast regions of the USA, where old- growth river-bottom timberland was plentiful. Here, they would strip bark from dying trees with their massive ivory-coloured bill in order to reach the insect larvae beneath. Allegedly, the woodpecker was often referred to as the ‘Lord God bird’, because people who encountered it supposedly exclaimed ‘Lord God!’ in amazement. By mid February there had been no sightings of the wood- pecker. In search of Ivory-billed Woodpecker ‘ Immigrants strain scant resources’ That is the attention-grabbing title of a BTO news release issued in January. The subtitle ‘BTO Garden Birdwatchers highlight difficulties’ removes any lingering impression that this might refer to the latest batch of asylum-seekers slipping through the Channel Tunnel. Instead, it refers to the immigrant thrushes Turdus and finches (Fringillidae) whose arrival in the UK last autumn coincided with the widespread failure of tree seed crops. This winter is proving to be a difficult one for many of our familiar garden visitors, largely as a consequence of reduced food avail- ability combined with the increased numbers of birds win- tering here. Last autumn’s fruit and seed production was poor, leaving birds with little option but to feed on less suitable fruits which would normally not be touched until very late in the winter. As a result, observers have reported birds moving into gardens and feeding on Cotoneaster , Pyracantha and Common Ivy Hedera helix berries in the weeks leading up to Christmas. It was also during this period that cold weather to the north and east of Britain led to the arrival of increasing numbers of winter thrushes and finches. These additional winter migrants have put extra strain on our normal wintering populations. Was this what happened in your garden? Did it make your Big Garden Birdwatch more or less spectacular in January? The experi- ence of one of us (AP) in a sub- urban garden in northeast England was probably sadly similar to that of many others: a grand total of just seven species (and no House Sparrows Passer domesticus) in the designated hour-long watch. Visit the Garden Birdwatch website at www.bto.org/gbw/gbwhome.htm 148 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 47- 1 49 News and comment Once Bittern, thrice shy The London Wetland Centre has been in the news recently. Three Great Bitterns Botaurus stellaris have been seen at the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust’s new flagship reserve, close to central London. This is, apparently, the first time in more than a century that bitterns have been recorded so close to the capital; the last record was of one in Oxford Street! Built on the site of the former Barn Elms reservoirs, near Barnes, the transformation of the 43-ha site, from four concrete reservoirs into the hugely impressive London Wetland Centre, took five years of work. The project cost £16 million, £11 million of that raised by selling 10 ha of the original site for housing development. The remaining £5 million was raised by WWT. In 2001, it was the Global Winner in the annual British Airways Tourism for Tomorrow Awards, just a year after opening its doors to the public in May 2000. More recently, the site was granted SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) status, on account of its nationally important numbers of wintering Gadwalls Anas strepera and Northern Shovelers A. clypeata and its assemblage of breeding wetland birds. An average of 140 species is logged each year, with recent high- lights having included Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis and Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris in 2001. The White-tailed Eagle in China Tadeusz Mizera is preparing a book on the White-tailed Eagle Hali- aeetus albicilla , but is lacking infor- mation from China. He would be pleased to hear from anyone with relevant data or references to pub- lished material, such information being difficult to obtain in Poland, and he is particularly keen to receive data on populations and distribution. Contact Tadeusz Mizera, Agricultural University, Zoology Department, Wojska Pol- skiego, 71C 60-625 Poznan, Poland; e-mail: tmizera@au.poznan.pl Conferences and meetings to attend. . . ...RSPB Members Weekend 2002 Once a year, the RSPB organises a weekend for its members to enjoy a feast of bird-related activities, including lectures, film shows, excursions and trade stands. Over the years, there has been one clear winner when it comes to a venue for this conference: York. In 2002, the Society is again in resi- dence at York University, during 5th-7th April. So, if you want to visit the seabirds at Bempton Cliffs, learn how the TV series Blue Planet was made, check out the latest in bird-feeding equipment, discover the population status of the Red-billed Chough Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax, Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris or Black Grouse Tetrao tetrix, or simply enjoy the story of the RSPB’s oldest reserve, Dungeness (celebrating its 70th year in 2002), then this is the conference for you. Further details from Events Office, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SGI 9 2DL; tel: 01767 680551 . . . ...Climate Change and Coastal Birds Caught between a seawall and the deep blue sea. That is the prospect for the inhabitants of our mudflats, as sea levels rise with global warming and the intertidal zone disappears. Climate change and coastal birds is the theme of this year’s BOU spring conference, which takes place at Hull Uni- versity during 22nd-24th March. An impressive array of speakers, from the UK, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and the USA, will explore the very pressing problem of how coastal birds, and indeed the whole coastal ecosystem, will cope with the impact of a changing climate and rising sea levels. The conference is sponsored by Northumbrian Water, the chairman of which, Sir Fred Holliday, is also president of the BTO. This eminent marine biologist opens the conference with a lecture entitled ‘How will the global economy deal with climate change?’ Other talks of note include ‘Climate change and coastal waterbird populations - current impacts and future predictions’ and ‘The potential effects of marine habitat change on Antarctic seabirds’. Visit the BOU website: www.bou.org.uk. . . ...OSMEAGM The Ornithological Society of the Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia (OSME) will be holding its summer meeting and AGM on Saturday 13th July 2002, at the School of Oriental 8c African Studies, University of London. For further information, visit the OSME website at www.osme.org or contact Dawn Balmer (e-mail: dawn.balmer@bto.org)... ...6th World Conference on Birds of Prey and Owls If you have any interest in Falconiformes or Strigiformes, then this confer- ence, in Budapest, Hungary, on 18th-25th May 2003, is for you, and the invitation has now been made to attend and contribute. It is not necessary to be a member of the World Working Group on Birds of Prey, the organ- ising body, in order to take part. The organisers are keen to hear from anyone with an interest in these groups who may wish to attend. It is planned to hold the conference in the Hotel Agro Conference Centre, situ- ated on Svabhegy, the highest point in the hilly district of Buda, with a panoramic view of Budapest and on the edge of a forest justifiably claimed to be full of birdlife. The preliminary programme includes a mix of scien- tific presentations and excursions. Further developments will be reported regularly on the group website: www.raptors-international.de. For further details and all enquiries, contact WWGBP, PO Box 52, Towcester, Northamptonshire NN12 7ZW; tel: 01604 862331; e-mail: wwgbp@aol.com British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 147-1 49 149 Monthly Marathon * * L ri ' 75. Pink-footed Geese Anser brachyrhynchus, Lincolnshire, November 1989. Perhaps this is a good time to inform readers with an interest in this feature of the basis on which the solutions to the Monthly Marathon photographs are prepared. Every year or so, a batch of scanned photographs selected by the BB editor for use as Monthly Marathon pictures is sent to the Sunbird office. We receive no additional information with them, so that the identity of the species and where, when and by whom they were photographed are all a matter of ‘guesswork’ or deduction. We at Sunbird have all agreed that it is far better that we have to work out the solutions for ourselves, rather than being informed of these at the outset. This way, we are more likely to go through similar thought processes to those of con- testants taking part in the competi- tion, and, ideally, a fairly logical train of thought will be presented in each written solution. So, it is not until we have sent off our solu- tion to the BB editor (and do not have it returned immediately for a rewrite) that we receive some con- firmation that we have come to the correct conclusion. With photo number 184 (Brit. Birds 94: plate 344; repeated here as plate 75), we have now reached the thirty-second stage in this particu- larly long-running eleventh ‘Marathon’. I do not mind admit- ting that, on this occasion, I am a little more apprehensive than usual in submitting my solution, since, to tell the truth, I am not sure that 1 can convince myself, let alone anybody else, that the birds can be conclusively identified from this photograph, printed at this size. Nevertheless, I shall attempt to do so. I have to assume that no-one will have had any difficulty in iden- tifying our mystery birds as geese. The usual instruction ‘Identify the species’ appears in the caption to all photographs in this series, and it is deliberately ambiguous, but I am also assuming that we are not required to identify more than one species in this group of birds. Judging from their shape and pro- portions, as well as the subtlest of contrasts behind what are virtually silhouettes, these birds certainly look more like Anser geese than like Branta. The candidate species are, therefore, Bean Goose A. fabalis, Pink-footed Goose A. brachyrhynchus, White-fronted Goose A. albifrons, Lesser White- fronted Goose A. erythropus and Greylag Goose A. anser. There is little to be derived from looking for belly barring, underwing pattern or other telltale markings that often assist in the identification of grey geese, which means that identifica- tion will have to be based largely on shape and proportions. Bearing in mind that it is, we hope, just one species that we are asked to identify, I am inclined to ignore the worryingly different look of the figure in the top left- hand corner of the photo and to concentrate on the more homoge- nous appearance of the rest. The 150 © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 150-151 Graham Catley c decidedly small and neat bill and the rather small and rounded head possessed by all of them strongly suggest Pink-footed Goose, but we need to consider all the other options carefully. Greylag is prob- ably the easiest to eliminate on account of its usually significantly heavier bill; I should expect Grey- lags also to have a proportionately slightly bigger head and a heavier body, but I prefer not to rely too heavily on such subjective assess- ments when looking at images of this size and quality. Bean Goose comes in many shapes and sizes across its range, but the two with which we need to be concerned are nominate ‘Taiga’ Bean Goose A. f. fabalis and the smaller and more Pink-footed-like ‘Tundra’ Bean Goose A. f. rossicus. Taiga Beans are large, and comparatively longer- necked and longer-billed than the birds in our photograph; Tundra Beans can be extremely confusing, but I should be confident that, even in a photo such as this, a pro- portionately big head and a swollen, angular jaw-line would be noticeable on at least one or two individuals. It is more difficult to pinpoint just why these birds do not look quite ‘right’ for White- fronted Goose, but I guess that it all boils down to the shape of the Monthly Marathon head and bill - whatever it is, it is subtle. At this point, it seems that, the more I scrutinise the tiny images for impossibly small details, the less I am sure of their significance, or the reliability of my judgement. So, on the basis that even those expected to ‘have all the answers’ in this kind of exercise must occa- sionally resort to guesswork, my guess, inspired by good old gut- instinct, is that most of the birds in this month’s photo look most like Pink-footed Goose. If anyone tells me that there are, in fact, two Lesser White-fronted Geese in the lower left-hand corner, I am not going to argue - but he or she can do the explaining! As detailed in the opening paragraph, it is only after we have given our solution that we learn of our success or otherwise in making the identification. I now know that these geese are, indeed, Pink-footed Geese, photographed in Lin- colnshire, in November 1989, by Graham Catley. It is no surprise that this photo- graph caused significant problems and much head-scratching for almost all entrants. The answers received by the competition dead- line were split almost equally among Pink-footed Goose (36%), D White-fronted Goose (32%) and Bean Goose (32%). After the longest-running ‘Marathon’ since this competition began, and with several contestants having almost won at various times during the preceding 31 stages of this eleventh competition, we finally have a most worthy winner. Whether by supreme skill or through educated guesswork, Peter Sunesen named the birds in photo no. 184 as Pink- footed Geese, while Andy Mears, the co-leader until this month, went for White-fronted Geese. That leaves Peter with a winning sequence of 19-in-a-row, and a worthy winner of a SUNBIRD holiday. This is Peter’s second win in the Monthly Marathon series, an achievement matched only by Anthony McGeehan since it started, back in July 1986. We offer Peter our warmest congratulations and, at the same time, offer our commiserations to Andy and all the other contestants who did so well at various stages of this com- petition. So, with the nervousness and tension of the last few months now behind us, we begin a twelfth ‘Marathon’. The first two stages of this have already appeared, in the January and February issues: photo no. 185 (plate 10) becomes the first stage in this new ‘Marathon’, and photo no. 186 (plate 36) becomes the second (not, as suggested in its caption, the first). Plate 77 repre- sents the third stage. This is your chance to become the next person to join a distinguished group of previous winners (see Brit. Birds 92: 272). The prize for the next winner will be £1,500 towards the SUNBIRD holiday of your choice. It could be you. . . Killian Mullarney For a free brochure, write to SUNBIRD (MM), PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG 1 9 I DF, or telephone 01767 682969 Sunbird The best of birdwatching tours 77. 'Monthly Marathon’. Photo no. 1 87. Third stage in twelfth 'Marathon'. Identify the species. Read the rules (see page 36), then send in your answer on a postcard to Monthly Marathon, c/oThe Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY or by e-mail to editor@britishbirds.co.uk, to arrive by 30th April 2002. British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 1 50- 1 5 I 151 Recent reports Compiled by Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan This summary of unchecked reports covers mid January 2002 to mid February 2002. Black Duck Anas rubripes Kings- bridge estuary (Devon), 17th January; Slapton Ley (Devon), 19th January and 10th February. Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis Male, Oxford Island, Lough Neagh (Co. Armagh), 19th-26th January. King Eider Somateria spectabilis Holkham Bay (Norfolk), 19th January to 10th February. Allen’s Gallinule Porphyrula alleni Picked up exhausted and died in care, Portland (Dorset), 10th February. American Golden Plover Pluvi- alis dominica Near Bude (Corn- wall), 24th-28th January. Bonaparte’s Gull Larus Philadel- phia Pagham Harbour (West Sussex), 31st January, with one remaining at Millbrook Lake (Cornwall) until at least 10th February. Ross’s Gull Rhodostethia rosea Adult, Plymouth (Devon), 28th January to 10th February; adult, Nimmo’s Pier (Co. Galway), 3rd-4th February; Blackpill (Glamorgan), 10th February. Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea Adult, Criccieth (Gwynedd), 9th- 10th February. Olive-backed Pipit Anthus hodgsom Lynford Arboretum (Norfolk), 2nd-5th February. Hume’s Warbler Phylloscopus humei Newbiggin (Northumberland), 20th January to 10th Feb- ruary. Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapillus One at an undisclosed site in England, 20th December to 16th January. 79. First-winter Little Gull Larus minutu s, Plymouth, Devon, February 2002. 152 © British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 152-1 53 Gary Bellingham George Reszeter Recent reports C 80. Adult Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea, feeding on Harbour Porpoise Phocoena phocoena, Criccieth, Gwynedd, February 2002. 8 1 . (left) Adult Ross's Gull Rhodostethia rosea, Plymouth, Devon, January 2002. 82. (below) Lapland Longspun Calcarius lapponicus, Aldborough, East Yorkshire, January 2002. HRare Bird News supplies all its information free to British Birds. Call 09063 888 1 I I for the latest, up-to-date news (28p/min cheap rate; 4 1 p/min other times; including VAT) Call 07626 923923 to report your sightings to the hotline British Birds 95 • March 2002 • 152-153 153 Rarities Committee news The BBRC is delighted to announce that, following a recent ballot of county records commit- tees and bird-observatory wardens, organised by ACRE and BBRC, John Sweeney from Paisley, Strath- clyde, has been appointed as the new member of the Committee, and will commence his duties on 1st April 2002. John Sweeney was the BBRC’s nominee in the election (see Brit. Birds 94: 550). John began birding in the Clyde and Forth areas in the 1970s and, like many others, he was an active twitcher in Britain during the ‘boom period’ of the 1980s. He has been a ringer New BBRC member for 15 years, and is well known to many birders in Scotland. John takes the place of Ken Shaw, who has been a member of the Committee since 1993, and who served on BOURC before that. Ken was very much the ‘observer’s man’ on BBRC and had more than a passing penchant for amateur psychology, as anyone who has spent more than a couple of hours in a pub with him will know. During his term with BBRC, Ken greatly improved the public profile of the Committee. We wish him well in his ‘retirement’, during which, he says, he is looking forward to finding rare birds rather than just reading about other people’s finds. BBRC is also indebted to Martin Grey, from Orkney, who was the unsuccessful candidate in this elec- tion. The result was very close, and we are quite sure that Martin will serve on BBRC in the future. We thank all county and bird- observatory records committees for responding quickly to the ballot and, in particular, Judith Smith for her help in running this election. ZEISS The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd. Chairman: Colin Bradshaw, 9 Tynemouth Place. Tynemouth, Tyne &Wear NE30 4BJ Secretary: M.J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, St Ives, Cornwall TR26 3AZ Request Tape recordings of crossbills A study of Common Crossbills Loxia curvirostra in Scotland, shortly to be published in Ibis, has shown that the birds have different call types, recognisable on sono- grams of tape-recorded calls. This finding matches the results of work carried out in North America and Europe, which demonstrates a hitherto unknown complexity among crossbill populations. Limited recording in England and Wales has revealed that at least two call types occur. In order to obtain a more detailed map of the distrib- ution of these call types, I should be interested to hear from anyone in England, Wales, Ireland and southern Scotland who would be willing to help with this project. Please contact: Ron Summers, RSPB, Etive House, Beechwood Park, Inverness IV2 3BW; e-mail: ron.summers@rspb.org.uk Correction > In the paper on ‘The non-breeding status of the Little Egret in Britain’ (Brit. Birds 95: 62-80), fig. 2 (ii) was unfortunately omitted and fig. 2 (i) repeated twice. The correct version of fig. 2 (ii) is reproduced here. Figure 2(ii). 1989-1990 154 British Birds 95 • March 2002 • I 54 Classified advertising RATES Text: 50p per word. Minimum cost: £10. Semi-display: Mono. £15 per see (width 40mm) or £32 per dec (width 85mm). Minimum 2cm. Series: 5% discount for 6, 10% discount for 12. (All rates exclude VAT at 17.5%) Payment for all classified advertisements must be made in advance by VISA, Mastercard or by cheque payable to British Birds. Copy deadline: 10th or the month. Contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd., 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2627. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BOOKS HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD. Visit our website for our online catalogue Visit our shop and see our extensive collection. Hawkridge Books, The Cruck Barn, Cross St, Castleton, Derbyshire S30 2WH. Tel: 01433 621999. Fax: 01433 621862. Email: books@hawkridge.co.uk. Web: www.hawkridge.co.uk RARE AND OUT OF PRINT books on Ornithology. Isabelline Books. Tel: 01326 210412. Fax: 0870 051 6387. BACK NUMBERS OF ALL leading ornithological and natural history journals, reports, bulletins, newsletters, etc. bought and sold. Catalogue details: David Morgan, Whitmore, Umberleigh, Devon EX37 9HB or www.birdjournals.com The original BIRDWATCHER’S LOGBOOK The most concise way to record your observations. Monthly, annual and life columns for 762 species, plus 159 diary pages. Send £7.45 inclusive P/P to: Coxton Publications, Eastwood, Beverley Rd, Walkington, Beverley, HU17 8RP. 01482 881833 FOR SALE BACK ISSUES BRITISH BIRDS: 1983-2001. Birding World: 1990-2001. Mint condition. Phone or email for details. Tel: 01280 813871. Email: andy@ardem.demon.co.uk WANTED Overseas PROVENCE, CAMARGUE. Two s/c cottages. Rogers, Mas d’Auphan, Le Sambuc, 13200 ARLES, France. Tel: (0033) 490972041, Fax: (0033) 490972087. SINEMORETZ, BULGARIA Villa Philadelphia is a cosy six-room Bulgarian-American Inn offering exclusive service and excellent opportunities for birding in a once closed region: www. villa Philadelphia. com Email:tours@ villaphiladelphia.com Tel:2 15.5 17.7639 (USA), +359. 88. 53. 56. 86 (BG). TRINIDAD - NORTHERN RANGE. Luxurious colonial style plantation house for rent, 2000 sq. ft. sleeps 4, set within 15 acres of rainforest. Abundant birdlife. 25 minutes from airport, 1 hour from Asa Wright Ctr. Tour guides and car hire can be arranged. Website: www.trinidadhouse.com. Phone: 01372 466254. MALLORCA - PUERTO POLLENSA. Lovely apartment near the Boquer valley. Sleeps max. 6. Aircon/heating. Available ALL YEAR including both migration seasons April-May & September-October. Tel: 01206 571745. Website: www.boquer.puertOpollensa.com BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS CUMBRIA, SOLWAY AND LAKE DISTRICT BirdBreakTours - 2 and 4 day BirdBreak tours led by local professional ornithologists. Pomarine skua, osprey, black grouse, black guillemot, barnacle & pink footed goose, peregrine falcons, puffins & lots of waders. Small groups collected at Carlisle station. Contact: Bird Breaks, Wallsend House, Church Lane, Bowness-on-Solwav, Cumbria CA7 5AF. Email: birdbreaks@emgroup.org.uk; Website: www.emgroup.org.uk/birdbreaks. Tel: 016973 OPTICAL EQUIPMENT 51055. MEXICO 100 ENDEMIC BIRD SPECIES Expert level small group tours, and custom trips for private parties. USA based LEGACY TOURS, guided by Michael Carmody: Fax: (509) 624-1885 Email: jigsaw@winstarmail.com References from top world listers. Come to Dohana, the wild heart of Spain. Professionally led birding - botany excursions. Small groups and individuals. All year round. Charming guesthouse facing the marshes. Transfer from airport. Personalised stays. Full board from £22. All inc. 6 days from £200. j "Daiuiiuz ud. Aguila Imperial 150, 21750 El Rocio, Huelva, Spain. Tel: +34 959 442466/620 964369. Fax: +34 959 442466. E-mail: donana@sistelnet.es Information and prices: www.sistelnet.es/donana BIRD WATCHING ms,™ -Wlnsmanka 26 Endemics H1GH ELMS TRAVEL (PVT, UM|TED Tours tailor-made ^T^Z*'**0** . Sri Lanka to suit your Tei.94 1 861 465/94 1 86i 466 Fax. 94 1 861 464 requirements e-mail, highelms@itmin.com www.highelmstravel.com DESPERATELY SEEKING 6-10 old-sized British Birds binders (cordex ONLY). Nicholas Green, 020 7485 9280. N EWTON/ WOLLEY : Ootheca Wollcyana STC. Please write to: David Ellison, 40 Queensway, Rothwell. Leeds 1.526 ONB. HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION Scotland MORVERN (DRIMNIN) HOLIDAY COTTAGES. Beautifully situated by Sound of Mull. Superb walking and wildlife. No pets. Open all year E175-E205 fully inclusive. Tel: 01967 421308. Email: glasdrumtrust@aol.com ELLERY ESTATE - MOST ATTRACTIVE choice of self-catering cottages and chalets situated on the shores of Loch Caolisport. While you are at Ellery you are free to go wherever you please. There are hill walks, many lochs and burns where you can fish, numerous wildlife, birds, flowers, etc. The perfect locationfor the true country lover. For a full colour brochure please write to: The Booking Office, Ellery 7, Lochgilphead, Argyll PA31 SPA. Tel: 01880 770232. Fax: 01880 770386. Email: info@ellery.com CASSOWARY HOUSE Rainforest Guest House Cassowaries! Riflebirds! Red-necked Crakes = A great birding destination. 14 regional endemics around Atherton Tablelands, plus also Cairns/Great Barrier Reef. Beautiful relaxing location, excellent food, expert local guiding. Phil and Sue Gregory. Phone: (61) 740 937318 Fax: (61) "40 939855 E-mail: sicklebill@austarnet.com.au Website: www.cassowary-house.com.au Cassowary House. Blackmountain Road. PO Box 387. Kuranda 4872. Queensland, Australia. Birdwatching Aficionados exclusive personalised Birdwatching Tours Australia wide private charter only Jonny Schoenjahn PO Box 5493, Broome WA 6726, Australia Phone +61 8 91927707 Fax +61 8 91927708 www. users, bigpond. com/jonnybird/ Binoculars & Telescopes Top Makes , Top Models , Top Advice, Top Deals, Part Exchange Show Room Sales 01925 730399 "TfteuC Order 07000 247392 Credit/debit cards accepted Birdwatching Abroad? We offer. . Sunbird ‘The best of birdwatching tours’ • 22 years experience • Professional leaders • Small, friendly groups • and over 80 birdwatching holidays to choose from in our 2002 brochure. For your free copy contact: Sunbird (BS), PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire, SGI 9 IDF Tel: 01767 682969 Fax: 01767 692481 Email sunbird@sunbird.demon.co.uk www.sunbird.demon.co.uk Atlantic rainforest south-east Brazil Sitio Agua Fresca is a small guesthouse in the heart of the Atlantic rainforest, south-east Brazil. Situated amongst 10,000 acres of privately owned rainforest, it offers the perfect base from which to explore the ornithological delights of the area, 360+ species of bird already recorded, including 95 endemics! The Sitio offers a high standard of accommodation, and is only 1 'A hours from Rio de Janeiro, airport transfers available. For further information please contact: Tel/Fax +44 (0) 1243 641438 e-mail: sitioaguafresca@hotmail.com www.sitioaguafresca. co.uk EILAT & SOUTHERN ISRAEL (AUTUMN/WINTER/SPRING) ★ A better quality Israel birding experience assured ★ Tours by a team of dedicated protessionals. ★ Ground prices from 160 GB pounds sterling- 240 US dollars ★ Birds on your doorstep! Almost 300 species recorded at Lotan. ★ Northern Israel itineraries from 5-8 days. ★ Perfect for sell-guided birders. ★ Customized itineraries for tour companies. ★ Full details on request al www.birdingisrael.com ★ Contact - James Smith/David Dolev at Kibbutz Lotan, Doar Na Chevel Eilot. 88855 ISRAEL. Fax: + 9728-6356-937. Tel: + 9728-6356-935 ★ Email birdlotan@lotan.ardom.co.il BIRD NEWS to PAGERS and MOBILE PHONES • Up to the minute bird news wherever you are. Local news, national news. Rare Bird Alert 01603 456789 For all advertising enquiries contact Ian Lycett Tel: 020 7704 9495 ian . lycett@bi rdwatch .co.uk il ome to BB Books, the new mailorder service from British Birds. In the March issue we are pleased to present around 160 t( , over 60 of these at special offer prices (denoted in red) - including the latest HBW. r rooks included in BB Books are recommended by British Birds as reliable, good value and important additions to any » catcher's library. We aim to provide the most prompt, efficient and friendly service possible. roks fulfilment is provided by NHBS Ltd in association with British Birds - each sale benefits the journal, so please take ntage of our excellent selection. Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse Steve Madge & Phil McGowan Covers almost 260 species of gamebird from around the world. This is the first time all of the species have been treated in one volume, and the first time many of these birds have been illustrated at all. □ #66365 45.00 hbk Handbook of the Birds of the World. Volume 7: Jacamars to Woodpeckers del Hoyo et al. Volume 7 presents the orders Galbuliformes and Piciformes. Families covered include: Galbulidae (Jacamars), Bucconidae (Puffbirds), Capitonidae (Barbets), Ramphastidae (Toucans), Indicatoridae (Honeyguides), and Picidae (Woodpeckers). □ #17562 89.00 01900 hbk Moths (New Naturalist Series) Michael Majerus The latest volume in the New Naturalist series, this offers a comprehensive account of the diverse natural history of moths. □ #126204 34.99 hbk □ #126205 19.99 pbk ✓ T «■ • MIIUIS-* 'A* VfV 4 Field Guide to the Birds of South-East Asia Craig Robson et al Provides incredibly detailed information on the 665 most threatened bird species found in Asia. □ New paperback edition #126456 1 9.99 pbk Checklist of the Birds of Colombia Paul Salaman & Tomas Cuadros Provides a total list of 1865 species that have been recorded from within the republic of Colombia, as of March 2001- includes all species from both within the continental boundaries of Colombia and its four islands (San Andres, Providencia, Gorgona & Malpelo). □ #126076 1 0.00 1 2.00 pbk Birds of Western Africa: An Identification Guide Nik Borrow & Ron Demey Major new handbook describing 1282 species occuring in the western countries of Africa. The guide is illustrated with 142 colour plates covering all the species described and distribution maps are provided for the majority of species. □ #40675 55.00 hbk E 3»e and Western Palearctic a s i.n Counties - Ballance - #106513 □i Is 5 of Europe - Jonsson - #49559 12.99 □ ndwatching Guide to Eastern Spain - #108192 □ Is S of Israel - Shirihai - #21254 tJ Is ; of the Western Palearctic - Concise -Snow & Perrins- #50548 LI ; of the Western Palearctic - Complete I slumes) - #32807 □ is ; of the Western Palearctic - Complete (CD) ^nrip & Perrins - #28660 □I ; ns Bird Guide - Svensson et al. - #113220 89.00 0509 10.95 78.95 49.50 250.00 12.99 22.99 21.00 □. ns Bird Guide: Large Format - #106883 ^plete Guide to the Birdlife of Britain - #121164 □. v ; Atlas of European Breeding Birds - #53830 O. s : of Britain & Europe - Peterson et al. - #22327 -1 Guide to Birds of the Middle East - Porter et al. - #45653 ng Birds in Britain - Lee GR Evans - #123780 , New to Britain & Ireland - Palmer - #111106 dbook of Bird Identification Beaman & Madge #17061 55.00 LX irical Atlas of Breeding birds in Britain land - Holloway - #44008 it tification Guide to European Passerines - Svensson - #889 □4- tification Guide to Non-passerines - Baker - #29342 LX irtant Bird Areas of Europe - Heath & Evans - #101969 Macmillan Birder's Guide to European and ' lie Eastern birds - #52543 ' Macmillan Field Guide to Bird Identification - #24237 Atlas of Breeding Birds - Gibbons et at. - #20923 L# rtre to Watch Birds in Thames Valley and the F erns - Helm - #125993 Ni , America hbk pbk pbk hbk hbk hbk 116.33 CD 0609 pbk -2000 hbk -2900 hbk 59.95 hbk 19.99 hbk 31.95 hbk 19.95 pbk 25.00 hbk -6500 hbk 31.95 hbk 36.00 pbk 19.50 pbk 75.00 pbk 17.99 hbk 14.99 pbk 53.95 hbk 14.99 pbk □ The Birds of Ecuador vol 2 - Ridgely 8 Greenfield - #117744 □ The Birds of Ecuador, 2-volume set - #118677 □ Birds, Mammals & Reptiles of the Galapagos #86419 □ Birds of the West Indies - Raffaele et al - #69140 28.99 □ Birds of Southern S. America 14.99 - de la Pena & Rumboll - #66504 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Peru - Clements et al - #63442 □ Guide to Birds of Costa Rica - Stiles et al. - #4386 □ Guide to Birds of Trinidad & Tobago - French - #14770 □ Where to Watch Birds in Mexico - Howell - #85698 40.00 pbk 80.00 pbk 16.95 pbk 0500 hbk -40r09 pbk 40.00 pbk 40.00 pbk 32.00 pbk 19.99 pbk Africa, Middle East & Indian Ocean Islands □ The Birds of Africa vol 1 - Fry et al. - #571 □ The Birds of Africa vol 2 - Fry et al. - #572 □ The Birds of Africa vol 3 - Fry et al. - #2780 □ The Birds of Africa vol 4 - Fry etal. - #10567 □ The Birds of Africa vol 5 - Fry et al. - #19103 □ The Birds of Africa vol 6 - Fry et al. - #19104 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - #40871 □ Birds of Madagascar: a Photographic Guide - #54245 □ Birdwatching Guide to Oman - #126092 □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of Eastern Africa - #43706 □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of S Africa - #86446 □ Birds of East Africa - Stevenson & Fanshawe - #22326 □ Birds of the Gambia & Senegal - Barlow et al. - #31919 □ Important Bird Areas in Africa and Associated Islands -#120103 □ Important Bird Areas in Uganda - RSPB, Byaruhanga et al. - #124739 □ Newman's Birds of Southern Africa - #115772 □ SASOL Birds of Prey of Africa & its islands - #85607 □ SASOL Birds of Southern Africa - #69110 84.00 130 00 hbk 84.00 nonn I JW.UV hbk 84.00 130.00 hbk 84.00 115.00 hbk 84.00 1 20 00 hbk 92.00 115.00 hbk 33.99 ac\ on hbk 23.50 ~>o nr\ zLO . \J\y hbk 20.00 pbk 14.99 -19-09 pbk 14.99 19.99 pbk 23.99 -2905 hbk 23.99 ~?ft nn hbk 55.00 hbk 16.00 pbk 12.99 0509 pbk 15.99 0909 pbk 15.99 19.99 pbk der's Guide to Florida - #779 □j der's Guide to the Rio Grande Valley - #100616 LX der's Guide to SE Arizona - #44527 LX der's Guide to S. California - #86478 Guide to the Birds of N. America ional Geographic - #8871 1 uide to N. American Birds Part 1 - Pyle - #75330 i American Bird Guide - Sibley - #106918 •ibley Guide to Bird Life and Behaviour - #124065 & Central America & Caribbean iirds of Ecuador vol 1 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #21379 24.50 spr 24.50 spr A 22.95 spr □ 24.50 spr □ 9.99 0209 pbk □ □ 29.99 pbk □ 20.99 1C nn ZL J XjXJ pbk □ 35.00 hbk □ □ □ 55.00 pbk □ Birdwatchers' Guide to India - #82704 Checklist of Birds of the Oriental Region - #54331 Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands - #70343 14.99 Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - Grimmett et al - #69141 The Birds of Japan - #10075 22.00 Field Guide to Birds of Bhutan - #97388 Field Guide to the Birds of China - #101745 23.99 Field Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #66407 A Field Guide to the Birds of Korea - #1 19805 20.95 Field Guide to Birds of Nepal - #107846 18.75 10.00 0709 55.00 40.00 16.99 -2909 25.00 ~1 A PC .JO 19.99 pbk pbk pbk hbk hbk pbk pbk hbk pbk pbk See BB Books online at www.nhbs.com/bb-books J Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka - #83310 -1 Guide to the Birds of the Philippines - *101746 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Seychelles - *116115 J Guide to the Birds of Thailand - *9945 □ Guide to the Birds of Wallacea - #31250 □ Threatened Birds of Asia - 2 volume set - #120107 □ Threatened Birds of Asia - cd - #125996 Australasia □ Birds of New Guinea - #1683 Collins Field Guide to Birds of Australia - #88226 Field Guide to Australian Birds - Morcombe- #122064 □ □ Hand Guide to the Birds of New Zealand - #116574 HANZAB vol 1 - Marchant & Higgins - #10556 HANZAB vol 2 - Marchant 8 Higgins ■ HANZAB vol 3 - Marchant & Higgins ■ HANZAB vol 4 - Marchant & Higgins ■ HANZAB vol 5 - Marchant & Higgins ■ • #10667 • #10668 ■ #10669 ■ #10670 World □ Birds of the World: a checklist - Clements - #101888 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 1 - #17555 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 2 - #17556 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 3 - #17557 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 4 - #17558 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 5 - #17559 Handbook of Birds of the World vol 6 - #17561 HBW volumes 1-7 set - #127049 Threatened Birds of the World - BirdLife - #110198 World Bird Species Checklist - Wells - #77401 Monographs □ Albatrosses - Tickell - #101886 J The Atlantic Gannet - Nelson - #123245 J Buntings & Sparrows - Byers et al. - #21255 □ The California Condor - Snyder & Snyder - #105565 □ Crows & Jays - Madge & Burn - #97387 _1 Cuckoos, Cowbirds & other cheats - Davies - #104272 □ Raptors of Europe, Middle East & N. Africa - Clark & Schmitt - #54599 Finches & Sparrows - Clement et al - #97396 The Golden Eagle - Watson - #53818 The Great Auk - Fuller - #101175 Gulls: A guide to identification The Hobby - Chapman - #103400 Munias and Mannikins - Restall • The Mute Swan - Birkhead 8 Perrins - #1165 New World Blackbirds - Jaramillo & Burke - #82707 J □ a a a □ □ u • Grant - #580 ■ #54237 23.99 -2995 pbk 6 23.99 Cfi pbk 27.99 ~>a nc. JH . JJ pbk 25.00 pbk 45.00 hbk 41.00 hbk 55.00 hbk 12.00 cd 35.00 pbk 14.99 -19:99 pbk 23.95 pbk i 19.99 nn pbk 15.50 ■j Q 5Q pbk 150.00 hbk 72.50 hbk 75.00 hbk 135.00 hbk 125.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 623.00 Tin no f f \j XjXj hbk 70.00 hbk 29.50 hbk 40.00 hbk 20.50 D/1 c/p . Dt7 hbk 23.50 2Q QQ hbk 25.95 hbk 16.99 pbk 24.95 hbk 21.50 pc c/p cO.jv pbk 19.99 pbk 31.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 22.50 hbk 15.40 28.00 hbk 15.95 hbk 26.25 ic on JJ.VV hbk □ New World Warblers - Curson et al - #29510 □ Nightjars - Cleere - #65487 □ Nightjars & their Allies - Holyoak - #105584 □ The Nuthatches - Matthysen & Quinn - #69079 □ Owls - Konig et al - #66408 □ Parrots - Juniper & Parr - #65486 □ The Peregrine - Ratdiffe - #858 Pigeons & Doves - Gibbs et al - #66403 Pittas, Broadbills and Asities - #29868 Rails - Taylor & van Perlo - #66402 Raptors of Europe and the Middle East Forsman #55844 Raptors of the World - Ferguson-Lees et al. - #5601 The Red Kite - Carter - #115639 Seabirds: An Identification Guide - Harrison - #851 Seabirds of the Word: A photographic guide - Harrison - #63122 Shorebirds - Hayman et al. - #554 Shrikes - Lefranc 8 Worfolk - #54240 Shrike & Bush-Shrikes - Harris 8 Franklin - #105227 Skuas & Jaegers - Olsen 8 Larsen - #63425 Starlings & Mynas - Feare 8 Craig - #82706 Sunbirds & Flowerpeckers - Cheke 8 Mann - #66414 Swallows & Martins - Turner 8 Rose - #3929 Swifts - Chantler 8 Driessens - #86417 Sylvia Warblers - Shirihal et al. - #107849 Thrushes - Clement et al. - #107850 □ Tundra Plovers - Byrkjedal 8 Thompson - #69080 □ Warblers of Europe, Asia & N. Africa - Baker - #65060 □ Wildfowl - Madge 8 Burn - #2621 □ The World of the Hummingbird - Burton - #124511 □ Wrens, Dippers & Thrashers - Brewer - #66416 20.99 27^9 hb 16.50 30 00 hb 50 00 hb 2595 hb 35 00 hb 29.50 DC AA j j w hb 36 95 hb 31.99 go aa 30. VU hb 21.50 40 UU hb 26.25 JCAA JJ w hb 23.95 -2995 hb 49.00 hb 22.50 hb 24.99 9999 hb 15.99 pb 24.99 9999 hb 20.99 DC AA £- J hb 28.99 gr r\r\ j j.UU hb 13.20 24 00 hb 24.00 DP Art hb 37 00 hb 20.99 -27-99 hb 28.00 hb! 60.00 hbl 28.99 dc nn J~. vTtj hbt 22.50 -29-99 hbl 743 60.00 hbl 29.95 hbl 24.00 p d on J4.W hbl 22.50 9999 hbl 27.95 hbll 35.00 hbl 17.95 vii 49.94 vii 46.94 Cl Recordings & Videos _l African Bird Sounds, 2-volume set - chappuis - #119048 141.00 159.95 C( North Africa and Atlantic Islands, West and Central Africa □ Bill Oddies's Video Guide to British Birds - #98805 J The Birds of Britain and Europe, 4-Video Set - #39466 J Bird Songs and Calls of Britain and Europe (Complete 4 CD Set) - #63342 J Eastern Rarities: The Birds of Beidaihe - #86435 J The Large Gulls of North America - #100756 □ The Raptors of Britain and Europe • Video - #49316 J Sound Guide to Nightjars & related Nightbirds - #82371 8.28 U A Sound Guide to the Owls of the World - #84226 J The Warblers of Britain and Europe - Video - #86434 17.95 17.95 17.95 14.99 24 99 17.95 vii Miscellaneous U Birders - tales of a tribe - Cocker - #120708 J Who Killed the Great Auk? - Gaskell - #111124 15.50 15.99 i q no rO JJ BB binders are still available from Subbuteo Books, tel: 01743 709420 Prices quoted in £ (UK Sterling). All special offer prices are valid only for March 2002, other prices quoted are subject to any publishers increases and all sales subject to NHBS Ltd Terms & Conditions (available on request). VAT is included in the price of CDs, Videos etc as applicable. Make all cheques and POs payable to NHBS Ltd. Payment can also be made in US$ & C, please contact customer services for details. Orders are normally despatched promptly from stock, but please allow up to 21 days for delivery in the UK, longer if abroad. Name Address Postcode Subscriber No Email Please sign here Please debit my Visa/MastercardTSwitch/AMEX II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Switch - Start date | | | / | | | Issue No I I I I I AMEX - Start date Telephone Goods total £ P&P total £ Total £ Expiry date /I I Code Standard Service (books) postage 8i packing charges and delivery times Special overseas postaoe rates applv to sets & heavv items Video Maps/CDs Up to provide a forum for contributions of interest to all birdwatchers in the region; ♦> publish material on behaviour, conservation, distribution, ecology, identification, movements, status and taxonomy; ♦> embrace new ideas and research; and ♦> maintain its position as the respected journal of record. British Birds Editor Roger Riddington Assistant Editor David A. Christie Editorial Board lan Carter, Richard Chandler, Martin Collinson, Robin Prytherch, Nigel Redman, Roger Riddington Art Consultants Robert Gillmor & Alan Harris Photographic Research Robin Chittenden David Tipling Design Mark Corliss Rarities Committee Chairman Colin Bradshaw Hon. Secretary Michael J. Rogers Paul Harvey, John McLoughlin, John Martin, Doug Page, Adam Rowlands, Ken Shaw, Brian Small, Jimmy Steele, Reg Thorpe, Grahanie Walbridge Archivist John Marchant Statistician Peter Fraser Museum consultant Ian Lewington Notes Panel Colin Bibby, Ian Dawson, Jim Flegg, lan Newton FRS, Malcolm Ogilvie, Angela Turner (Co-ordinator) Annual subscription rates Libraries and agencies - £72.00 Personal subscriptions UK and overseas surface mail - £56.50 Overseas airmail - £88.00 Concessionary rates (Available only to individual members of the RSPB, BTO, IWC, SOC, County Bird Clubs & Societies and other National or Regional organisations) UK - £42.00 Overseas surface mail - £46.00 Overseas airmail - £69.50 Single back issues - £6.50 Available from British Birds, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Rarities Issue - £10 (available as above) Please make all cheques payable to British Birds Guidelines for Contributors: see inside back cover or visit the BB website. www.britishbirds.co.uk EDITORIAL Chapel Cottage, Dunrossness, Shetland ZE2 9JH Tel & Fax: 01 950 460080 Papers, notes, letters, illustrations, etc. Roger Riddington E-mail: editor@britishbirds.co.uk 'News & comment’ information Bob Scott & Adrian Pitches, 8 Woodlands, St Neots, Cambridgeshire PE19 I UE Tel: 0 1 480 2 1 4904 Fax: 0 1 480 473009 E-mail: abscott@tiscali.co.uk Rarity descriptions M. J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, Cornwall TIL26 3AZ CIRCULATION & PRODUCTION The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel: 01580 882039 Fax: 01580 882038 Subscriptions & Circulation Vivienne Hunter E-mail: subscriptions@britishbirds.co.uk Design & Production Philippa Leegood E-mail: design@britishbirds.co.uk Accounts & Administration Hazel Jenner E-mail: accounts@helm-information.co.uk ADVERTISING: for all advertising matters, please contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd, 3D/F I.eroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP Tel: 020 7704 9495 Fax: 020 7704 2767 E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk Front-cover photograph: Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana. off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000, Brian Patteson HGISCOPING? ve can supply the complete package! Telephone 01962 366203 London Camera Exchange Winchester NEW! DUOVID 8+12x42 Phone for latest Info. g 1 selection of our large stock Prices shown include VAT @ 17.5% and are subject to change without notice. rrubes available from £39.99. Phone for details or visit our website. rvww.dlgiscoplng.co.uk 115 The Square Winchester S023 9ES m.ill:wlnchcstem lcegroup.co.uk LEICA 8X20BC 8X20BCA 10X25BC 10X25BCA 8X32BN 10X32BN 7X42BN 8X42BN 10X42BN K Mail Order ext Day Delivery Available istage A Insurance £6 most items apo Televid+32x APO Televid+zoom SWAROVSKI 8.5X42EL 10X42EL £249 £279 £279 £295 £619 £639 £699 £689 £699 £919 £959 £845 £880 8X20B 10X25B 8X30 SLC 7X42 SLC 10x42 SLC £279 £299 £475 £589 £639 AT80HD+30XW AT80HD+ZOOm ATS65HD+30XW ATS65HD+ZOOm £979 £1029 £1049 £1129 Nikon 8x36 Sporter 1 £199 10x36 sporter 1 £229 8X42 HC £?79 10X42 HC £869 Nikon RAII + 20X £199 Nikon RAII + Zoom £249 Nikon EDIIIA Body £599 8x42 DBA 10x42 DBA 8X42 PCACN 10X42 PCACN M.Midget2+25X M.Midget2 + Zoom imagic 65+25 Imaglc 80+25 imagic 80+zoom ES80+25X+Case £599 £599 £429 £439 £179 £219 £199 £299 £329 £499 Diascope65T' 23 or 30x 15-45X Zoom 8x20 Victory 10x25 Victory £725 ] £175 £240 £299 £329 rind much man Plume. information correct @ 21/02/02 and is subject to change without notice E&OE www.digiscoping.co.uk New Diascopes from Carl Zeiss New Carl Zeiss Diascopes T* FL • 65mm and 85mm Objectives • Straight and Angled bodies. • 2 fixed magnification eyepieces and 1 variable eyepiece • Fluoride glass • Waterproof, Nitrogen filled For details of your nearest Carl Zeiss Dealer. Please contact our helpline 01707 87 13 50. ZEISS British Birds Volume 95 Number 4 April 2002 I 56 S3 From the Rarities Committee’s files: Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel Colin Bradshaw, on behalf of BBRC 1 66 The status of the Hawfinch in the UK 1975-1999 Rowena Langston, Richard Gregory and Roy Adams 1 74 The European Bird Report - Non-passerines Colin Davies Regular features 1 65 Looking back 1 89 Notes Greylag Goose nesting in oak tree Robin Redfern Eleonora’s Falcon carrying chick back to eyrie Pedro Felipe and Felipe Siverio Peregrine Falcons fostering Herring Gull chicks Ronnie Baker Collared Dove feeding on algae Paul Morris Adult Common Cuckoo feeding juvenile Keith Smith Common Swift nestlings attacked by wasps Roy Overall Great Spotted Woodpeckers feeding on apples D. M. Bednall; Clive Minton Mimicry by Lesser Short-toed Lark on Tenerife Ruben Barone Alarm calls of Barn Swallow Tony Taylor Blackbirds with damaged bills Alan Harris Tameness and unusual feeding behaviour of female Sardinian Warbler Brian Hill Yellow Blue Tit Peter A. Hammersley 1 96 Letters Dodgy ducks, grotty geese and suspect ‘Sibes’ Nigel Odin Status of Marmora’s Warbler in Italy Nicola Baccetti Lesser Redpolls in France Philip Redman 1 99 Looking back 200 Obituaries Bert Axell (1915-2001) ]. M. B. King (1924-2002) 20 1 News and comment Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches 205 Reviews The Sibley Guide to Bird Life and Behaviour: A Companion to the North American Bird Guide by Chris Elphick, )ohn B. Dunning Jr & David Sibley Colin Bibby The Avifauna of Hong Kong by G. J. Carey, M. L. Chalmers, D. A. Diskin, P. R. Kennerley, P. J. Leader, M. R. Leven, R. W. Lewthwaite, D. S. Melville, M. Turnbull & L. Young Nigel Redman Wrens, Dippers and Thrashers by David Brewer & Barry Kent Mackay Peter Lansdown Sunbirds: A Guide to the Sunbirds, Flowerpeckers, Spiderhunters and Sugarbirds of the World by Robert A. Cheke, Clive F. Mann & Richard Allen Iain Robertson Gulls: A Video Guide to the Gulls of Europe, Asia & North America by Paul Doherty Stephen Votier Norfolk: A Birdwatcher’s Site Guide by Phil Benstead, Steve Rowland & Richard Thomas Peter Allard 209 (§) Monthly Marathon 2 1 0 Recent reports Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan 212 53 Recent BBRC decisions © British Birds 200 2 From the Rarities Committee’s files: Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel Ian Lewington ABSTRACT Rare seabirds are often extremely hard to identify, and a significant part of the problem is that, when observed from land, circumstances are typically very difficult. In many cases, one or more of the following drawbacks applies: the weather conditions are poor, views are distant and brief, and photographic evidence is impossible. For these same reasons, records of rare seabirds are also difficult to assess, particularly so if they concern what would be a ‘first for Britain’ for the species in question. This was the case when a probable Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana was seen off Dungeness, Kent, in January 1 998. In this paper, the circumstances and the assessment of that record are described, and, more generally, the level of supporting evidence which is necessary for acceptance of records of rare seabirds is discussed. ZEISS 156 © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 156-1 65 02 fcl |> c Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel > pd r- TO Rare seabirds present difficulties in many ways. They are difficult to find, and most observers will spend hundreds of hours 'sifting through’ common species before encountering a rarity. They are difficult to iden- tify, not least because the circumstances in which they are seen usually mean that, com- pared with most other birding situations, views are both distant and brief, and the observer is rarely given a second chance to confirm the fea- tures noted on first impressions. From a rarities committee’s point of view, they are extremely difficult to assess. Rare seabirds are usually seen by a small number of observers, the weather and viewing conditions are often poor, and there are rarely any supporting photographs. In addition, the observers are frequently either unfamiliar with the species or used to seeing it in a different context (for example, at close range, from a boat in calm conditions). These problems are amplified both for observers and for BBRC when the species con- cerned is new for Britain. This was the case when a probable Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana was seen off Dungeness, Kent, in January 1998, by David Walker, Owen Leyshon and Chris Philpott. David Walker describes the circumstances of the event, and the identifica- tion process, as follows. On Sunday, 4th January 1998, after a prolonged period of extremely stormy weather, I decided to check the sea at Dungeness for any signs of movements of displaced seabirds. I arrived at the Coastguards Tower at 09.40 hours and decided to watch from my car, since the weather was still very unpleasant. Chris Philpott was already there in his vehicle, and I was soon joined by Owen Leyshon. It was still very windy, with frequent spells of driving rain, but the light was good in the intervening periods and it was evident that good numbers of Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla and, more unusu- ally, a few Great Skuas Gatharacta skua were moving out of the North Sea in a westerly direction. At about 09.55, CP called out that a large shearwater was approaching. Owing to the way in which OL and I were aligned in the car, I was unable to see it and waited impa- tiently for it to come into view. The next call from CP then came... ‘It’s not a Great [Pufftnus gravis] or a Cory’s Shearwater [Calonectris diomedea ]: I don’t know what it is!’ At this point, OL and I had still not seen the bird and it? A few seconds later, the mystery seabird came into our field of view, trailing behind a Northern Gannet Moms bassanus and flying steadily west, low over the water, about 400 m offshore. At the time of the observation the light was dull but clear, in fact excellent for observing colour tones. The presence of the nearby Northern Gannet allowed a good size compar- ison, while several Fulmars Fulmarus glacialis and Kittiwakes were also seen under similar light conditions and range prior to the sighting. My initial impression was of a shearwater, about the size of a slim Cory’s, but with huge white flashes on the underwing (resembling a boldly marked juvenile Pomarine Skua Sterco- rarius pomarinus), a broad breast band, a faint impression of an ‘M’ pattern on the upper- wings, a few curious pale feathers in the wing- coverts, and a peculiar narrow-winged and long-tailed appearance, somewhat reminiscent of a juvenile Long-tailed Skua S. longicaudus. I watched it for perhaps two minutes, until it was eventually lost from view, during which time all three of us called out comments and plumage features as it passed by. After it had disappeared, we simply sat there for a while as we collected ourselves and made mental and verbal notes of what we had seen. I mentioned at the time that it might have been a Herald Petrel, since I was aware that that species had been claimed in the past, although never formally submitted. The following description was compiled from our field notes. Size and shape I estimated the bird to be slightly smaller than a Cory’s Shearwater, perhaps nearer to an Arctic Skua S. parasiticus in general dimensions, but with a com- pletely different shape. The wings were much nar- rower than those of a Cory’s, while the tail appeared relatively long, similar in shape to that of a juvenile Long-tailed Skua. Although the wings were narrow and the tail long, it was still quite bulky. Plumage The upperparts were ‘milk-chocolate’ brown, with the wing-coverts slightly darker than the mantle, and with a faint scaly appearance. Within the wing- coverts, there were a few white feathers. The flight feathers were slightly paler brown than the coverts. This subtle difference in colour gave rise to a faint ‘M’ across the upperparts, although at no time was this feature striking. There was no sign of a white flash on the upperwings. The underparts were mainly pale, a British Birds 95 ’April 2002 • 156-165 157 Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel > brownish white, but with a broad, ill-defined, brown band across the upper breast, of the same colour as the upperparts. The belly and throat were pale, while the rest of the head appeared to be brown. The upper- tail, the vent and the undertail were also brown, like the upperparts. The underwings were the most striking part of the bird. There was a large white area at the base of the primaries, and a white band across the base of the primary coverts, divided by a dark line, as on a Pomarine Skua. The inner white band extended as a broad white line through the centre of the wing, probably along the base of the underwing- coverts. The rest of the wing was dark, with no hint of white on the leading edge of the underwing. Flight The petrel flew past low above the water, in a straight line, occasionally with a slight roll from side to side. The wings appeared to be slightly bowed for most of the time, since it was simply gliding into the wind, but at times it would give a short bout of rapid, fluttering wing flaps, mainly from the wrist down, i.e. just the wingtips seemed to be flapped. At no time did it rise high into the air, or soar. We returned to the Observatory to compare our notes with the available literature while the sighting was still fresh in our minds (there seemed little point in continuing with the sea- watch). The only reliable material seemed to be the two books by Harrison (1983, 1987). The drawings of Herald Petrel in the former (Har- rison 1983) were quite close to what we had seen, but there were some differences. The main points about our bird which seemed not to fit were: (i) it was possibly too large; (ii) the flight action was ‘wrong’; (iii) the upperparts were not dark enough; (iv) the wing lacked a pale leading edge; and (v) the dark ‘M’ on the upper- parts was not sufficiently distinct. Nonetheless, we could not find any other species which came close. We decided that more research was needed but, just in case it was seen again, we alerted the birdlines and all seawatchers at points to the west of Dungeness. By chance, only a few days later, an article by Dubois & Seitre (1997) was published which described a Herald Petrel seen in the Azores, and which contained photos of that and other individuals. Although the Azores petrel was a dark morph, virtually all the apparently ‘prob- lematic’ features of the Dungeness petrel now seemed to fit Herald Petrel perfectly. The Azores petrel was likened to a Cory’s Shearwater in size, but the ‘body was much lighter and the wings narrower than in that species’. In addi- tion, one photograph showed a long-tailed appearance; the flight action was described as gliding, not soaring and arcing; there was no sign of a white leading edge to the wing in any of the photographs; there was little indication of an ‘M’ on the upperparts, although the coverts appeared darker than the flight feathers; and the upperparts showed a number of iso- lated white feathers. I contacted Anthony McGeehan, who kindly sent slides of a Herald Petrel which he had seen off North Carolina, USA, together with copies of some of the references mentioned in Dubois & Seitre (1997). The slides from AM clearly showed large white underwing patches, similar to those of the Dungeness petrel. The texts were, however, of limited value, since they referred mainly to dark-morph individuals and contained little field information. Gochfeld et al. (1988) did, however, mention the long, wedge-shaped tail, while Lee (1984) noted the flight as being more like that of a shearwater than that of a gadfly-petrel, and observed that the light patches on the underwing suggested a skua. Finally, Charles Wilkins provided me with two slides of pale/intermediate-morph Herald Petrels taken at Round Island, in the Indian Ocean. These seemed to remove any remaining doubts. The coloration of the upperparts was exactly as on the Dungeness petrel, being pale brown and not at all blackish. The wings also lacked both a white leading edge and a striking ‘M’ on the upper surface, and had occasional, isolated white feathers; in short, they were vir- tually identical to those of the seabird which we had seen. I am now quite sure that the Dungeness petrel was a pale/intermediate-morph Herald Petrel, a species which is clearly quite variable in plumage. This individual was obviously not of the dark morph, but I am presently unsure how to differentiate between pale and intermediate morphs. The intermediate morph shown in plate 154 of Harrison (1987), with its darker ventral region, is certainly closer to the bird which we saw than is that depicted in his plate 153. Perhaps the latter is really a pale morph? One of the problems encountered during this research has been the lack of suitable reference material. Since the species has only recently been admitted to the Western Palearctic List, it is not featured in most relevant field guides or in BWP. The American literature adds little of relevance for field identification. As part of the 158 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 56- 1 65 Brian Sullivan Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel > 83. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. 84. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. 85. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. British Birds 95 ’April 2002 • 156-165 159 Brian Sullivan George Armistead Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel identification process, there are several other species which must be eliminated. 1 have seen none of these, so that my comments rely com- pletely on published information. Most of the points below are derived from the plates and text in Harrison (1983, 1987). Kerguelen Petrel Pterodroma brevirostris. The white (not silvery) underwings and the pale belly of the Dungeness petrel eliminate this species. ‘Soft-plumaged petrel’ P. madeira/feae/mollis. My impression is that all these taxa would be much greyer in overall plumage tones than the petrel which we saw, and would appear much smaller, with a proportionally larger body and shorter wings. The underwing pattern is also inconsistent with that which we observed. Atlantic Petrel P incerta. The white patterning of the underwing of the Dungeness petrel, together with its white throat, eliminate Atlantic Petrel. Kermadec Petrel P. neglecta. The Dungeness petrel lacked white primary shafts on the upperwings and at the base of the tail. The tail was also probably too long for Kermadec Petrel. I believe that all other possible species would show completely dark underparts and/or an obvious ‘M’ on the upperwings. In conclusion, all of the features described above appear to be consistent with a Herald Petrel, including several noted during the obser- vation which, initially, seemed to be ‘incorrect’. All the possible confusion species can be elimi- nated. Since the publication of Dubois & Seitre (1997), Shawneen Finnegan has claimed that there have been 40 records of Herald Petrel off eastern North America since 1991, including nine individuals of the pale/intermediate morph ( Birding World 11: 67). Perhaps, there- fore, this species is commoner, or is becoming commoner, than was previously realised. A detailed description was also supplied by Owen Leyshon, which confirmed both the cir- cumstances and most of the features of the Dungeness petrel described by DW. OL had seen the bird only through binoculars, and had noted the tail as ‘short’, and there were also some differences in the way in which the two observers had interpreted the colour and pat- terning of the petrel. These variations were, however, entirely compatible with the difference in optical equipment used, and consequently in the views of the bird obtained by the observers. Taxonomy of Herald Petrel There are currently two accepted races of Herald Petrel. The nominate form arminjoniana (‘Trindade Petrel’, often erroneously spelt as ‘Trinidade’) breeds in the South Atlantic and also in the Indian Ocean, on Round Island and Mauritius, while P. a. heraldica breeds in the Pacific Ocean. There is, however, some evidence that the Round Island petrels are genetically more similar to those in the Pacific Ocean than to those in the South Atlantic. Although these two forms are still considered subspecies of Herald Petrel, differences between them in plumage, morphology and, perhaps, vocalisa- tions have led some to argue that ‘Trindade Petrel’ should be elevated to the status of a full species. Since the type specimen was collected on Trindade, it would presumably retain the present scientific name, P. arminjoniana , while the Pacific form would become P. heraldica. ‘Trindade Petrel’ is named after one of its two known breeding localities, a small group of islets lying about 1,200 km off the east coast of Brazil; it also breeds close by on the islet of Pedro Segundo, part of the Martin Vaz archi- pelago. The breeding population of Trindade is estimated to be about 5,000 individuals. Its non-breeding range is poorly known, although it is now regularly seen off the coasts of North and South Carolina during the summer months. It has three colour morphs (pale, inter- mediate and dark), and, while the relative abun- dance of each is unknown, the majority of those seen and photographed in the Gulf Stream off North America have been classified as dark morph. Assessment of the Dungeness petrel During the first circulation of the record, several BBRC members commented on the paucity of information on the pale or interme- diate morph of the Atlantic form of Herald Petrel. DW had seen photographs of the Round Island petrels, but we were not sure how rele- vant this might be, since mitochondrial-DNA analysis has suggested that these are genetically similar to the pale-morph Herald Petrels of the Pacific (Brooke & Rowe 1996). Field observa- tions of Herald Petrel in the North Atlantic have been made primarily between May and Sep- 160 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 56- 1 65 Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel 86. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. 87. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 156-165 161 Brian Sullivan George Armistead c Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel tember, and we were not aware of any published descriptions of what the species might look like, or, indeed, where it might be, in January. Most members were concerned that the flight of the Dungeness petrel, as described, did not seem compatible with that of most Pterodroma petrels under similar conditions. While there was no doubt that the three observers had seen an amazing seabird, the description of which seemed closest to that of a pale-morph Herald Petrel, the prevailing opinion of BBRC was that, given (i) the brevity of views and the poor weather conditions, (ii) some relatively minor discrepancies between the two submitted descriptions, (iii) the fact that the observers had little or no experience of the possible confusion species, and (iv) the enormity of the record, this submission would be unlikely to make the grade as a ‘first for Britain’. Since this species was, however, also outside the experience of most members of the Committee, we decided to seek expert advice, both from Britain and from North America. The key questions to which we wished to find answers were as follows. • Can Herald Petrel show the flight pattern described for the Dungeness petrel in wind- speeds of more than 20 knots? • What colour would the upperparts of pale/intermediate-morph Herald Petrel be? • Can pale/intermediate-morph Herald Petrels show only a slight impression of a dark'M’ across the upperwings? < • Do Herald Petrels ever show a scaly pattern on the upperwing-coverts? Having studied the evidence, our experts replied that, in their opinion, the plumage of the Dungeness petrel was within the range of variation shown by Herald Petrel. The first expert felt that ‘everything in the notes [above], with the exception of the description of the flight pattern, accords with my experience of pale-morph “Trindade” or Herald Petrel. I have observed about 13 pale morphs at sea in the western North Atlantic, and two further indi- viduals from land. I have seen perhaps half a dozen “intermediate” morphs, and 40 or so dark morphs, plus Atlantic Petrel and Kerguelen Petrel in the Scotia Sea, but none of the Pacific Pterodroma. The description of flight style bothered me at first, but 1 recall seawatching in the USA, during the spring migration, and seeing Sooty Shearwaters Puffinus griseus execute a quite astonishing flight style which I have never seen offshore. The birds battled an onshore wind and, to maintain their northward progress, they hugged the surface of the ocean, with belly to the water, like a cross between a Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus and an Audubon’s Shearwater P. Iherminieri , never sailing up in typically dynamic sinusoidal flight (in fact, the typical crucifix shape, with the axis of wings held perpendicular to the ocean’s surface, was never seen). Several years later I was able to observe a whole host of “deviations” from typical flight behaviour during several tropical cyclones. Three Herald Petrels seen in similar conditions in 1996 deviated from their typical flight pattern, but not in precisely the manner described above. I would be happy to endorse this description as referring to Herald Petrel were it not for the word “fluttering”. It is difficult to visualise this gadfly-petrel “flut- tering”, but, of course, the use of this word may have other subjective connotations to the observer, or may just be an inappropriate choice of word. In any case, I do believe that tubenoses have a wide variety of flight styles, and that a seabird rounding a headland into a strong wind would certainly have to abandon dynamic flight. The flight described is certainly plausible for this species, but I have not observed it myself. ‘The date of observation would probably raise eyebrows in North America, but I think it is not a major problem. There is a December record (a specimen) from the mid Atlantic, and I expect that if we put in more effort offshore at that time of year we would see a few here as well.’ Our second expert agreed. ‘I have seen seven or eight Herald Petrels on trips out of North Carolina over the last couple of years. Some of them were very close, others a little more distant (and, therefore, possibly of more use from a seawatching point of view), but all have been from boats, in quite calm weather and in bright sunshine. 1 have seen only one pale and one or two intermediate morphs, [while] the rest were dark morphs. Because of this, 1 feel that 1 cannot comment on the variability of the upperwing pattern, or the mottling, although all those which I have seen, in May and June, appeared uniform, with no mottling. ‘With regard to the flight described, 162 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 56- 1 65 Brian Patteson Brian Patteson c Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel I 13 / i 88. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. This individual has a much darker underling than is typical for a pale-morph Herald Petrel. 90. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. 89. Pale-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 2000. 9 1 . Dark-morph Herald Petrel Pterodroma arminjoniana, off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, USA, August 1 996. This individual is typical of about 70% of dark-morph Herald Petrels seen on pelagic trips off North Carolina. British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 56- 1 65 163 Brian Patteson Brian Patteson Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel although I have observed Herald Petrel flying low to the water, this was in windspeeds of less than ten knots. They do not tend to use the “fingers” on these occasions (as described here). In fact, if they do flap, the whole wing is used. Irrespective of the colour morph, this species, like other Pterodroma, does not need much of an excuse to start towering. I [am] surprised that, given the weather conditions described, the bird in Kent was not bouncing around. The speed of Herald Petrel can also be surprising. One observer noted the bird as “trailing a gannet”. Even into a strong head wind I would have expected the petrel to leave a Northern Gannet standing!’ The record was recirculated around BBRC. With reference to the experts’ views on the flight, combined with the viewing conditions (at low level, from the back of a car in very windy weather), the collective view was that there was still sufficient uncertainty about this (admittedly remarkable) record which would leave it just below the standard required for acceptance. All the members expressed a degree of sympathy for the observers, who, through no fault of their own and in very difficult circum- stances, did not quite see the petrel well enough. What standards should we expect with records of rare seabirds ? BBRC used this circulation to stimulate a dis- cussion of what should be expected of records of rare seabirds, especially if those records would constitute a ‘first for Britain’. During the past five years, there have been records of Southern Giant Petrel Macronectes giganteus and Short-tailed Shearwater Puffinus tenuirostris , both seen on seawatches, as well as numerous other seabird rarities, submitted to BBRC. Many members felt that standards for the acceptance of records of rare seabirds, and especially those involving potential ‘firsts’, must be as high as for other species. Indeed, it could be argued that, since most seabirds allow the observer only a short viewing time and little chance of a second look, and are often seen in poor weather conditions, we should expect a higher standard of submission before we accept them. Consider, for example, a ‘fly-by’ wader or a female duck. The field characteristics of these are often no less clear-cut than is the case with rare seabirds, and there is often less variation in plumage than occurs among many seabirds. Yet would anyone seriously consider that we should accept as a first for Britain a record of an indi- vidual - perhaps an Asiatic Dowitcher Limnodromus semipalmatus or a Spectacled Eider Somateria fischeri - which was seen only in flight for a couple of minutes in poor condi- tions half a kilometre away? Those species are no more easy to identify than are many rare seabirds, such as Little Shearwaters Puffinus assimilis (which are sometimes claimed confi- dently on such views). BBRC also considered the question of the previous experience of the observers. With typical seawatching records, of birds seen briefly, at long distance and in poor conditions, previous experience of the species concerned is desirable and, for extreme rarities, such as the claimed Herald Petrel, a sound knowledge of the genus is almost a prerequisite for accep- tance. Many BBRC members commented that perhaps we need a change in our birding culture, to the point where pelagic trips become commonplace, despite the cost, and rare seabirds are photographed and fully docu- mented. Cost does not prevent many British birders from travelling abroad, or to far-flung corners of Britain and Ireland, in pursuit of birds, so why should it prevent them from jour- neying out into the oceans? This is the norm in the USA, South Africa and Australia, so why should it be different here? Some members, however, felt that to expect the sort of docu- mentation required in those countries was unreasonable, even though we have come to expect it for non-seabirds. Despite concerns over documentation, records such as the one described here should not be lost even if they are currently unaccept- able. They will help us to establish a picture of changing distribution and occurrence patterns, and, in years to come, may be reviewed and accepted in the light of new information. This has recently happened with ‘soft-plumaged petrels’, while pelagics in the Western Approaches have completely changed our per- ception of the occurrence of Wilson’s Storm- petrel Oceanites oceanicus. Consider how unlikely a record of Swinhoe’s Storm-petrel Oceanodronia monorhis seemed 15 years ago, yet we now have definite proof that this seabird does occur in British waters. BBRC is keen to receive high-quality sub- missions of rare seabirds, to help us to establish 164 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 56- 1 65 Rare seabirds and a record of Herald Petrel such patterns. Records like the one discussed here, although difficult and time-consuming, are also extremely instructive. BBRC appreciates that non-acceptance may be demoralising, but our view is that it is better to make a decision based on current knowledge and understanding than to allow a record to disappear into a long- term ‘pending’ category. We shall always be pre- pared to review such records in the light of new information on identification or patterns of occurrence. Acknowledgments We are grateful to David Walker and Owen Leyshon for allowing us to use their observations in order to discuss both specific and broader issues. References Brinkley, E. S., & Patteson.J. B. 1998. Gadfly Petrels in the western North Atlantic. Birding World I 1 : 34 1 -354. Brooke, M. de L„ & Rowe, G. 1 996. Behavioural and molecular evidence for the specific status of light and dark morphs of the Herald Petrel Pterodroma heraldica. Ibis 1 38: 420-438. Dubois, P, & Seitre, R. 1 997, Herald Petrel: a new species for the Western Palearctic. Birding World 1 0: 456-459. Gochfeld, M., Burger J., Saliva, J., & Gochfeld, D. 1988. Herald Petrel new to the West Indies. American Birds 38: 151-163. Harrison, R 1 983. Seabirds. London. — 1987. Seabirds of Che World: A Photographic Guide. London. Lee, D. S. 1 984. Petrels and storm-petrels in North Carolina’s offshore waters: including species previously unrecorded for North America. American Birds 38: 151-163. Prof. Colin Bradshaw, on behalf of BBRC 9 Tynemouth Place, Tynemouth, Tyne & Wear NE30 4BJ The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd Looking back Seventy-five years ago: [Front Ornithological Report From Norfolk for 1926, by B. B. Riviere) ‘The event of most outstanding interest to Norfolk ornithology in the year 1926, and one which seems likely to have an important bearing upon its future, was undoubtedly the purchase of Cley Marshes from the executors of the late Mr. A. W. Cozens-FIardy by a few public-spirited and enter- prising naturalists, and the formation of a limited company, entitled the Norfolk Naturalists’ Trust, to whom the property has been handed over to be main- tained for all time as a bird sanctuary. ‘Cley Marsh, to which reference has frequently been made in these notes, is some 400 acres in extent, and is bounded on the north by a sea-wall, on the east and west by high banks, the former of which divides it from Salthouse Broad, whilst on the south runs the main coast road and the village of Cley. Formerly, this area was well drained, grazing marsh, but it became flooded when the sea-wall was breached by an abnor- mally high tide during a gale on the night of December 31st, 1921, and having remained in a state of partial inundation ever since, has proved an extra- ordinarily attractive feeding and resting ground for Ducks and Waders. Its value as a Duck shoot may be gauged by the price of £5,160 which the 400 acres realized when sold at public auction, whilst as regards Waders there is probably no other spot in England where so many rare species may be seen at one and the same time during the spring and autumn migra- tions. Certainly there is none where they can be seen more easily, one of the best observation posts being in fact a motor car on the main road overlooking one of the gates on to the marsh! Amongst the interesting passage-migrants which have visited it annually during the past few years may be mentioned Ruffs and Reeves [ Philomachus pugnax], Black-tailed Godwits [Limosa limosa ], Spotted Redshanks [ Tringa erythropus ], Curlew-Sandpipers [Calidris ferrtiginea]. Little Stints [C. minuta]. Green [ T. ochropus ] and Wood-Sandpipers [T. glareola]. Black Terns [Chlido- nias niger ] and Spoonbills [ Platalea leucorodia]. A colony of Sandwich Terns [Sterna sandvicensis] bred there in 1923, whilst a Ruff and Reeve remained to nest in 1922, and encouraged by this latter fact and by our good fortune in having re-established the Bittern [Botaurus stellaris], one may still hope that on this ideal nesting ground, now that it is freed from all danger of disturbance, other of our lost Norfolk birds, such as the Black Tern and Black-tailed Godwit, may be won back to breed with us again.’ (Brit. Birds 20: 258, April 1927) British Birds 95 ’April 2002 • 156-165 165 The status of the Hawfinch in the UK 1975-1999 Rowena Langston , Richard Gregory and Roy Adams ABSTRACT The Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes is poorly monitored in the UK. In order to assess its population changes during 1975-99, data were gathered from county bird reports and additional information obtained from county recorders. Those counties which form the main part of the Hawfinch’s range were identified from the New At/os; annual totals for these counties were then compiled, and used to generate county and UK indices. Three indices are presented, two of which attempt to correct for changes in observer effort. The results indicate that Hawfinches have declined in numbers by 2-27% over a recent 20-year period, and by 37-45% during a recent ten-year period. The reasons for the decline require further study, and observers are encouraged to record this species more carefully, in order to enable careful monitoring of its status. 166 © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 166-173 The status of the Hawfinch in the UK Introduction The first confirmed breeding record for the Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes in Britain was in the early nineteenth century (Holloway 1996). Prior to that, the species was considered to occur only as a scarce winter visitor (Mountfort 1957), although this may, in fact, simply reflect its elusive nature. Hawfinch numbers increased rapidly during the middle and latter parts of the nineteenth century, until the species’ breeding range extended from Devon to southern Scotland. In 1988-91, the New Atlas showed concentrations of Hawfinches in southeast England, the New Forest in Hampshire, the Forest of Dean in Gloucestershire, the East Midlands and southern Cumbria (Gibbons et al. 1993). Although principally a species of mixed oak Quercus and Hornbeam Carpinus betulus forests, the Hawfinch also occurs in a wide range of deciduous and mixed woodland and parkland, where its powerful bill can tackle even large, hard fruits (Cramp & Perrins 1994). It tends to nest solitarily or in small groups, and it breeds right across the Palearctic, from Britain in the west to Japan in the east (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997). Population trends in continental Europe over the period 1970-90 appear to have been stable (BirdLife International/European Bird Census Council 2000). Stone et al. (1997) suggested that the UK Hawfinch population was between 3,000 and 6,500 pairs. In the UK, the Hawfinch is on the ‘amber’ list of ‘Birds of Conservation Concern’ (Gibbons et al. 1996a) owing to a moderate decline in its breeding range between the periods of the two national breeding atlases, in 1968-72 (Sharrock 1976) and 1988-91 (Gibbons et al. 1993). In recent years, there have been growing concerns that this decline has con- tinued, even in the species’ former strongholds. A species action plan, prepared by the RSPB, identified a critical lack of knowledge con- 'cerning its status, population size and trends, and conservation requirements. In spring 2000, a workshop was organised by the RSPB to bring together Hawfinch workers, in order both to assess what was known about the species’ breeding biology and to provide a regional overview of its perceived UK status. This work- shop highlighted the need to review the avail- able information on temporal changes in Hawfinch populations across the UK. The Hawfinch is poorly monitored in the UK, being neither sufficiently common or wide- spread to be covered by general schemes such as the Breeding Bird Survey (Baillie et al. 2001), nor rare enough to have dedicated monitoring in place or to be covered by the Rare Breeding Birds Panel (Ogilvie et al. 2001). It is, however, a species for which most, if not all, counties request the submission of all records. It was, therefore, considered a suitable candidate species to test the value of county bird reports for assessing changes in population status, both at a county level and for the UK as a whole 92. Male Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes, Kent, May 1 990. British Birds 95 'April 2002 • 166-173 167 J. Hollis AVindrush The status of the Hawfinch in the UK c (Mason 1990; Fuller et al. 1999). The revision of ‘Birds of Conservation Concern’ (Gregory et al. in prep.) provided the framework for assessing these changes over the most recent 25-year period for which county records were available. Methods The New Atlas (Gibbons et al. 1993) was used to identify those counties which form the core part of the Hawfinch’s range, in order to focus efforts on the most relevant areas. Information was* sought from county recorders in 38 counties in England and Wales, supplementing Hawfinch records published in the relevant county bird reports. Annual totals of the number of Hawfinches recorded, together with the number of sites involved and number of observers, were compiled from these sources. In many cases, it was not possible to separate breeding and non- breeding records, and consequently annual totals were based on the maximum number of Hawfinches recorded at each site. A coarse measure of observer effort was obtained by calculating the number of observers submitting records (of all species) for the respective bird reports each year. Gaps in data Inevitably, there were gaps in the annual data record, both for particular counties and in certain years. These were, however, surprisingly few in number, this no doubt being due in part to the fact that most county recorders request that all records of Hawfinch be submitted. In order to complete the dataset for the period from 1975 to 1999 inclusive, missing data values (about 5% in a matrix comprising 25 years and 34 counties) were estimated by interpolation or extrapolation (Gregory et al. 1999). Inter- polation involves the estimating of missing values for the intervening period between years for which data do exist, whereas extrapolation enables an estimate prior to the first available count or beyond the last available count. For both interpolation and extrapolation, the estimates assume a constant annual rate of change in numbers. Following Gregory et al. (1999), missing values were estimated only when the period with no data was shorter than eight years. The largest gap in our data, and the only one which exceeded this eight-year threshold, was for Suffolk, which was conse- quently excluded from the analysis. The next largest data gap was of six years, in each of two counties. Estimation of this type was employed to make the maximum possible use of the information available, and to avoid excluding whole counties for particular periods. Population indices The total number of Hawfinches seen in each year was calculated for each county or, in cases where reports are submitted on a regional basis, each combination of counties (e.g. West Mid- lands incorporates Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire) in our study area. The number of observers per year was summed for the same geographical units. Hereafter, refer- ence to ‘county’ indices includes those for the combined county units of West Midlands, Leicestershire & Rutland, and Cambridgeshire & Huntingdonshire. Three methods were used in order to derive an annual population index. Index 1 comprised simply the annual Hawfinch totals. Index 2 was composed of the annual Hawfinch totals divided by the login of the annual number of observers, to allow for variation in observer effort from year to year (Mason 1990). Index 3 also comprised the Hawfinch totals divided by the number of observers (but this time the latter was untransformed), again in an attempt to correct for observer effort. For each of these indices, a moving 5-year centred mean (i.e. the 5-year mean for years 1 -5 is centred on year 3, that for years 2-6 is centred on year 4, etc.) was calculated to ‘smooth’ the trend (Wilkinson 1990). Smoothing filters ‘noise’ arising from Fig. I. Changes in the number of observers submitting records (of all species) to county recorders. 168 British Birds 95 ‘April 2002 • 166-173 The status of the Hawfinch in the UK 93. Male Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes, Kent, March, year unknown, marked annual fluctuations (which are likely to be artificial) so that the underlying trend becomes clearer. Such annual variations may arise from a variety of sources, including changing behaviour of the birds themselves (for example, the temporary desertion of a favoured area) or changing patterns of observer effort, or both. Smoothed indices were produced for each county, and for all counties combined, and then summed to derive equivalent UK indices. The choice of index depends upon how the records of Hawfinches submitted to county recorders relate to observer effort (as defined above). The number of observers submitting records to county recorders has increased steadily from 1975 to 1999, by around 50% (fig. 1). If it is assumed that Hawfinch records are independent of the number of observers, which might be true if, for example, the majority of records were provided by Hawfinch enthusiasts rather than more ‘general birdwatchers’, then the simple counts in Index 1 would best reflect genuine population trends. If, on the other hand, it is thought that increasing numbers of observers would inevitably lead to more records of Hawfinches being submitted, even if the population was actually stable or declining, then Index 2 or 3 would be preferred. Index 2 (after Mason 1990) corrects for observer effort in a more conservative manner does than Index 3, but the choice between the two depends upon the nature of the relationship between records and observers. Population change The changes in the resulting indices were calcu- lated for both 20-year and ten-year periods, using the following equation (derived from Gibbons et al. 1996a): ((100/5-year-mean start) x 5-year-mean end)-100. For the 20-year period (1975/79-1995/99), the ‘5-year-mean start’ was the mean for 1975-79 and the ‘5-year- mean end’ was the mean for 1995-99. The equivalent values for the ten-year period (1985/89-1995/99) were the means for, respec- tively, 1985-89 and 1995-99. We used this method because measures of change over time can be unduly influenced by the particular start and end points of a series of data. The changes in each of the three different indices were obtained for each county separately, and for all counties combined. Changes were cal- culated for the 5-year centred means of (a) annual Hawfinch totals for Index 1, (b) annual Hawfinch totals divided by logio of the annual observers for Index 2, and (c) annual Hawfinch totals divided by annual observer totals for Index 3. Change values for the counties combined provided an assessment of the change in the Hawfinch’s status in the UK over the respective periods. The composite UK trend provides an overall assessment of changes in Hawfinch numbers, and this is likely to be much more reliable than the within-county trends owing to the small sample sizes and/or the influence of highly variable numbers of Hawfinches recorded in some counties. British Birds 95 ‘April 2002 • 166-173 169 Alan Petty/Windrush The status of the Hawfinch in the UK Results For most county units (34 in all), annual totals of Hawfinches were available and were included in our analyses (table 1). Annual totals for Suffolk were not available for 12 consecutive years during the study period, and this county was, therefore, excluded from the analysis. This is particularly unfortunate in view of the histor- ical importance of Suffolk for Hawfinches (Mountfort 1957) and some notable recent records ( Suffolk Bird Reports). The composite UK indices (fig. 2) all show a pronounced decrease, of between 37% and 45%, between 1985/89 and 1995/99, while the decrease between 1975/79 and 1995/99 was considerably less, and more variable, depending on which index was used (table 1). Both Index 1 and Index 2 showed a small decrease, of 2-6%, while Index 3 suggested a larger drop, of around 27%. The recent decline for the UK as a whole conceals a more variable pattern at county level, which is more difficult to interpret because of the relatively small numbers reported by indi- vidual counties. The principal increases between 1975/79 and 1995/99 occurred in the western counties close to the Severn estuary (Gloucestershire, Gwent and Wiltshire), and in several midland counties (particularly Northamptonshire and Nottinghamshire). Very small numbers of Hawfinches were recorded in Gloucestershire in the mid 1970s, but the species has subse- quently undergone a substantial increase, with the Forest of Dean being the main strong- hold. Few counties recorded an increase between 1985/89 and 1995/99, the exceptions being Gloucestershire and Wiltshire. Declines were evident in many counties in both time periods, but especially during 1985/89- 1995/99, including some in the core part of the Hawfinch’s British range, e.g. Hampshire, Kent and Norfolk; in this latter period, there were also decreases in counties which recorded an overall increase during the whole 20-year period, e.g. Northamptonshire and Gwent (table 1). Discussion Concerns about a decline in the Hawfinch pop- ulation in Britain have been widely expressed during the last ten years, and this review of county records confirms that these concerns are justified. Each of the three indices shows a similar pattern of increase through the 1980s, but a decline in the 1990s. A long-term decrease in the species’ range (from about 1970 to 1990) has been documented (Gibbons et al. 1993). Examination of individual county records shows that there were sizeable increases in several counties during the mid to late 1980s and early 1990s, as, for example, in Northamp- tonshire and Hertfordshire, although some of these were in areas where initial numbers were very low, so that a relatively small rise in numbers produced a large percentage increase. Many of the gains in northern areas reported by Gibbons et al. (1993) were not sustained, which accentuated the subsequent ten-year declines. In Gloucestershire, however, there has been a marked and sustained increase, also reported by Gibbons et al. It is not clear to what extent the increasing number of observers submitting their sightings to county recorders is reflected in a greater effort to record Hawfinches, especially given the generally secretive nature of this species. The attempt to correct for observer effort may be Fig. 2. Indices of population change for the Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes in the UK between 1 975/79 and 1 995/99. For explanation of time periods and indices, see text. For comparison, each index is set to a value of 1 00 in 1 975. [♦ = Index I. ■ = Index 2, ▲ = Index 3] 170 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 166-173 The status of the Hawfinch in the UK c Table I . County and UK population trends of the Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes during the periods 1 975/79- 1 995/99 and 1 985/89- 1 995/99. Figures represent estimated positive and negative changes in populations; for explanation of time periods and indices, see text. Annual totals reported for each county in 1 998 (estimates in parentheses) are included to indicate the numbers of Hawfinches recorded in recent years. 1 these values arise from large changes in small total numbers or generally small annual samples (<40 Hawfinches p.a.). * = not included in assessment. Time period 20 years 1975/79-1995/99 10 years 1985/89-1995/99 1998 county records Index 1 2 3 1 2 3 Avon1 -79 -85 -88 -28 -47 -52 1 Bedfordshire1 -65 -72 -87 -87 -88 -91 2 Berkshire -86 -87 -92 -85 -85 -87 (5) Buckinghamshire -74 -76 -86 -56 -55 -56 20 Cambridgeshire & Huntingdonshire1 + 1 -5 -31 -37 -39 -46 4 Cheshire1 -76 -77 -81 -94 -94 -95 0 Cleveland -4 -3 -6 -41 -40 -40 6 Cumbria -49 -49 -52 -77 -76 -76 14 Derbyshire -39 -40 -41 -42 -40 -25 23 Dorset1 + 150 + 137 + 128 +49 +39 +20 5 Durham1 + 16 +24 +23 +8 +6 -22 21 Essex +99 +86 +36 -63 -64 -66 26 Gloucestershire + 1153 + 1004 +442 +25 +21 +4 63 Gwent + 126 + 127 + 108 -29 -27 -26 (23) Hampshire + 13 0 -51 -22 -25 -48 94 Herefordshire1 +63 +55 -45 +79 +68 -5 24 Hertfordshire -4 -9 -33 -47 -44 -36 12 Kent -26 -26 -35 -36 -36 -44 (82) Lancashire1 + 107 +97 +50 -12 -16 -34 20 Leicestershire & Rutland1 +560 +503 +231 +36 +34 -1 8 Lincolnshire1 + 1015 + 1080 + 1103 + 177 + 182 + 131 (23) Norfolk -50 -55 -73 OO -50 -59 38 Northamptonshire +388 +375 +287 -44 -44 -50 34 Northumberland -10 -7 +3 -61 -61 -64 16 Nottinghamshire + 138 + 147 + 145 -7 -6 -17 32 Oxfordshire1 -65 -70 -86 -48 -55 -77 9 Shropshire -4 +2 +36 -49 -48 -44 4 Somerset1 -92 -92 -90 -87 -87 -84 0 Suffolk* * * * * * A- 41 Surrey -57 -59 -75 -19 -21 -42 23 Sussex -37 -38 -48 -37 -37 -40 18 West Midlands (Staffordshire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire & West Midlands) -51 -54 -70 -58 -59 -69 17 Wiltshire +336 +288 + 164 +49 +45 +37 12 Yorkshire +55 +33 -46 -36 -41 -66 (110) UK -2 -6 -27 -37 -38 -45 830 flawed if the degree of effort invested by bird- watchers specifically in searching for (and reporting) Hawfinches is markedly different from that for birdwatchers as a whole. Index 2 (which takes the logarithm of observer numbers) will tend to overestimate a downward trend if observer numbers are, in fact, unrelated to Hawfinch records. The use of untransformed observer numbers as the denominator in Index 3 will accentuate this problem even further, because the denominator is larger. Conse- quently, if the increase in number of observers is not coincident with a change in recording effort for Hawfinches, Index 1 (which takes no account of observer effort) may be the most useful of the three indices. Of these three, it is Index 1 that suggests the smallest change in Hawfinch populations in the UK. There is, in fact, little to choose between Index 1 and Index 2 (table 1): both indicate a minor overall decrease between 1975/79 and 1995/99, but a much more pronounced decline British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 66- 1 73 171 Robin Chittenden The status of the Hawfinch in the UK < > between 1985/89 and 1995/99. Index 3 suggests a decline of more than 25% for both the 20- year and the ten-year intervals. All three indices suggest that Hawfinches have declined by about 40% between 1985 and 1999. Clearly, the impli- cations for the degree of conservation priority that should be attached to the Hawfinch differ in accordance with which index is considered the most appropriate, but all indicate a recent downturn in the population. In the absence of more information on the relationship between Hawfinch records and observer numbers, it is perhaps most sensible to view the trends as a range of possible values, and it is encouraging that the pattern of change is very similar in all three cases. Interpretation of the long-term trend between 1975 and 1999 is the most diffi- cult issue, not only for the reasons outlined above, but also because the level and nature of recording may have been inherently different when the species was thought to be more common. Several counties have documented substan- tial declines at traditional sites which were pre- viously noted for their wintering and/or breeding concentrations of this species. Exam- ples include East Wretham, in Norfolk ( Norfolk Bird Report ), Chillington, in Staffordshire ( West Midlands Bird Report), Chatsworth, in Der- byshire ( Derbyshire Bird Report), Blenheim, in Oxfordshire ( Oxfordshire Bird Report; David Doherty, verbally), and Bedgebury Pinetum, in Kent ( Kent Bird Report; Michael Walter, ver- bally). Some of these declines have, however, been offset by the increased use of alternative sites, so that some redistribution is also apparent. Consequently, at least some of the intermittent records at different localities may represent the same individuals moving between sites. The importance of influxes from the Conti- nent has been a matter of speculation for some time, but there is little evidence to suggest that sizeable numbers of Hawfinches arrive in Britain on a regular basis (Cramp 8c Perrins 1994). Certainly, British-ringed individuals appear to be relatively sedentary (Cramp & Perrins 1994). Hawfinches are noted for their sporadic occurrence at different sites in winter, and their locally dispersive movements are thought to be a response to food availability (Cramp & Perrins 1994; Hagemeijer 8c Blair 1997). As a result, winter sightings may combine local breeding birds and winter visi- tors, and so could overestimate the potential breeding stock. It is unfortunate that, owing to differences between counties in reporting prac- tice, breeding and wintering records could not be separated in our analysis. This means that any differences in trends between breeding pop- ulations and wintering numbers will be obscured. A number of potential causes of the popula- tion declines of the Hawfinch have been sug- gested. These are storm damage to broadleaved woodlands in 1987, the loss of orchards, and even predation, particularly by crows (Corvidae) and Grey Squirrels Sciurus caroli- netisis (Bijlsma 1998; RSPB et al. unpubl.). The relative importance of each of these factors - 94. Juvenile Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes, Poland, June 1993. 172 British Birds 95 - April 2002 • 166-173 Mike Ash forth The status of the Hawfinch in the UK 95. Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes, Cromford, Derbyshire, February 2002. This photograph shows all the distinctive structural characters of the Hawfinch, namely, its powerful, triangular bill, thick neck, big head and short tail. habitat change, habitat loss and predation - is unknown and requires investigation. Ongoing work will examine the relationship throughout the year between food availability and its use by Hawfinches. The Hawfinch is generally an elusive species for those unfamiliar with its call or behaviour, but it has a following of enthusiasts. While it is widely recognised that this species is under- recorded (the situation in the New Forest, Hampshire, is one particular example which is known to the authors; see also table 1), it is not clear whether there have been pronounced tem- poral variations in recording effort with respect to Hawfinches. It is hoped that this paper will encourage more interest in recording this hand- some bird, so that a better assessment of the size of its breeding population in the UK is possible. Acknowledgments We are very grateful to the many county recorders, birders and colleagues who assisted with this assessment: Richard Allison, Rob Andrews, Bob Bullock, Howard Bunn, Geoff Carr Peter Cranswick, Geoff Dobbs, David Doherty, Giles Dunmore, Barry Embling, Ifor Evans, Rob Field, Ian Fisher Rob Fray, Roy Frost, Neil Gartshore, David Gibbons, Tim Hodgson, Geoff Holmes, Michael llett, Steve Keller. Ian Kinley, Russell Leavett.Tim Melling, Fred Milton, John Newnham, Andy Page, Ivan Procter, Steve Roberts, Martin Sanford, Ken Smith, Rod Smith, Moss Taylor, Michael Walter Jeffery Wheatley, Andy Wilson and Simon Wotton. References Baillie, S. R„ Crick, H. Q. P, Balmer D. E., Bashford, R. I., Beaven, L. R, Freeman, S. N„ Marchant.J. H„ Noble, D. G„ Raven, M. J., Siriwardena, G. M„Thewlis, R., & Wernham, C.V. 200 1 . Breeding Birds in the Wider Countryside: their conservation status 2000. BTO.Thetford. Bijlsma, R. G. 1998. Broedbiologie en aantalsontwikkeling van Appelvinken Coccothraustes coccothraustes in Flevoland. Limosa 71: 137-1 48. BirdLife International/European Bird Census Council. 2000. European bird populations: estimates and trends. BirdLife International, Cambridge. Cramp, S„ & Perrins, C. M. (eds.) 1994. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.V ol. 8. Oxford. Fuller R. J., Henderson, A. C. B„ & Wilson, A. M. 1 999. The Nightingale in England - problems and prospects. British Wildlife 10:221-230. Gibbons, D.W., Reid.J, B., & Chapman, R. A. 1993. The New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland: 1 988- 1991. Calton. — , Avery, M. I., Baillie, S., Gregory, R, Kirby, J., Porter R, Tucker G„ & Williams, G. 1996a. Bird species of conservation concern in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: revising the Red Data List. RSPB Conservation Review 1 0: 7- 1 8. — , — & Brown, A. F. 1 996b. Population trends of breeding birds in the United Kingdom since 1 800. Brit. Birds 89: 291-305. Gilbert, G., Gibbons, D.W., & Evans, J. 1998. Bird Monitoring Methods - a manual of techniques for key UK species. RSPB, Sandy. Gregory, R D., Gibbons, D.W., Impey, A., & Marchant.J. H. 1 999. Generation of the headline indicator of wild bird populations. BTO and RSPB.Thetford. — , Rehfisch, M. M„ Underhill, L. G., Field, R H„ Atkinson, RW, Freeman, S. N., Siriwardena, G. M„ & Baillie, S. R. 2000. National and site-based alert systems for UK birds. BTO.Thetford. — , Noble, D. G„ Cranswick, R A., Campbell, L. H., Rehfisch, M. M., & Baillie, S.R 200 1 . The state of the UK's birds 2000. RSPB, BTO and WWT, Sandy. — .Wilkinson, N. I., Noble, D. G., Robinson, j. A., Brown, A. F„ Hughes, J., Procter D., & Gibbons, D.W. In prep. A priority list for bird conservation in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: Birds of Conservation Concern, 2002-2007. Hagemeijer W. J. M„ & Blair M. J. 1997. The EBCC Atlas of European Breeding Birds. London. Holloway, S. (ed.) 1 996. The Historical Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland 1875-1900. London. Mason, C. F. 1 990. Assessing population trends of scarce birds using information in a county bird report and archive. Biol. Cons. 52: 303-320. Mountfort, G. 1 957. The Hawfinch. Collins. Ogilvie. M. A., & the Rare Breeding Birds Panel. 2001. Rare breeding birds in the United Kingdom in 1999. Brit. Birds 94: 344-38 1 . RSPB, JNCC & Country Agencies. Unpubl. Species Action Plan 1717: Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes. Stone, B. H„ Sears, J„ Cranswick, RA„ Gregory R. D„ Gibbons, D. W„ Rehfisch, M. M„ Aebischer, N. J., & Reid, J. B. 1997. Population estimates of birds in Britain and in the United Kingdom. Brit. Birds 90: I -22. Wilkinson, L. 1990. SYSTAT.The System for Statistics. Evanston, USA. Dr Rowena Langston and Dr Richard Gregory , Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2DL Roy Adams, 29 Bowring Close, Whipton, Exeter EXl 3TU British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 166-173 173 The European Bird Report Non-passerines Compiled by Colin Davies from information supplied by National Correspondents ABSTRACT This biannual feature, started 25 years ago (see Brit. Birds 70: 2 1 8), provides the only reliable, continent-wide report on population trends and significant, nationally accepted records of rarities. Some of the highlights in this fiftieth compilation include: • First national records of the following species: Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus (Andorra), Black-browed Albatross Diomedea melanophris (Channel Islands), Swinhoe’s Storm-petrel Oceanodroma monorhis (Ireland), Redhead Aythya americana (Iceland), Ring-necked Duck A. collaris (Italy), Lesser Scaup A. affinis (Iceland), Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus (Finland), Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus (Channel Islands), Eleonora’s Falcon Falco eleonorae (Germany), Common Quail Coturnix coturnix (Iceland), Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima (Czech Republic), Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus (Great Britain), Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia (Poland), Laughing Gull Larus atricilla and Audouin’s Gull L. audouinii (both Germany), Ring-billed Gull L. delawarensis (Denmark), Iceland Gull L. glaucoides (Bulgaria), Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri (France) and Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor (Ireland). • First breeding records of Great White Egret Egretta alba in Belarus, Gadwall Anas strepera in the Channel Islands, Common Eider Somateria mollissima in Italy, Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis in Germany, Saker Falcon Falco cherrug in Poland, Avocet Recurvirostra avosetta in Slovenia and Herring Gull Larus argentatus in Spain. • Population increase of the following species: Little Egret Egretta garzetta and Great White Egret in the Netherlands, Eurasian Spoonbill Platalea leucorodia and White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala in Spain; with range expansion of Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus ruber and Purple Swamp-hen Porphyrio porphyrio in Spain, and of European Bee-eater Merops apiaster in the Czech Republic. • Population declines of Bean Geese Anser fabalis wintering in Germany, Kentish Plovers Charadrius alexandrinus and Dunlins Calidris alpina breeding in Germany, Gull-billed Terns Sterna nilotica in Denmark, and Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers Dendrocopos minor in the Channel Islands. 174 © British Birds 95 - April 2002 • 174-188 The European Bird Report c ) Data are supplied for the EBR by a network of National Correspondents (see page 188) appointed by each country, and are also extracted from published reports of verified records. A few entries (always marked with an asterisk) are still subject to assessment by the relevant rarities committee (and will be either confirmed or deleted in a future EBR), but all others are accepted, verified records. While this Report covers the whole of Europe, records notified by the National Corre- spondents for nearby countries within the Western Palearctic are also included. This fiftieth compilation, covering non-passerines, includes officially notified records from 25 countries. This Report aims to include all records of: 1. Significant breeding-range expansions or contractions. 2. Major irruptions of erupting species. 3. Asiatic vagrants. 4. Nearctic species (excluding ducks, waders and gulls in Great Britain and Ireland, where they are regular, except for those covered by point 6). 5. Other extralimital vagrants. 6. Major national rarities, including the first five national records, even if the species is common elsewhere in Europe. Unless otherwise stated, all records refer to nationally accepted records of single indi- viduals. Great Northern Diver Gavia immer DENMARK Record numbers: 1998 was best year ever, with 42 records {DOFT 94: 104). White-billed Diver Gavia adamsii ITALY Fourth record: 23rd April 1999 (Riv. Ital. Orn. 69:212). Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps POLAND First record: adult at Gdansk, 15th- 18th April 2000*. SPAIN First record: Logrono, February-March 2001*. Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus ANDORRA First record: on a mountain lake at 2,400 m asl, 4th August 2001. Slavonian Grebe Podiceps auritus GERMANY Breeding: pair in 1997 and 1998 in eastern Schleswig-Holstein, the only breeding pair in Germany, the site having been occupied since the mid 1980s. Black-browed Albatross Diomedea melanophris CHANNEL ISLANDS First record: off south- west Jersey, 11th June 2000 (Brit. Birds 93: 355, plates 210 & 211). DENMARK Third record: 20th July 1999 (DOFT 94: 160). Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis GERMANY Breeding: 82 breeding pairs in 2000 on Helgoland, the only breeding site in Germany (Ornithol. Jber. Helgoland 11: in press). Sooty Shearwater Puffmus griseus CHANNEL ISLANDS Record numbers: 352 off Guernsey, 6th October 2000. Wilson’s Storm-petrel Oceanites oceanicus DENMARK Deletion: after reconsideration by the rarities committee, the sole Danish record (September 1988) is considered no longer acceptable, and the species has been deleted from the Danish List (DOFT 94: 160). European Storm-petrel Hydrobates pelagicus FINLAND Third record: 13th January 2000 (Linnut- vuosikirja 2000: 119). Swinhoe’s Storm-petrel Oceanodroma monorhis IRELAND First record: trapped at Great Skellig Rock, Co. Kerry, 1st July 2000. Madeiran Storm-petrel Oceanodroma castro SPAIN Third record: Denia, Alicante, 30th June 1997 (first record for the Mediterranean; Ardeola 48, in prep.). Northern Gannet Morus bassanus GERMANY Breeding: 93 breeding pairs in 2000 on Helgoland (cf. 69 in 1999), the only breeding site in Germany (Ornithol. Jber. Helgoland 1 1: in press). British Birds 95 'April 2002 • 174-188 175 Diederik Kok The European Bird Report > Shag Phalacrocorax aristotelis POLAND First inland record: Woniesc Reser- voir, 8th and 16th September 2000. Pygmy Cormorant Phalacrocorax pygmeus CZECH REPUBLIC Eighth record: southern Moravia, 16th October 1998*. ITALY Breeding census: 30-37 breeding pairs in 1998 ( Avocetta 24: 57). NETHERLANDS Third record: Budel-Dor- plein, Noord-Brabant, 6th May 2000*. POLAND Vagrants: near Oswiecim, 18th August to 12th September 1999 ( Notatki Orn. 41: 249); near Lezajsk, 10th September 2000*; and Milicz fish-ponds, 7th October 2000*. White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus BULGARIA Correction: reference to first breeding for 60 years {Brit. Birds 94: 128) should have read: pair bred in 2000 within colony of Dalmatian Pelicans P. crispus at Sre- barna Reserve ( BSPB National Bird Data Bank). NETHERLANDS Fifth record: one captured on an oil platform, 60 km northwest of Den Helder, 28th May 2001, and taken into care* (plate 96). SPAIN Vagrants/escapes: adult at Cellers Reser- voir, Lleida, 1st March 1997, and three adults near Huelva, 15th September 1998 ( Ardeola 47: 142). Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus POLAND Vagrant/escape: Przygodzice, 19th March 1996 (two previous records; Notatki Orn. 41: 311). Pink-backed Pelican Pelecanus rufescens SPAIN First record for the Balearics: one of unknown origin, Salobrar de Campos, Mal- lorca, 5th December 1998 {Ardeola 47: 143). Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris GERMANY Population estimate: only 70 indi- viduals in 1996, in Brandenburg & Sachsen- Anhalt ( Vogelwelt 121: 189-205). American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus SPAIN Second record: Ponteceso/Cabana, A Coruna, 10th October 1998 {Ardeola 47: 143). Little Bittern Ixobrychus minutus GERMANY Breeding: 46-61 breeding pairs in 1996 ( Vogelwelt 121: 189-205). MALTA Second breeding record: pair raised four young at is-Simar Nature Reserve in spring 2000*. Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax ESTONIA Second record: Kasari River delta, Laanemaa, 12th June 2000* (first record was on 96. Immature White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus, Den Helder, Netherlands, June 200 1 176 British Birds 95 - April 2002 • 174-188 The European Bird Report < 30th May 1973 at the same site). FINLAND Vagrant: adult at Kaustinen, central Finland, 7 th- 1 7th July 2000 ( Linnut — vuosikirja 2000: 119). Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis POLAND Fourth and fifth records: Slonsk reserve, 28th April 1999 ( Notatki Orn. 41: 294), and Milicz fish-ponds, 20th-22nd August 2000*. Little Egret Egretta garzetta FAROE ISLANDS Fourth record: Mykines, 10th May 2000*. The record on 20th May 1995 (Brit. Birds 93: 116) was not accepted. LATVIA Sixth record: Ikskile, 5th September 2001* (fifth record was in 1983). NETHERLANDS Population increase: breeding at several sites in the provinces of Zeeland, Zuid-Holland, Flevoland and Friesland (on Ter- schelling) in 2000; on 15th August 2000, a record count of 235 was reported from the Grevelingen area, Zeeland. Great White Egret Egretta alba BELARUS First breeding: three records between 1997 and 1999 (Subbuteo 3: 14). ITALY Breeding census: 34-42 breeding pairs in 1998 (Avocetta 24: 57). LATVIA High numbers: at least 50 throughout the country during summer 2001, and two nests found at Lake Engure. NETHERLANDS Population increase: a record ten breeding pairs at Oostvaardersplassen, Flevoland, in 2000, and more than 100 individ- uals present at various sites from October 2001 onwards. Purple Heron Ardea purpurea GERMANY Breeding: 13-20 breeding pairs in Bayern, Baden-Wtirttemberg and Rheinland- Pfalz in 1995 and 1996, those in last region being the first breeding records outside the south of the country (Vogelwelt 121: 189-205). Black Stork Ciconia nigra ITALY Breeding census: 2-4 breeding pairs in 1998 ( Avocetta 24: 57). Marabou Stork Leptoptilos crumeniferus SPAIN Vagrant/escape: Daimiel, Ciudad Real, 6th November 1997 (Ardeola 47: 143). > 97. Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus, Iceland, June 1 998. Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus ICELAND Second record: 10th-25th June 1998 (plate 97) (first record was in spring 1824; Bliki 22: 24). ITALY Breeding census: 16-23 breeding pairs in 1998 ( Avocetta 24: 57). SPAIN High numbers: largest flock on record, 226 roosting at Brazo del Este, Marismas del Guadalquivir, in October 2000 (cf. 58 in November 1998, Brit. Birds 93: 117; La Garcilla 109, in prep.). Sacred Ibis Threskiornis aethiopicus SPAIN Vagrants/escapes: adult and first-winter, Ebro delta, 28th-30th December 1998 (Ardeola 47: 142). Eurasian Spoonbill Platalea leucorodia ITALY Breeding census: 43 breeding pairs in 1998 (Avocetta 24: 57). SPAIN Breeding status: about 1,400 breeding pairs, the highest total ever, during the wet years of 1997 and 1998 (Quercus 174: 22-26). Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus ruber SPAIN Breeding expansion: about 100 pairs and 83 chicks fledged at Petrola Lake, Albacete, during spring 1999, the first breeding in central Spain ( Ardeola 46: 306-307). British Birds 95 'April 2002 • 174-188 177 Johann Oh Hilmarsson The European Bird Report d Fulvous Whistling Duck Dendrocygna bicolor SPAIN Vagrant/escape: Laguna Fuente de Piedra, Malaga, 14th May to 2nd July 1998 ( Ardeola 47: 144). Mute Swan Cygnus olor ICELAND Fourth record: 18th-26th June 1998 (Bliki 22: 24). Bean Goose Anser fabalis SPAIN Decline of wintering population: in tra- ditional area in Zamora province, only seven in winter 1999/2000 and none in January 2001 ( Quercus 181: 50). Snow Goose Anser caerulescens SPAIN Vagrants/escapes: two adults, Ebro delta, 24th September to 5th December 1997 ( Ardeola 47: 145). Ross’s Goose Anser rossii NETHERLANDS Vagrants: at least two in winter 2000/2001, one in Haringvliet area of Zuid-Holland* and one mostly in Friesland*. Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis DENMARK Record numbers: on Zealand, more than 40,400 passing during spring 1998 and 94,000 passing during autumn 1998 ( DO FI' 94: 1 10). GERMANY Breeding: about 25 breeding pairs along the North Sea coast in 1995 and 1996, the first breeding there since 1986, and three breeding pairs in Nordrhein-Westfalen in 1997 ( Vogelwelt 121: 189-205). Brent Goose Branta bernicla CHANNEL ISLANDS First record of North American/east Siberian race nigricans on Guernsey: 8th January to 26th March 1999 (Trans. Soc. Guern. 1999). FINLAND Fifth record of race nigricans: 30th September to 1st October 2000 (Linnut - vuosikirja 2000: 1 19). Red-breasted Goose Branta ruficollis CYPRUS Fourth record: adult and juvenile, Larnaca sewage works, 11th January to 18th February 2000 (Cyprus Annual Report 47: 26). Ruddy Shelduck Todorno ferruginea ARMENIA Count: about 3,000 along southern shore of Lake Sevan, mid September 2001 . ) American Wigeon Anas americana DENMARK Vagrants: three records in 1999 (eight previous records; DOFT 94: 161). SPAIN Vagrants: female, 20th December 1997 to 8th February 1998, and males from 12th to 20th March 1998 and 28th September to 4th October 1998 (Ardeola 47: 146). Falcated Duck Anas falcata FRANCE Presumed escapes: 7th February 1999, 23rd-26th November 1999, and 20th December 1999 to 16th January 2000 (Ornithos 7: 170). Gadwall Anas strepera CHANNEL ISLANDS First breeding: in Jersey, in 2000. Green-winged Teal Anas carolinensis DENMARK Vagrants: seven records in 1999 ( 18 previous records; DOFT 94: 161). SPAIN Vagrants: males on 1st January 1998 tnd 15th March 1998 (Ardeola 47: 146). Black Duck Anas rubripes SPAIN Vagrant: Cospeito Lake, Lugo, 5th December 1997 to 1st January 1998 ( Ardeola 17: 146), presumed returning individual of winter 1996/97, which was third record (Brit. Birds 93: 118). Blue-winged Teal Anas discors SPAIN Vagrants: 26th December 1997 and 11th- 14th December 1998 (Ardeola 47: 147). Marbled Duck Marmaronetta angustirostris ARMENIA Count: 20 at Armash fish-ponds, 28th September 2000. Redhead Aythya americana ICELAN13 First and second records: adult males on 15th June to 10th July 1998 and 1 1 th- 1 2th July 1998 (Bliki 22: 27). Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris ITALY First record: Viverone Lake, Piedmont, 13th February 1999 (Riv. Ital. Orn. 69: 212). SPAIN Vagrants: male and two females at Cecebre Reservoir, A Coruna, 15th February 1998 (Ardeola 47: 147). Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula CHANNEL ISLANDS First breeding for 178 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 174-188 The European Bird Report C Guernsey: pair reared five young in 2000. MALTA Vagrant: two offshore, Qawra, 18th November 2001 (about 15 previous records, the last in November 1994). Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis FRANCE Vagrant: 20th November 1999 to 5th February 2000 ( Ornithos7 : 148). ICELAND First record: adult male, 16th- 17th May 1998 {Bliki 22: 28). Common Eider Somateria mollissima ITALY First breeding record: female with three juveniles, 12th June 1999 ( Riv . Ital. Orn. 69: 212; cf. first breeding in Switzerland, in 1988, and subsequent records, Brit. Birds 82: 323; 88: 29). King Eider Somateria spectabilis FRANCE Vagrant: 27th-28th March 1999 (five records since 1981; OrnithosV : 149). SPAIN Second record: first-winter male, Laxe, A Coruna, December 2000 to January 2001*. Steller’s Eider Polysticta stelleri ICELAND Vagrant: early January to 20th May 1998 (eight previous records; Bliki 22: 28). Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus FAROE ISLANDS Vagrants: male from 1999 to at least 2000, two females in 1998, and one female in 1999 and 2000, all at Kirkjubour. FINLAND First record: Helsinki, 26th November 2000 ( Linnut - vuosikirja 2000: 120). Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis BULGARIA Third record: Pomorie Lake, Burgas District, 1st August 2000. Common Scoter Melanitta nigra FRANCE Vagrants of North American/east Siberian race americana: 28th February 1999 and 15th March 1999 (four records since 1981; Ornithos7 : 149). Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata ESTONIA Second record: male at Kuivastu, Muhu Island, 8th May 1999* (first record was of a pair at Kaina, Hiiumaa Island, 7th June 1971 ). FAROE ISLANDS Fifth record: male on Sandoy, 29th May to 1 7th June 200 1 *. GERMANY Third record: 2nd January 1997 ( Limicola 14: 291). NETHERLANDS Eighth record: five on Ter- schelling, Friesland, from 4th November to at least 30th December 2000*. Velvet Scoter Melanitta fusca ICELAND Second record of North American race deglandi: 4th June to 2nd July 1998 {Bliki 22:29). Bufflehead Bucephala albeola DENMARK Change of category: the sole Danish record, in June 1995 (formerly in Cate- gory A), has been placed in Category D after reconsideration by the rarities committee (DOFT 94: 161). FRANCE Fourth record: 10th- 16th November 1998 ( OrnithosV : 149). Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus ICELAND Second record: adult male and a female, 23rd-24th May 1998 (Bliki 22: 29-30). Goosander Mergus merganser CZECH REPUBLIC Fourth breeding record: two adult females, a male and several ducklings between 16th April and late May at Otava river, western Bohemia. Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis FRANCE Influx: 128 in 1999 ( OrnithosV : 149- 150). GERMANY First breeding record: pair at Frenswegen/Niedersachsen in 2000 fledged four chicks; a second brood did not survive. ICELAND Vagrants: three in 1998, but no breeding recorded (Bliki 22: 30). White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala FRANCE Vagrant: 24th October to 11th November 1999 (15 records since 1981; OrnithosV : 150). SPAIN Continuing population increase: 2,396 individuals in January 2000 (Quercus 172: 48). Black-shouldered Kite Elanus caeruleus NETHERLANDS Third record: Meerstalblok, Bargerveen, Drenthe, 4th June to 23rd August 2000*. * Black Kite Milvus migrans CHANNEL ISLANDS Fourth record: Guernsey, 1st May 1999 (Trans. Soc. Guern. 1999). British Birds 95 'April 2002 • 174-188 179 Ane Ouwerkerk Diederik Kok The European Bird Report X 98. Adult Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus, Epen, Zuid-Limburg, Netherlands, May 200 1 . Red Kite Milvus milvus CHANNEL ISLANDS Vagrant: (ersey, 24th- 25th November 2000* (five previous records, the last in 1996). White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla LAROE ISLANDS Vagrant: adult at Hvalba, 19th July 1998* (second record since 1916). GERMANY Breeding status: about 280 breeding pairs in 1995 and 1996, of which 18- 21 pairs were in the former West Germany, where only four pairs were left in 1970s ( Vogel - welt 121: 189-205). Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus NETHERLANDS First record: adult at Epen, Zuid-Limburg, 24th-25th May 2001* (plate 98). Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus CHANNEL ISLANDS First record: immature on Sark, 22nd-23rd August 2000, and then on Guernsey, 24th-27th August 2000 (Brit. Birds 94: 467). CYPRUS Population estimate: 42 adults plus four young fledged in 2000 ( Cyprus Annual Report 47: 32). Monk Vulture Aegypius monachus NETHERLANDS Second record: Friesland, Noord-Holland and Zuid-Holland (including four Wadden Sea islands), 13th July to 18th August 2000* (plates 99 & 100). 99. Monk Vulture Aegypius monachus. IJmuiden, Netherlands, July 2000. 100. Monk Vulture Aegypius monachus, Maasvlakte, Netherlands, August 2000 180 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 174-1 88 Arnoud 8. van den Berg The European Bird Report Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus DENMARK High numbers: 161 passing Stevns Klint, Zealand, on 26th August 2000, the highest daily total ever in Denmark. Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus SPAIN Third record: adult male at Cap de Creus, Girona, 25th March 1998 (first for Iberian peninsula; Ardeola 47: 147). Montagu’s Harrier Circus pygargus CHANNEL ISLANDS Vagrant: juvenile on Jersey, 20th August 2000. Common Buzzard Buteo buteo ICELAND Second record: individual found dead, 22nd March 1998 {Bliki22: 30-31). Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus FRANCE Vagrants: 20th February to 23rd April 1999, and 20th October 1999 to 19th February 2000 ( OrnithosV : 151). NETHERLANDS Second record: juvenile at Praamweg, Flevoland, 5th- 10th September 2000*. SPAIN Fourth record: Urraca-Miguel, Avila, 5th September 1998 {Ardeola 47: 147). Rough-legged Buzzard Buteo lagopus CHANNEL ISLANDS Vagrant: Herm, 13th February to 1st April 1999 {Trans. Soc. Guern. 1999). Lesser Spotted Eagle Aquila pomarina GERMANY Breeding status: 135 pairs in 1995 and 1996, all in eastern Germany {Vogelwelt 121: 189-205). Spotted Eagle Aquila clanga NETHERLANDS Vagrants: at least four between 4th November 2000 and February 2001*, in the provinces of Friesland, Groningen, Noord-Holland, Ovreijssel and Zuid-Holland. Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis CZECH REPUBLIC Seventh record: southern Moravia, 15th October 1997*. POLAND Vagrant: near Lonrza, 30th May 1998 {Notatki Orn. 41: 35). Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca AUSTRIA Recent recolonisation: pair raised young in both 1999 and 2000 in Burgenland, and bred unsuccessfully at same site in 2001. CZECH REPUBLIC Second breeding record: pair with two young in southern Moravia in 1999. Spanish Imperial Eagle Aquila adalberti FRANCE Second record: 14th January 1999 (first twentieth-century record; Ornithos 7: 152). Booted Eagle Hieraaetus pennatus NETHERLANDS First autumn record: dark- morph individual at Vlieland, Friesland, 13th October 2000, picked up exhausted on 14th and released on 24th October*. Bonelli’s Eagle Hieraaetus fasciatus DENMARK Change of category: the record of an adult in May 1974 (formerly in Category A) has been placed in Category D after reconsider- ation by the rarities committee {DOFT 94: 162). Osprey Pandion haliaetus DENMARK Record passage numbers: 1998 was best year ever, with 2,700 records ( DOFT 94: 114-115). Lesser Kestrel Falco naumarmi BULGARIA Influx: 23 near Zvezdel, Kardzhali District, on 16th June 2000 (in an area with large numbers of locusts Locusta ), 25 near Deventzi, Kardzhali District, on 19th June 2000, and eight males together near Madzharovo, Khaskovo District, in June 2000 ( BSPB National Bird Data Bank). NETHERLANDS First record: juvenile female found dead at Bergen, Noord-Holland, 5th November 2000*. Red-footed Falcon Falco vespertinus LATVIA Small influx: several tens of immatures counted at Pape during August and September 2001. Eleonora’s Falcon Falco eleonorae CYPRUS Breeding census: 127 nest sites found during survey in 2000 (cf. about 95 in 1972 and 110-120 in 1982; Cyprus Annual Report 47: 114). GERMANY First to third records: adult dark- morph, Helgoland and, two hours later, on Wangerooge, Niedersachsen, 26th September 1999 ( Ornithol . Jber. Helgoland 10: 1-68); pale- British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 174-188 181 The European Bird Report > morph, Helgoland, 13th May 2000; and dark- morph, Helgoland, 8th October 2000. POLAND Eighth and ninth records: Milicz fish- ponds, 6th October 1999 ( Notatki Orn. 41: 298), and Dzierzno Reservoir, 24th September 2000*. Lanner Falcon Falco biarmicus BULGARIA Vagrant: adult at Teodosievi Karauli, Rila Monastery Nature Park, 28th July 2001 (second record since 1975). SPAIN Fifth record: juvenile at Tarifa, Strait of Gibraltar area, 9th October 1998 ( Ardeola 47: 147). Saker Falcon Falco cherrug DENMARK Deletion: the only Danish record, in May 1991, has been deleted from the Danish List after reconsideration by the rarities com- mittee (DOFT 94: 162). GERMANY Breeding: pair Hedged two young in Sachsen in 2000 and 2001, the first successful breeding since pair first appeared at site, in 1997 (Brit. Birds 94: 133). POLAND First breeding record: nest with young in Silesia in 1998 (Notatki Orn. 41: 298). Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus CHANNEL ISLANDS Breeding: pair reared three young on Jersey in 2000 (first breeding since 1950s). DENMARK Record passage numbers: 1998 was best year ever, with 821 records ( DOFT 94: 115). Common Quail Coturnix coturnix ICELAND First record: 23rd October 1998 (Bliki 22: 32). Purple Swamp-hen Porphyrio porphyrio SPAIN Range expansion: first breeding in Extremadura, at Arrocampo Reservoir, in 1999 (La Garcilla 108: 24; Aves de Extremadura 1998: 104). Common Crane Grus grus CHANNEL ISLANDS Fourth record for Jersey: 26th October 1999 (Jersey Bird Rep. 1999). DENMARK Record passage numbers: 1998 was best year ever, with 6,578 passing through during spring and 10,033 counted in autumn (DOFT 94: I 17-1 18). NETHERLANDS High numbers: about 20,000 passing through eastern provinces during late autumn 2000 and wintering flock of 13 at De Peel, Noord-Brabant, in at least January and February 2001. Demoiselle Crane Anthropoides virgo ARMENIA Record passage numbers: several flocks, comprising a record total of about 4,500, at Cape Noratoos, Lichk and Karchaghbyur, Lake Sevan, in mid September 2001. BULGARIA Vagrants: two adults at Durankulak Lake, Dobrich District, 25th April 2001, one remaining until 27th (first record since 1985). Little Bustard Tetrax tetrax BULGARIA Vagrant: Durankulak Lake, Dobrich District, 14th January 2001 (first record since 1985). Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus AUSTRIA Breeding: pair at River March in 2001 (first breeding record for lower Austria). POLAND Fifth and sixth breeding records: two single pairs with young in 2000. Avocet Recurvirostra avosetta SLOVENIA First breeding record: confirmed breeding at Secovlje Salinas in June 2001. Stone-curlew Burhinus oedicnemus AUSTRIA Breeding census: 10-12 pairs at two breeding sites in lower Austria in 2000. Cream-coloured Courser Cursorius cursor GREECE Vagrant: adult found injured (and subsequently died) on Rodhos (Rhodes), 6th March 2001 (Newsl. Hel. Wildlife Hospital 3 1 : 6). Collared Pratincole Glareola pratincola ITALY Breeding census: 73 breeding pairs in 1998 (Avocetta 24: 57). Black-winged Pratincole Glareola nordmanni FRANCE Vagrant: 5th September 1998 (1 1 records since 1981; Oniitlws 7: 153). POLAND Vagrant: Mietkowski Reservoir on 27th September 1999 (Notatki Orn. 41: 299). Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipalmatus AZORES Vagrant: Cabo da Praia, Terccira, 5th- 14th November 2001* (plate 101). 182 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • I 74-188 The European Bird Report 101. Semipalmated Plover Charadrius semipaimatus. Cabo da Praia, Terceira, Azores, November 200 1 Kentish Plover Charadrius alexandrinus GERMANY Population decline: 320 pairs in 1997 and 242 pairs in 1999, all in Schleswig- Holstein/Niedersachsen ( Vogelwelt 121: 189- 205; Seevogel 22: 41-48). Lesser Sand Plover Charadrius mongolus FRANCE Second and third records: 7th- 10th August 1999 and 29th August to 2nd September 1999 ( OrnithosV : 154). Greater Sand Plover Charadrius leschenaultii BULGARIA Second record: Atanasovo Lake, Burgas District, 16th May 2000 ( Burgaski Ezera Newsletter 5). Caspian Plover Charadrius asiaticus CYPRUS Vagrant: 31st March 2000 (nine pre- vious records; Cyprus Annual Report 47: 47). American Golden Plover Pluvialis dominica DENMARK Sixth record: Romo, S-Jutland, 15th-22nd May 1999 (DOFT 94: 163). Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva FRANCE Fifth record: 23rd October 1999 ( Ornithos 7: 154). IRELAND Ninth record: Inishbofin, Co. Galway, 9th September 1999. POLAND First record: adult near Czestochowa, 31st August 2000*. Grey Plover Pluvialis s quatarola ARMENIA Vagrant: Lichk vill, Lake Sevan, 12th September 2001*. Spur-winged Lapwing Hoplopterus spinosus ITALY Second record: Alviano Lake, Umbria, 15th-23rd March 1999 (Riv. Ital. Orn. 69: 212). Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius CZECH REPUBLIC Seventh record: southern Moravia, 25th April 1997 ( CSO News 49: 6). POLAND Vagrants: Przygodzice, 12th June 1996 ( Notatki Orn. 41: 299), and Otmuchowski Reservoir, 25th-27th September 2000*. SPAIN Vagrants: 14th- 15th March 1998, and 24th-25th October 1998 (Ardeola 47: 148). White-tailed Lapwing Vanellus leucurus DENMARK Second and third records: 15th May 1999 (DOFT94: 163); Harboore Tange, W- Jutland, 8th- 10th June 2000*, and same indi- vidual at Vejlerne, N-Jutland, 17th June until September 2000*. FINLAND Fourth record: Merikarvia, 21st May 2000 ( Linnut - vuosikirja 2000: 122). British Birds 95 ‘April 2002 • 174-188 183 Theo Bakker Arie Ouwerkerk The European Bird Report C ) 1 02. White-tailed Lapwing Vanellus leucuru s, Brabantse Biesbos, Netherlands, August 2000. GERMANY Fourth to sixth records: Koldingen, Niedersachsen, 2nd May 2000*; Lahnaue GieSen-Wetzlar, Hessen, 6th May 2000*; and Marburg, Hessen, 3rd-5th June 2000*. GREECE Vagrants; two adults at Gouves Lagoon, Chania, 7th May 2000 (third for Crete). ITALY Fourth record: 3rd June 1999 (Riv. Ital. Orn. 69: 213). NETHERLANDS Sixth record: Polder Maltha, Werkendam, Zuid-Holland, 9th- 19th August 2000* (plate 102) (recorded for the third con- secutive year). Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris POLAND First record: juvenile at Turawa Reservoir, 15th- 19th September 2001*. Red Knot Calidris canutus CYPRUS Vagrants: 26th February 2000, 31st August 2000, 3rd-6th October 2000, 5 1 h - 7 1 h September 2000 and 16th September 2000 (13 previous records; Cyprus Annual Report 47: 49). Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla FRANCE Vagrants: 15th August 1999, 7th October 1999 and 24th October 1999 (seven records since 1981; Ornithos7: 155). POLAND First to third records: Spytkowice, 30th April to 1st May 2000*; Vistula River mouth, 20th June 2000*; and Reda River mouth, 9th September 2000*. Little Stint Calidris minuta DENMARK Huge passage: more than 30,000 in 1998 (cf. record autumn of 1996, when at least 40,000 recorded, Brit. Birds 92: 71; DOFT 94: 118-119). Temminck’s Stint Calidris temminckii ARMENIA Fifth record: near Karchaghbyur v i 1 1 , Lake Sevan, 12th September 2001*. DENMARK Record passage numbers: 1998 was best year ever, with total of 2,517 during spring and autumn {DOFT 94: 1 19). Least Sandpiper Calidris minutilla FRANCE Vagrant: 17th May 1999 (five records since 1981; Ornithos 7: 155). White-rumped Sandpiper Calidris fuscicollis AUSTRIA Fifth record: adult at Seewinkel, Bur- genland, 2nd September 2000. FRANCE Vagrants: 23rd-24th October 1999, 24th October 1999, 25th October 1999 and 2nd November 1999 (12 records since 1981; Ornithos 7: 155). GERMANY Vagrant: 25th-31st May 1997 (I.ini- icola 14: 295). SPAIN Vagrant: 29th September 1998 (Ardeola 47: 148). Baird’s Sandpiper Calidris bairdii DENMARK First record: juvenile at Stensiuvs, 184 British Birds 95 'April 2002 • 174-188 The European Bird Report N-Jutland, 19th-23rd September 2000*. POLAND Second record: Przygodzice, 8th August 1993* ( Notatki Orn. 41: 300). Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos BULGARIA Third record: Uzungeren, Mandra Lake, Burgas District, 20th September 2001 ( BSPB National Bird Data Bank). CZECH REPUBLIC Sixth and seventh records: central Moravia, 27th April to 3rd May 1997 (first spring record for the Czech Republic; CSO News 47: 31), and 1 1- 12th October 1997*. POLAND Vagrant: 20th-27th September 1999 ( Notatki Orn. 41: 300). SPAIN Vagrants: two in 1993, two in 1994, two in 1995, three in 1996, ten in 1997 and one in 1998 {Ardeola 46: 138; 47: 148-149). Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata FRANCE Second record: 10th-24th April 1999 (first was in 1972; Ornithos7 : 157). Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea DENMARK Record passage: 1998 was best spring ever, with 520, and 13,000 were recorded in autumn 1998 {DOFT 94: 119). Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima CZECH REPUBLIC First record: southern Moravia, 4th October 1997 (CSO News 49: 6). Dunlin Calidris alpina GERMANY Population decline: now close to extinction, with only ten pairs in 1999 ( Seevogel 22: 39-40 & 41-48). Stilt Sandpiper Micropalama himantopus NETHERLANDS Second record: adult at Camperduin and Callantsoog, Noord- Holland, 22nd-24th July 2000*. Buff-breasted Sandpiper Tryngites subruficollis DENMARK Vagrants: Veslos Vejle, N-Jutland, 27th-30th September 1999 (DOFT 94: 164), and Olsemagle Revle, Zealand, 10th- 12th August 2000*. POLAND Vagrants: Mietkowski Reservoir, 18th September 1999*, and Pakoskie Lake, 7th Sep- tember 2000*. SPAIN Vagrants: 1 2th - 1 9th September 1994 ( Ardeola 46: 139), 6th October 1998 and 8th - 18th October 1998 (Ardeola 47: 149). Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus GREAT BRITAIN First record: juvenile at Rose- hearty, Northeast Scotland, llth-24th Sep- tember 1999, then at Greenabella Marsh and Greatham Creek, Cleveland, 29th September to 30th October 1999 (Brit Birds 94: 472). IRELAND Second record: first-summer at Boyne Estuary, Co. Dublin, 18th March 2000, then at Swords Estuary, Co. Meath, to 23rd Sep- tember 2000; returned to Swords Estuary as an adult in May 2001. Long-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus scolopaceus DENMARK Vagrants: two records in 1999 (eight previous records; DOFT 94: 164). SPAIN Vagrants: 2 1 st-23rd April 1998 and 25th October to 23rd November 1998 (Ardeola 47: 149). Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica CYPRUS Vagrant: 25th-29th September 2000 (13 previous records; Cyprus Annual Report 47: 54). Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris GREECE Vagrant: Messolonghi, 3rd May 1999, and four at the Evrotas River mouth, southern Peloponnese, 7th April 1999. POLAND Sixth record: Siemien fish-ponds, 7th October 1995 (fifth record was in 1978). Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata ITALY Breeding census: two breeding pairs in 1998 (Avocetta 24: 57). Spotted Redshank Tringa erythropus FAROE ISLANDS Fourth record: Sandoy, 15th May 2001*. Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis NETHERLANDS Vagrant: Camperduin, Noord-Holland, 31st December 2000 to late January 2001 (first winter record). Greenshank Tringa nebularia FAROE ISLANDS Third record: Sandoy, 25th May 2001*. Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes DENMARK Fourth record: Romo, S-Jutland, 28th May 1999 (DOFT 94: 164). British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 74- 1 88 185 The European Bird Report < FRANCE Vagrant: 13th-22nd October 1999 (12 records since 1981; Ornithos7 : 159). GERMANY Fourth record: adult at Dith- marscher Speicherkoog, Schleswig-Holstein, 2nd-20th August 1997 ( Limicola 14: 273-340). SPAIN Vagrants: 1st November 1996, 22nd July 1997 and 6th November 1998 (Ardeola 47: 150). Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus AUSTRIA Small influx: four records in May 2000. CYPRUS Vagrants: 1 0th- 1 1th May 2000 and 5th September 2000 (ten previous records; Cyprus Annual Report 47: 62). Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia FRANCE Vagrant: 14th- 18th September 1999 ( 1 1 records since 1981; Ornithos 7: 159). POLAND First record: Mietkowski Reservoir, 30th September to 14th October 1999 ( Notatki Orn. 41: 300). Wilson’s Phalarope Phalaropus tricolor DENMARK Sixth and seventh records: two in May 1999 {DOFT 94: 164). GERMANY Tenth record: 21st July to 3rd August 1997 ( Limicola 14: 298). Arctic Skua Stercorarius parasiticus MALTA Vagrants: January 2001 and October 2001 (about ten previous records). Long-tailed Skua Stercorarius longicaudus CHANNEL ISLANDS Third record for Jersey: 16th September 2000*. MALTA Eighth and ninth records: two offshore, November 2001 . Laughing Gull Larus atricilla FRANCE Vagrants: 2nd February to 4th March 1999 and 6th October 1999 (14 records since 1981; Ornithos 7: 160). GERMANY First record: 3rd April 1997 ( Limi- cola 14: 300). NETHERLANDS Third record: adult at Rut- bekerveld, Ovreijssel, 22nd July 2000, and Arnhem, Gelderland, 13th- 16th August 2000*. Franklin’s Gull Larus pipixcan FRANCE Vagrants: 17th January to 10th Feb- ruary 1999 and 1 4th - 1 6th October 1999 (ten records since 1981; Ornithos 7: 160). Sabine’s Gull Larus sabini CHANNEL ISLANDS Second record for Guernsey: juvenile, 22nd September 2000*. Slender-billed Gull Larus genei GERMANY Fourth and fifth records: 18th May 1997 and 9th- 15th May 1997 (Limicola 14: 302). Audouin’s Gull Larus audouinii BULGARIA Second record: adult at Cape Galata, Varna District, 8th August 2001 ( BSPB National Bird Data Bank). GERMANY First record: offshore between St Peter-Ording, Schleswig-Holstein, and Hel- goland, 16th July 1997 ( Limicola 14: 302). Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis DENMARK First record: 15th May to 14th June 1999 (DOFT 94: 164, 173-174). Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus fuscus ARMENIA Vagrant: Armash fish-ponds, 13th May 2001 (third record of nominate race fuscus). Herring Gull Larus argentatus SPAIN First breeding attempts: in the Basque Country, single adults seen sitting on nests within Yellow-legged Gull L. cachinnans colonies in both 1993 and 1998 (Anuario Orni- tologico de Gipuzkoa 1998: 66). Iceland Gull Larus glaucoides BULGARIA First record: first- or second- summer at Cape Emine, Burgas District, 18th May 2000 (BSPB National Bird Data Bank). CHANNEL ISLANDS First record of race kum- lieni: first-winter on Guernsey, 3rd January to 9th May 1999 (Trans. Soc. Guern. 1999). SPAIN Vagrants: 8th January 1998,30th January 1998 and 23rd-24th February 1998 (Ardeola 47: 150). Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla BULGARIA Fifth record: near Burgas, 1 1th June 2001 (BSPB National Bird Data Bank). GERMANY Breeding census: 7,968 pairs on I lelgoland in 2000. MALTA Vagrant: Qawra, 2nd January 2001 *. Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea GERMANY Second record: 21st May to 9th June 1997 ( Limicola 14: 304). 186 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 174-188 The European Bird Report ( Gull-billed Tern Sterna nilotica DENMARK Population decline: eight breeding pairs in 1998 (cf. 14 in 1995; DOFT 94: 124). Caspian Tern Sterna caspia IRELAND Eighth record: Ballymacoda, Co. Cork, 14th August 2000. Royal Tern Sterna maxima SPAIN Vagrant: 1st August 1997 ( Ardeola 47: 150). Lesser Crested Tern Sterna bengalensis FRANCE Vagrants: adult and hybrid juvenile, 8th August 1999, and adult from 19th May to 7th July 1999 ( OrnithosV : 163). ITALY Breeding status: one breeding pair in 1998 ( Avocetta 24: 57). Elegant Tern Sterna elegans IRELAND Second record: adult at Lady’s Island Lake, Co. Wexford, 8th- 19th July 1999. Common Tern Sterna hirundo CHANNEL ISLANDS Breeding census: 1 1 1 pairs on Jersey in 2000. Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri FRANCE First record: 1 1 th-26th December 1999 (■ OrnithosV : 163). Bridled Tern Sterna anaethetus DENMARK Second record: 28th July to 4th August 1999 {DOFT 94: 164). Sooty Tern Sterna fuscata FRANCE Vagrant: 13th June to 6th July 1997 (seven records since 1981; Ornithos 7: 163). Black Tern Chlidonias niger GREAT BRITAIN First record of American race surinamensis: juvenile at Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, 3rd- 1 1th October 1999. IRELAND First record of American race surina- mensis-. juvenile at Sandymount, Co. Dublin, 3rd-7th September 1999. White-winged Black Tern Chlidonias leucopterus GERMANY Influx: several thousand in mid May 1997 in eastern and northern Germany, the biggest flocks being of 700 at Nonnensee/ } Riigen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, on 13th May and 900 at Giilper See, Brandenburg, on 15th May ( Limicola 14: 273-340). Atlantic Puffin Fratercula arctica POLAND Eighth record: Hel, 3rd April 2000*. Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto MALTA Vagrants: two in June 2001 and two in August 2001 (seven previous records). Great Spotted Cuckoo Clamator glandarius CHANNEL ISLANDS Second record: first- summer on Guernsey, 7th April 1999 (Trans. Soc. Guern. 1999). Snowy Owl Nyctea s candiaca FAROE ISLANDS Vagrant: Streymoy, 30th July 2001* (second record since 1900). Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor IRELAND First record: 24th October 1999 at Ballydonegan, Co. Cork. White-throated Needletail Swift Hirundapus caudacutus FAROE ISLANDS First record: Mykines, 19th- 20th June 2000*. Pallid Swift Apus pallidus GERMANY Third record: Helgoland, 9th June 2000. Little Swift Apus affinis CHANNEL ISLANDS First record: Guernsey, 22nd April 2000*. SPAIN Vagrants: Constantina, Sevilla, 3rd July 1997, and Sotogrande, Cadiz, 13th May 1998 (Ardeola 47: 151). Smyrna Kingfisher Halcyon smyrnensis GREECE Fifth record: adult on Rodhos (Rhodes), 8th August 2000. Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon ICELAND Second and third records: female on 17th- 18th May 1998 and presumably the same individual at another locality from July to 15th September 1998 (plate 103 on page 188), both in southwest Iceland, and a female during 18th- 24th June 1998 in southeast Iceland (Bliki 22: 38; Brit. Birds 92: 75). British Birds 95 'April 2002 • 174-188 187 lohann Oil Hilmarsson The European Bird Report European Bee-eater Merops apiaster CZECH REPUBLIC Range expansion: 36-40 pairs at 15 locations in 2000, an increase from 8-10 pairs at two locations in 1991. Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major LATVIA Irruption: unprece- dented numbers, about 6,500, passed through Pape between 16th August and 25th October 2001. Lesser Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos minor CHANNEL ISLANDS Popula- tion decline: only one Jersey Blue-cheeked Bee-eater record in 1999 (colonised about 1935, first bred Merops superciliosus about 1979; Jersey Bird Rep. 1999). GERMANY Third record: 14th July 1997 ( Limi- cola 14: 318). 103. Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon, Mosfellsdalur Iceland, September 1998. National Correspondents Countries for which records are included in this compilation are shown in bold. ANDORRA Ann Matschke. ARMENIA Vasil Y. Ananian. AUSTRIA Hans-Martin Berg. BELARUS Dr Mikhael E. Nikiforov. BELGIUM Rene-Marie Lafontaine. BULGARIA Dr Petar Iankov. CANARY ISLANDS Juan Antonio Lorenzo. CHANNEL ISLANDS Glyn Young. CROATIA Jelena Krai j. CYPRUS John Sanders. CZECH REPUBLIC Prof. Karel Slastny. DENMARK Brian Rasmussen. EGYPT Sheri f & Mindy Baha El Din. ESTONIA Dr Vilju Lil- leleht. FAROE ISLANDS Soren Sorensen. FINLAND Tom Lindroos. FRANCE Dr Philippe J. Dubois. GEORGIA Alexander Gavashelishvili. GERMANY Jochen Dierschke. GIBRALTAR Charles E. Perez. GREAT BRITAIN John Marchant. GREECE George 1. Handrinos. HUNGARY Dr Gabor Magyar. ICELAND Gunnlaugur Petursson. IRELAND Paul Milne. ISRAEL Hadoram Shirihai. ITALY Marco Gustin. LATVIA Dr Janis Baumanis. LITHUANIA Dr Petras Kurlavicius. LUXEM- BOURG Tom Conzemius. MACEDONIA Branko Micevski. MALTA Joe Sultana. MON- TENEGRO Dr Vojislav F. Vasic. MOROCCO Dr Michel Thevenot. NETHERLANDS Drs. Arnoud B. van den Berg. NORWAY Bjoern Ove Hoeyland. POLAND Dr Tadeusz Stawarczyk. PORTUGAL (including Azores and Madeira) Dr Joao Carlos Farinha. ROMANIA Jozsef Szabo. SERBIA (As Montenegro). SLOVAK REPUBLIC RNDr Dusan Karaska. SLOVENIA Iztok Geister. SPAIN Dr Eduardo de Juana. SWEDEN Tommy Tyrberg. SWITZERLAND Dr Bernard Volet. TUNISIA Thierry Gaultier. UKRAINE Dr Igor Gorbah. 188 British Birds 95 * April 2002 • 174-188 Greylag Goose nesting in oak tree On 25th May 1999, in open parkland at Oxen- ford Farm, near Elstead, Surrey, a Greylag Goose Anser anser was discovered nesting in a hollow branch in a large, dead oak Quercus tree (plate 104). As the nest hole was approximately 10 m from the ground, it was difficult to see the occupant unless its neck was outstretched. The site was visited almost daily until 7th June; the goose was present in the hole on each occasion, and on several days its mate was observed near the River Wey, some 250 m away. No further visits were possible until 26th June, by which date there was no sign of either parent. Fragments of eggshell were, however, found at the bottom of the tree. Although there was no direct evi- dence of successful breeding, there seems little doubt that eggs were laid and incubated. I can find no reference to this species nesting in tree holes, although BWP (Vol. 1) states that it occurs ‘Exceptionally in or near low trees, on flooded areas, especially in USSR’. I am grateful to Colin Baker for informing me of the goose nest, and allowing access to his land. Geoffrey Wheatley kindly verified the identification of the goose. 1 04. Greylag Goose Anser anser nesting in oak Quercus tree, Surrey, June 1 999. Robin Redfern Gatwick Lodge, Shackleford, Godaiming, Surrey GU8 6BH EDITORIAL COMMENT Malcolm Ogilvie has commented that, apart from the fact that the bird has taken advantage of a hollow branch, this site may be regarded as very similar to a pollarded tree, and 20% of sites found in the former Czechoslovakia were in such a situation (BWP). Fie has also recorded Greylags nesting in pollarded willows Salix in the UK. Eleonoras Falcon carrying chick back to eyrie During the morning of 4th October 2000, on the islet of Alegranza, Lanzarote, Canary Islands, we watched and filmed a female Eleonora’s Falcon Falco eleonorae from a hide placed 14 m from the eyrie. On two occasions, the falcon was seen carrying a chick, aged approximately 20 days, which had wandered 60- 70 cm from the scrape. Holding the skin of the chick’s neck within its beak, the parent dragged its young back to the eyrie. The female habitu- ally perched on a small rock, some 80 cm from the eyrie, waiting for the male; perhaps induced by the scarcity of food, the chick tried to reach the female in the two instances which we observed. This behaviour may well have been facilitated by the unusual characteristics of the ground eyrie (very exposed, on more or less flat, earthy terrain), together with the frequent presence of marauding Common Ravens Corvus corax , a potential predator. Our observations differ significantly from what has normally been recorded for related © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 89- 1 95 189 Robin Redfern Notes C ) species. For example, for the Peregrine Falcon F. pulls back with the underside of its beak any peregrinus, Ratcliffe (1980, The Peregrine small chick which moves out of the scrape’. Falcon) stated that ‘the brooding falcon gently Pedro Felipe and Felipe Siverio Los Afligidos 43, E-38410 Los Realejos, Tenerife, Canary Islands Peregrine Falcons fostering Herring Gull chicks On 11th June 2001, at a coastal-cliff site in Dorset, I discovered a female Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus apparently brooding two Herring Gull Larus argentatus chicks, which I estimated to be perhaps 7-10 days old. There- after, 1 visited the site at two-day intervals. On 22nd June, the male Peregrine Falcon appeared, calling, and deposited a young Eurasian Jackdaw Corvus monedula in front of the chicks, the first occasion on which I had observed food brought in by the Peregrines. The corvid was dragged to the back of the ledge by the chicks, out of sight. The arrival of either falcon at the ledge without food caused the chicks to approach and gently ‘nudge’ the raptor with their bill, or to stand back a little, bowing the head. This behaviour failed to elicit any response from the Peregrines. On 25th June, both foster-parents were present, the male with a kill, which it began feeding to the gull chicks in typical falcon fashion, bill to bill. The gull chicks were clearly heavily imprinted on the Peregrine Falcons, which spent little time at the ledge. Towards the end of June, a pair of adult Herring Gulls did at times land on the ledge, either singly or together. Each such visit was met with hostility by the chicks. On 2nd July, at 07.10 hours, with no sign of the Ronnie Baker Clematis Cottage, Eype, Bridport, Dorset DT6 6AP falcons, two adult Herring Gulls alighted on the ledge. At first, they backed off, having encoun- tered aggression from the chicks, but then the adults mounted a sustained attack on one of the chicks; at 07.35, the latter, badly mauled and bloodied, was finally ejected from the ledge and was not seen alive again. The adult gulls returned at 08.05 and attacked the remaining chick, but less violently, and it moved out of sight. At 13.15 hours, the female Peregrine arrived at the ledge, without food, whereupon the remaining chick emerged, clearly injured; the female remained for two hours, then departed, and was not seen to return before 19.00 hours. On the following day, the ledge was deserted until the male Peregrine arrived with a plucked Feral Pigeon Columba livia, but there was no sign of the remaining chick. During a subsequent search of the beach below the ledge, I could find no trace of either chick. 1 am not able to shed any light on the initial circumstances or the stage at which the falcons became involved with the gull chicks. I made a very thorough search of the cliff top above the ledge, but I found no evidence of human inter- vention, such as rope marks or stake holes, to suggest that egg-collectors might have replaced the Peregrines’ original clutch with gull eggs. EDITOIMAL COMMENT Robin Prytherch has commented as follows: ‘In addition to the possibility that the original clutch had been replaced, it is possible that the I^eregrine Falcons had lost a brood of their own, perhaps of small chicks, and that the urge to brood led them to transfer to a nearby Herring Gull nest with small chicks. For the chicks to be imprinted on the Peregrines, this must have happened soon after hatching, and the need to brood overruled the falcons’ normal predatory reac- tion to the chicks. The feeding Isehaviour is perhaps the most interesting part of this observation. Herring Gull chicks normally stimulate their parents to feed them by pecking at the red spot on the parents’ bill. The parent reacts t>y regurgitation (though it will sometimes regurgitate without stimu- lation). Falcons have no red spot on the bill, but a morsel of flesh is red, so the gull chick would peck at that and be rewarded with food. There seems little doubt that the gull chicks adapted quickly to this unusual feeding method.’ 190 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 89- 1 95 c Notes > Collared Dove feeding on algae On 3rd October 1998, on the coast at Penrhyn- side, near Colwyn Bay, Clwyd, I watched a Col- lared Dove Streptopelia decaocto fly in and land on the rocky foreshore. To my surprise, the dove began to peck at and consume the filamentous green algae which carpets the rocks below the high-tide mark here. The algae took on a dis- tinctive tufted appearance as the dove tugged and pulled at it. Feeding on such plants by birds other than waterfowl (Anatidae) appears to be rare, or at least rarely recorded, and I can find no published observation of a pigeon, or indeed any landbird, feeding in such circumstances. Paul Morris Caughall Farmhouse Cottage, Caughall Road, Upton-by-Chester, Cheshire CH2 4BW Adult Common Cuckoo feeding juvenile During 29th-30th May 2001, near Edderthorpe Flash, South Yorkshire, I had good views of a pair of Meadow Pipits Anthus pratensis feeding a juvenile Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus. On 31st May, I observed an adult Common Cuckoo feeding the juvenile. 1 watched the adult circling the flash, calling constantly, before coming in to land on a fence post. Having iden- tified it as a male, with solid grey throat and upper breast, I scanned down the bank by the disused railway line and saw the juvenile cuckoo on the fence, flanked by the two Meadow Pipits; the pipits were disappearing into the grass and returning to the fence wire, but I did not see them feed the youngster on this occasion. After watching for five minutes, I turned my atten- tion back to the birds on the flash. Some 30 minutes later, I checked on the juvenile again, and was surprised to see the adult cuckoo perched alongside it with a cater- pillar in its bill. Both cuckoos were facing me. The adult shook the caterpillar vigorously, like a Common Kingfisher Alcedo atthis with prey, while at the same time maintaining its balance with wings drooped. Then, in one quick move- ment, each stretched its neck towards the other, the juvenile took the prey item, and after a short pause the adult flew off, calling in flight. Soon after the adult had disappeared, the pipits (which had been absent during the adult cuckoo’s visit) returned. The juvenile cuckoo begged for food, but the pipits did not respond. About 25 minutes later, the adult Common Cuckoo reappeared, carrying another cater- pillar. This time the pipits harassed it, and the caterpillar was either dropped or eaten by the adult cuckoo (I could not see which, but the food was not fed to the juvenile). On this occa- sion, the tenacity of the pipits eventually drove away the adult cuckoo, which flew off out of sight, again calling as it did so. Keith Smith 13 The Square, Crimethorpe, Barnsley, South Yorkshire S72 7JW; e-mail: keithsmith@therum.freeserve.co. uk EDITORIAL COMMENT BWP (Vol. 4) states that, according to Wyllie (1981, The Cuckoo), there is lno reliable evidence for an adult C. canorus feeding fledged young’, but that a report exists of an adult Common Cuckoo apparently feeding a juvenile 20 times in succession (see Klein, 1911, Orn. Monatsber. 19: 130-131). Common Swift nestlings attacked by wasps On 15th July 2000, during a routine visit to monitor the progress of the Common Swifts Apus apus breeding in the tower of the University Museum, Oxford, I noticed a dead nestling (one week old) with a freshly blood- stained back. The second chick of the brood of two had a Common Wasp Vespula vulgaris feeding on its back; 1 removed the \tasp but did not catch it. On the following day, the second swift chick was dead, and I removed it from the nest. On 19th July, a wasp was discovered feeding on one of the two dead nestlings in a British Birds 95 ‘April 2002 • 189-195 191 Notes > separate nestbox. A total of three chicks was attacked in this fashion, and 1 surmised that the wasp regarded the torpid swifts as carrion. This was the first time in 38 years of moni- toring the Common Swifts in the tower that I had encountered wasps in nestboxes. Is this a Roy Overall 30 Hunsdon Road, Iffley, Oxford 0X4 4JE new pattern of behaviour for Common Wasps, and what can be done to prevent it happening again? Do social wasps relay information on suitable feeding sites to other wasps in the colony, as bees (Apidae) do? Great Spotted Woodpeckers feeding on apples The note on Great Spotted Woodpeckers Den- drocopos major feeding on apples (Brit. Birds 95: 24) prompts me to report similar behaviour. On three occasions between 17th December 2001 and 3rd January 2002, a Great Spotted Wood- pecker fed upon windfall apples in my garden at Burnham Market, Norfolk. This is approxi- mately 24 km from Guist, the location of the earlier report. The apples had lain since falling during the previous autumn and were in an advanced state of decay, though still being eaten by Blackbirds Turdus merula and Fieldfares T. pilaris. Great Spotted Woodpeckers have been daily visitors to our peanut feeders since April 1999, and windfall apples have been left as bird food since autumn 1999, but we had not previ- ously observed the woodpeckers feeding on the apples. D. M. Bednall Coppers, Church Walk, Burnham Market, Norfolk PE31 8DH I was surprised to learn from the note by Noel Elms (Brit. Birds 95: 24) that Great Spotted Woodpeckers Dendrocopos major had not previ- ously been recorded as eating apples. During 1947-53, when I was at school in Oundle, Northamptonshire, we carried out a great deal of bird-ringing in an apple orchard adjacent to the school grounds. Every autumn/early winter, large quantities of fallen apples lay on the ground and were fed on by Blackbirds Turdus merula and Common Star- lings Sturnus vulgaris, among others. We operated a variety of walk-in and drop traps, made from wire netting (this was before the advent of mist nets, which were first used in the UK in 1956). Each winter, we would catch one or two Great Spotted Woodpeckers. The traps had been set over the densest patches of rotting apples, and it seemed that the wood- peckers were being attracted by those. I also recall seeing the woodpeckers on the ground on several occasions, apparently pecking at apples. While one cannot rule out the possibility that the woodpeckers were seeking grubs in the apples, I certainly had the impression at that time that it was the apples themselves which were the prime target. Dr Clive Minton 165 Dalgetty Road, Beaumaris, Victoria 3193, Australia; e-mail: m in tons@ozemail. com. a u EDITORIAL COMMENT David A. Christie has commented: ‘A large number of woodpecker species consume fruits of various kinds. Frugivory is especially common among the American melanerpine species, but the behaviour is also well documented for many other members of the family, in both the Old World and the New World. Although the habit does seem to be unusual for the genera Den- drocopos and Picoides, it evidently does occur on occasion. The Great Spotted Woodpecker, being a great opportunist, is perhaps the most likely of the “pied” woodpeckers to take advantage of fallen apples. Nevertheless, and as suggested in both the above notes and the one published earlier (Brit. Birds 95: 24), the possibility remains that, in those cases, insect larvae inside the fruit were the food items being sought.’ 192 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 189-1 95 Notes Mimicry by Lesser Short-toed Lark on Tenerife Between 1993 and 1996, during the course of a study of the distribution, status and ecology of the Lesser Short-toed Lark Calandrella rufescens on Tenerife, Canary Islands, I observed the larks giving excellent imitations of the calls and songs of local breeding birds, several of which are not among those mentioned in BWP (Vol. 5) as being mimicked by this species. At three lowland semi-desert localities in the south of the island, the Lesser Short-toed Larks mim- icked Barbary Partridge Alectoris barbara. Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius , Plain Swift Ruben Barone Apus unicolor, Southern Grey Shrike Lanius meridionalis and Spanish Sparrow Passer his- paniolensis. The best and the most frequent imitations made by all the lark populations on the island are, however, those of Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus , Berthelot’s Pipit Anthus berthelotii and Spectacled Warbler Sylvia conspicillata, together with Linnet Carduelis cannabina in the northeast. I should like to thank Keith Emmerson for his help in translating this note. Eduardo Zamacois, 13-3° A, 38005 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain Alarm calls of Barn Swallow Peter Atherton and others have described a low- pitched alarm call used by Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica in response to Hobbies Falco subbuteo [Brit. Birds 90: 526; 92: 51-52). During 20 years of living in Hampshire and Dorset, the great majority of my Hobby sightings have resulted from listening out for this call. If Barn Swallows give the call loudly and repeatedly, a Hobby can usually be located simply by looking in the direction from which the swallows are flying. I had presumed that this low-pitched call was given specifically in response to Hobbies. Some years ago, however, I saw a small group of Barn Swallows reacting to a Eurasian Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus in an area of narrow valleys and steep hills in Dorset. Initially, the swallows gave their usual loud, high-pitched alarm call as they mobbed the hawk; the latter, as it moved away, took advantage of an updraught to rise very quickly up a hillside, and as soon as the raptor was above their level the swallows switched to the low-pitched ‘Hobby alarm’. Barn Swallows perhaps distinguish between ‘danger at low altitude’, when the best strategic place is directly above the threat, and ‘danger above’, when the only safe place is as far away as Tony Taylor 26 High Street, Spetisbury, Blandford, Dorset DTI 1 9D] possible. This is usually equivalent to a distinc- tion between Eurasian Sparrowhawk and Hobby as a result of the predators’ differing hunting behaviours, but it is not invariably so. This does not, of course, diminish the value of the information to observers. I saw further evidence for this interpretation on 18th August 1998, when a Hobby flew over my garden at an altitude of about 15 m. It was being mobbed by an adult Barn Swallow, which was diving at it and giving the typical loud ‘sparrowhawk-mobbing call’. Also, in August 1999, on Cape Clear, Co. Cork, I observed several Barn Swallows feeding in the area of the Observatory. When they gave the ‘Hobby call’ and flew northeast, I immediately searched for a reason and saw a male Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus making a long stoop towards them from the southwest. To my ear, the ‘Hobby call’ sounds like a very intense and more repeated version of what is described in BWP (Vol. 5) as the ‘follow-contact call’, used by female Barn Swallows to induce males or young to follow them. This suggests to me that the underlying message of the ‘Hobby call’ is an urgent ‘fly in this direction’. Blackbirds with damaged bills Moss Taylor’s note (Brit. Birds 92: 370-371) prompts the following. Over a period of about six weeks in late September and October 1998, near my home in Harlow, Essex, I saw three Blackbirds Turd us merula (two females and a ringed male) which had lost their upper mandible, broken off at the weak point of the nostrils. The cause was unknown, but was British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 189-1 95 193 Brian Hill Notes } presumably a local, and apparently temporary, hazard. At least two of the Blackbirds survived the winter, and 1 observed them until at least May 1999 (it is possible that all three survived, although I never saw more than one female at any one time). The male, at least, retained his tongue, and his singing ability was unimpaired. All three gathered food in typical thrush manner, frequently stabbing at items. These always ended up in the mouth, and I presumed, from the birds’ actions, that they ‘bounced’ them into it by using the tip of the lower mandible; I could not, however, be certain of this, since the action was so quick. If the item was too large to swallow, it was shaken vigorously until small enough. The Blackbirds hunted on lawns for earthworms in characteristic fashion, and I also observed them turn their head sideways to pick up prey items, particularly soon after the deformity was first noticed. The plumage of all three was always in good order, suggesting that preening was not a problem. In the late summer of 1999, the ringed male Alan Harris 60 East Park, Harlow, Essex CM 17 OSE was found dead in a neighbour’s garden. It proved to be an adult male, ringed by me in November 1992, and retrapped in November 1997, when the bill was undamaged. My neigh- bour reported that a ringed male Blackbird with a broken upper mandible had bred in his garden, and was seen actively feeding at least two fledged young. Shortly afterwards, it was found dead on the lawn, the cause of death being unknown. Despite the deformity, it was clearly able to participate successfully in a breeding attempt. If a Blackbird’s upper mandible is broken at the nostril, there is still about half of it remaining (comparing the measurement from the tip of the lower mandible to the gape), which is evidently sufficient for most daily tasks. This appears to have been true also of Moss Taylor’s Eurasian Jay Garrulus glandarius {Brit. Birds 92: 370), which would, I believe, have had few problems in picking up acorns (with the head turned sideways) or even hiding them in soft leaf mould. Tameness and unusual feeding behaviour of female Sardinian Warbler In April 2001, while we were staying at a holiday complex in Port D’es Torrent, Ibiza, Balearic Islands, our hotel balcony was visited regularly by a female Sardinian Warbler Sylvia melanocephala. The warbler fed voraciously on food scraps, which it also carried away, presum- ably to feed to nestlings. It would take bread- crumbs, but was also particularly fond of lemon sponge cake and, on one occasion, it landed on the edge of my plate as I ate a boiled egg, and subsequently took fragments of this (plates 105 & 106). It showed no fear of humans whatso- ever, and landed on my knee and arm several times; it also approached for food via my wife’s shoulder. Visits would take place, on average, every ten minutes or so through the day, and would last up to two minutes. The male of the pair also visited the balcony, but was much less confiding; although it, too, took scraps, its visits were very brief and much more intermittent, and it preferred to seek insect food in the nearby scrub. tear-' 1 05 & 1 06. Female Sardinian Warbler Sylvia melanocephala, Ibiza, April 200 1 . 194 British Birds 95 - April 2002 • 189-195 Brian Hill Peter A. Hammersley Notes BWP (Vol. 6) mentions a vagrant Sardinian Warbler in the Netherlands in winter taking bread, and also one in Algeria taking scraps in winter. Presumably, on both occasions, the pre- ferred food would have been scarce. In Ibiza, on the other hand, insect food was plentiful, and the feeding habits adopted by this female seem, therefore, most unusual. I tried to discourage the bird from feeding ‘junk’ food to its nestlings by removing scraps, but it merely transferred its affections to a neighbouring balcony. Brian Hill 7 Mill Cottages, Mill Lane, Creech St Michael, Taunton, Somerset TA3 5PU EDITORIAL COMMENT Bearing in mind the normal insectivorous diet of this species, and its general shyness and elusive habits, the behaviour described here seems quite extraordinary. We should welcome any comparable observations from readers. Yellow Blue Tit At the end of June 1999, at Caterham-on-the- Hill, Surrey, a juvenile Blue Tit Parus caeruleus with entirely yellow plumage came to seed and peanut feeders in my garden. It was accompa- nied by a brood of ‘normal’ young Blue Tits, presumably its siblings. The yellow tit visited the garden regularly until September (plate 107), and it did not appear to suffer any antago- nism from other Blue Tits. By December, it had moulted into first-winter plumage; it then had a white head, wings and tail, the remaining areas being yellow. I assumed, therefore, that the aberrant plumage was caused by a lack of blue pigmentation, rather than an excess of yellow. Peter A. Hammersley Upper Mill Farm, Cardington, Church Stretton, Shropshire SY6 7HR EDITORIAL COMMENT We do not normally publish notes on aberrant plumages unless these could pose identification problems. In this instance, however, the striking appearance of this all-yellow Blue Tit, a species very familiar to most people, may be of interest. In this context, Bryan Sage has com- mented as follows: ‘The occurrence of yellow plumage is known as xanthism. In the case of the Blue Tit, the green of the back results from the suf- fusion of brown and black melanins with yellow carotenoid pigment; in the absence of the former, only the yellow remains. The blue colour in the feathers of the Blue Tit is not iridescent, and does not change with the angle of vision. The colour is produced by the phenomenon known as Tyndall scattering. Particles with a diameter less than the wavelength of yellow and red light (less than c. 600 nm) reflect, or scatter, more of the short-wave than of the long-wave constituents of white light. In blue feathers, the barbs contain a scattering system made up of tiny, air-filled box cells surrounding a medullary area with brown or black melanin gran- ules; the air spaces scatter the incident light and reflect blue. In the absence of melanin, the blue parts of the plumage normally appear white.’ 107. Xanthistic Blue Tit Parus caeruleus, Caterham-on- the-Hill, Surrey, August 1999. British Birds 95 ’April 2002 • 189-195 195 Letters Dodgy ducks, grotty geese and suspect ‘Sibes’ Having read the ‘Report on rare birds in Great Britain in 2000’ (Brit. Birds 94: 452-504), as well as several of the previous Reports, 1 feel that clarification is needed on the correct termi- nology to be used with regard to rare species the occurrence of which in Britain is not due to natural vagrancy. One example in which 1 have particular interest is the male Yellow-breasted Bunting Emberiza aureola at Landguard, Suffolk, on 12th August 1999. Accepted by BBRC, and published in the 1999 Report (Brit. Birds 93: 564), the record has apparently been reconsidered subse- quently, and the bird is ‘now considered of captive origin’ (Brit. Birds 94: 500), even though there has been no further information forth- coming from the original observers (see also Odin et al. 1999). The bunting may well have been captured at some point during its life, although I am firmly of the opinion that it was born in the wild. Such circumstances may well apply to a number of the rarities included in the BBRC Report, but how is the decision made to treat one in particular as being of captive origin? Certainly, the condition of a trapped individual is not a reliable guide, since many species which are of presumed captive origin are in absolutely immaculate condition when handled by ringers. Another, related point is that the BBRC Report is littered with records of wildfowl which are, in all probability, the offspring of captives which have been allowed to escape once they have Hedged. Although there have been records of known (ringed) transatlantic vagrants in Britain concerning species such as American Wigeon Anas americana , we have to accept the likelihood that a significant propor- tion of the wildfowl in each Report are essen- tially of captive origin. For example, Red-breasted Geese Branta ruficollis seen with flocks of commoner species are considered wild if they occur in winter, but the same individuals are subsequently labelled captive if they do not disappear before the summer. Other captive- bred individuals simply migrate back and forth with other migratory species. The number of genuine vagrants to these shores may be very much lower than the number which occur in the Report, and it seems to me that an improved system of dealing with this (admit- tedly difficult) situation is needed. Finally, I am at a loss to know just what the purpose is of Category D and Appendix 3. For which species should 1 submit a description for possible inclusion in these sections? During the course of a year’s birding, I come across a wide range of exotics which, perhaps surprisingly, does not correlate with what is available in my local pet shop (where both Pallas’s Rosefinches Carpodacus roseus and Long-tailed Rosefinches Uragus sibiricus are freely - and cheaply - avail- able). Why vet records of some species which are widely available for sale, yet not others which I, for one, have not seen for sale but have seen in the wild? Consistency and a dose of reality are needed when dealing with these waifs and strays. Reference Odin, N., James, M., & Holmes, R 1 999. The Yellow- breasted Bunting in Suffolk. Birding World 1 2: 3 1 7. Nigel Odin Landguard Bird Observatory, View Point Road, Felixstowe, Suffolk IP1 1 8TW EDITORIAL COMMENT Colin Bradshaw, Chairman of the BBRC, has commented: ‘Nigel makes many valid points about the thorny question of escapes. Some of these are general points, and some specific to the Landguard Yellow-breasted Bunting. Dealing with the latter first, the publication of that record in the 1999 Report was simply a clerical error. Although the identification was never in doubt, BBRC decided unanimously that this individual should be treated as an escape. This was due partly to the date of the record and the age of the bird, but mainly to its poor condition. It was missing a claw on the left foot, and a claw and part of a toe on the right; two outer primaries were snapped off about halfway along, while the tips of all the remaining remiges and rectrices were heavily worn. Having spent several years in examining consignments of cagebirds, 1 am familiar with the variation in wear which can occur in captivity. Nigel is quite correct in his assertion that perfect 196 © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 196-1 99 Letters C plumage does not necessarily guarantee wild origin (many birds kept in large aviaries are in perfect condition, and even some individuals in a large consignment of birds in a small cage can look very good), nor is the reverse necessarily true, either. Although birds which have never been held captive may show missing claws and toes, or broken feathers, this is comparatively unusual, and the combi- nation of all three is typical of birds which have been held in captivity. 'I am sure that Nigel is also correct when he says that the bunting was born in the wild. Yellow- breasted Bunting is difficult to breed in captivity and there have been few successful attempts in the UK. Furthermore, those people who have been successful tend to specialise in buntings, and their birds are usually in immaculate condition and are kept in special aviaries which make escape extremely unlikely. Whether we should use the expression “of captive origin” is debatable, since this suggests that the individual was born in captivity. Perhaps a return to the term “escape” would be more accurate? 1 am not sure, however, that it is really relevant whether or not a bird was born in the wild, apart from the issue of terminology. Surely, the main question is that of how it arrived in Britain or western Europe. To take a slightly far-fetched example, if a zoo captures a young wild-bred Ostrich Struthio camelus and brings it back to Britain, where it then escapes, should we consider it for the British List because it was not captive-bred? I think that most birders would agree that, if a bird which has been born in the wild is captured, transported halfway across the world, and then escapes back into the wild, it is still an escape. The situation of a wild vagrant which is taken into care and then released again is rather more problematic for the lister (can we count it only if we saw it before it was taken into care?), but is not relevant to BBRC. ‘Nigel also refers to the particular problems of wildfowl, and I agree that not only BBRC but also BOURC has so far failed to find perfect solutions to these issues. The confusion of these two com- mittees is, however, a reflection of the problems that modern-day birding has with this difficult group (to which we should also add raptors). BBRC has tried to address this by stating that the acceptance of wildfowl records does not necessarily include or imply any certainty as to the origin of the individual(s) concerned. Some are undoubtedly wild vagrants, some are probably escapes, and some may be “of captive origin” in the true sense of the phrase but have lived most of their life as wild birds. It is almost impossible to decide the category into which an individual duck or goose comes. Neither geography nor behaviour is infallible. I have seen Nearctic waders on the London reservoirs, and a Silvereye Zosterops lateralis on Scilly. 1 have seen a Bean Goose Anser fabalis in Northumberland which was undoubtedly wild when it arrived but, after consorting with feral Greylag Geese A. anser for a whole winter, ended up grazing unconcernedly within 50 m of birders. Realistically, we cannot make incontrovertible decisions on the origins of individual wildfowl, and BBRC feels that it has either to persist with its current (admittedly imperfect) system or to cease the recording of all potential vagrant wildfowl and raptors. ‘Category D is a BOURC classification which includes “Species that would otherwise appear in Categories A or B except that there is reasonable doubt that they have ever occurred in a natural state...” To paraphrase, species could potentially turn up as wild vagrants, but may also be escapes. This category includes various wildfowl, raptors and passerines, and currently numbers about 16 species. Accepted records of these appear in Appendix 1 of the annual BBRC Report. Appendix 3 is less easy to classify, since it is meant to be a record of those species currently residing in Category E (escapes) which we believe to be of more interest to British birders, mainly because there is some possibility that they may occur as genuine vagrants at some time in the future. There is no hard and fast rule regarding the species for which records should be submitted tor this section, and it is largely a matter of commonsense. Nigel will no doubt be relieved to know, however, that for a number of years BBRC kept a close eye on the cagebird trade, including wholesalers, across the whole of Britain and did not rely simply on what was for sale in local pet shops.’ British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 1 96- 1 99 197 Letters Status of Marmoras Warbler in Italy Shirihai et al. (2001a, b) presented a stimulating and detailed case to support the separation of Marmora’s Warbler Sylvia sarda of the nomi- nate form sarda from its Balaearic counterpart balearica. Their description of the Italian distri- bution of sarda was, however, at best outdated, since they apparently failed to acknowledge recent local ornithological literature, in partic- ular, atlas studies. A number of local Italian atlases, for regions such as Tuscany, Latium, Campania and Sicily, as well as the national breeding-bird atlas (Meschini & Frugis 1993), provide a more recent account of the distribu- tion, and also shed some light on the wintering status of sarda. On the distribution map in Shirihai et al. (2001a), the two broad areas depicting winter range, on the west Italian mainland and in northwest Sicily, should probably be deleted, since Marmora’s Warblers occur in winter only within the breeding range or in very close prox- imity to it. Although the species is said to breed on the Tyrrhenian islands of Capraia, Elba, Montecristo, Giglio, Ponza, Ischia and Capri (listed from north to south), confirmed records are available only for the first two, which are closest to Corsica, and for nearby Pianosa (P. Sposimo in lift.); claims of breeding on Tyrrhenian islands outside the Tuscan Archi- pelago are not supported by definite records. The absence of breeding on the Italian main- land is incorrect, because, in 1988, a few pairs were discovered on the Argentario peninsula, in southern Tuscany. With regard to habitat choice, the assertion that, in comparison with Dartford Warbler S. undata, Marmora’s favours lower and more uniform vegetation does not accord with my observations in Sardinia. Here, apart from in mountain habitats, Marmora’s Warbler almost invariably occurs where the garrigue (usually very low) is dotted with rocky outcrops or boul- ders which break the continuity of the vegeta- tion. On Dartford-dominated and typically greener Tuscan islands, Marmora’s is reasonably common only at the highest elevations of Elba, where Dartford Warbler seems to be absent, while a typical tall herb ( Ampelodesmos ) com- munity admixed with calciphilous scrub and frequently burnt is occupied by Marmora’s on Argentario. Considering population size, the authors state that the total number of pairs of Marmora’s Warblers in Sardinia is probably greater than the 10,000 estimated for Corsica, given the former’s larger extent of suitable habitat. The national estimate for Italy is cur- rently 5,000-10,000 pairs (Meschini & Frugis 1993), of which no more than 200 are to be found in Tuscany and very few on Pantelleria. Whether or not the Sardinian estimate has to be increased should, I believe, be the result of accurate analyses of satellite images, rather than unsupported extrapolation. Finally, although the majority of Italian Marmora’s Warblers are sedentary, or undertake only local movements, those which are migra- tory return in spring from North African winter quarters, staging at sites where the species does not breed, but when most breeders are already on territory. Such evidence was provided during ten years of the study 'Progetto Piccole Isole’, when continuous mistnetting on many islands, usually during mid-April to mid-May, led to as many as 24 individuals being ringed on Ven- totene and Giannutri (Messineo et al. 2001a); an additional 13 were ringed on Capri in 1 08. Marmora's Warbler Sylvia sarda. near Pesaro. Italy, April 1991. 198 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 196-199 Ariele Magnam Letters C spring, between 1956 and 1990 (Petterson et al. 1990). These spring migrants may in fact repre- sent eastward-drifted individuals originally heading to Sardinia or Corsica, rather than a part of the Tuscan population, which, given its very small size, would probably pass unnoticed. Real overshooting of spring migrants has, however, only rarely been observed. A second- calendar-year female was trapped and ringed along the north Adriatic coast, near Pesaro, on 3rd April 1991 (Magnani et al. 1992; plate 108), while at least four occurred on Palmaria island, off La Spezia in the Golfo di Genova, in 1998 and 1999 (Messineo et al. 2001b), confirming that extralimital records do, nevertheless, occur. References Magnani, A., Serra, L, & Giusini, U. 1992. Prima segnalazione di Magnanina sarda, Sylvia sarda, sull’alto litorale adriatico. Riv. Ital. Orn. 62: 1 90- 191. Meschini, E„ & Frugis, S. 1993. Atlante degli uccelli nidificanti in Italia. Supp/. Ric. Biol. Selvaggina 20: 1-343. Messineo, A„ Grattarola, A., & Spina, F, 2001a. Dieci anni di Progetto Piccole Isole. Biol. Cons. Fauna 1 06: I -244. — , Spina, F., & Mantovani, R. 200 1 b. Mediterranean Islands Project: results 1 998- 1 999. Biol. Cons. Fauna 108: I - 1 46. Petterson, J., Hjort, C., Gezelius, L., & Johansson, j. 1 990. Spring Migration of Birds on Capri - an overview of the activities 1956-1990. Special report, Ottenby Bird Observatory. Shirihai, H„ Gargallo, G., Helbig, A. J., Harris, A., & Cottridge, D. 200 1 a. Identification and taxonomy of Marmora's Warblers. Brit. Birds 94: I 60- 1 90. — , — , — , — & — 200 1 b. Sylvia Warblers: Identification, taxonomy and phylogeny of the genus Sylvia. London. Nicola Baccetti INFS, via Ca Fornacetta 9, 1-40064 Ozzano Emilia BO, Italy; e-mail: infszumi@iperbole.bologna.it Lesser Redpolls in France The paper on the taxonomic status of Lesser Redpoll Carduelis cabaret (Brit. Birds 94: 260- 267) was of considerable interest, but I should like to correct one error in the text concerning the status of this species in France. The first breeding record of Lesser Redpoll in northern France occurred in 1966, at Cap Gris-Nez, Pas- de-Calais, and was published in Richard et al. (1967). To the best of my knowledge, breeding has not taken place in this area for several years, which coincides with a marked decrease in the number of redpolls seen on migration each Philip Redman 23 rue de Richelieu, 75001 Paris, France autumn at Cap Gris-Nez. Although Richard et al. discussed the possi- bility of the redpolls originating from birds cap- tured by trappers in Belgium, and then escaping, it is just as likely that they came from southeast England, where the breeding popula- tion was expanding at that time. Reference Richard, A., avec la collaboration de Di-Bernardo, L., et al. 1967. Nidification du Sizerin flamme ( Carduelis flammea) dans le Boulonnais. Alauda 35: 235-236. Looking back Seventy-five years ago: ‘GOOSANDERS IN SHROPSHIRE. On Saturday, February 12th, 1927, 1 had brought to me for identifi- cation an adult male Goosander ( Mergus merganser ) which had been shot, out of a pair, on the Severn below Atcham Bridge the same morning. This section of the river seems to have a special attraction for the Goosander, and I have known parties remain there in winter for weeks at a time. This was especially notable in the winter of 1885-6. Its visits to Shropshire are very irregular, and I have no records between 1918 and the present time. H. E. Forrest.’ ‘LONG-TAILED SKUA IN LEICESTERSHIRE. An immature male Buffon’s or Long-tailed Skua ( Stereo - rarius longicaudus) was put up with a covey of Par- tridges [Perdix perdix] at Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, on October 3rd, 1926, and was inadver- tently shot. This is the first record of the bird having occurred in the county. The bird has been added to the Leicester Museum collection. W. E. Mayes.’ (Brit. Birds 20: 276-277, April 1927) British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 196-199 199 Obituaries Bert Axell (1915-2001) Known to most of his friends as Bert, he was also Herbert to many, and H. E. Axell on more formal occasions. However you knew him, he was famous in birding circles for half a century, and something of a legend in his own lifetime. When he died, in November 2001, an era seemed to have come to an end. Bert Axell left many friends to mourn his passing, and there are lots of us around who learned much from him and were influ- enced by his thinking. It was not all sweetness and light, though. Big, forceful, and fiercely independent, he could sometimes be opinion- ated and awkward, and, sadly, it has to be said that not all of his profes- sional colleagues were endeared to him. The problem was, however, as often as not of their making as much as his, and perhaps not enough consideration and under- standing were always given to his determined and single-minded approach to his job - which, for a significant part of his life, really boiled down to making the RSPB’s reserve at Minsmere, in Suffolk, the best bird reserve on earth. He probably succeeded. He will always be associated with Minsmere, but his involvement in birds dates back way beyond his time there. He grew up as an enthu- siastic young birdwatcher on the coastal borders of Sussex and Kent. Dungeness was part of his youthful patch, and it was at Dungeness that his life as a professional ornitholo- gist and conservationist took off. That was in 1952, after a career in the Post Office interrupted by war service and terminated through ill health. At the Society’s invitation, he became warden of the RSPB reserve, and more or less simultaneously also became warden of the fledgling Dungeness Bird Observatory. Bert moved to Minsmere in 1959, and it was there that his resourcefulness, ingenuity and imagination as a reserve warden came to full fruition. Perhaps his most obvious memorial is The Scrape (which should be spelt with initial capitals, since it is, in a sense, the ‘type specimen’), but it should be borne in mind, too, that the pio- neering use of Minsmere as a reserve capable of handling hun- dreds of visitors (and showing them birds at close quarters) was just as much a product of the Axell philosophy. His early efforts had earned him an RSPB medal, and his work at Minsmere was rewarded in 1965 when he was honoured with an MBE. It also won him a Churchill Fellowship, which he used to good effect when he left Minsmere in 1975 to travel overseas, advising other reserve- managers on ‘scrapes’ and many other things. He became a land-use adviser for the RSPB, finally retiring from the Society in 1980. Even in retirement he kept very busy, globetrotting with his wife Joan, meeting people, watching and talking birds and advising on their conservation. He led an enviably full and ful- filling life, and to appreciate it (and him) properly you have to read his excellent autobiography Of Birds and Men (The Book Guild Ltd, 1992). His Minsmere: Portrait of a Bird Reserve (Hutchinson, 1977) is an important record of an historic chapter in the saga of nature- reserve management. Of his assorted contributions to the more purely ornithological literature, his paper Eruptions of Bearded Tits during 1959-65 {Brit. Birds 59: 513- 543) stands as the most important. Bert was one of the best fieldmen I ever went out with. By today’s lights, he was probably an old-fash- ioned birdwatcher, the product of another age; but there was something awesome about the huge breadth of his knowledge and experience. He would hold his own, easily, in any company. Above all, Bert Axell was a great pioneer in a pioneering age, and he left an indelible mark on the ornithological world. Mike Everett J. M. B. King (1924-2002) 1. M. B. (Mike) King was one of the first ringers to use mistnets when they arrived in Britain during the 1950s. This was just one small hint of his pioneering attitude to his ringing activities. In the mid 1960s, he responded to a request for a ringer to visit the North Ronaldsay lighthouse-keeper, Ken Walker, who wanted somebody to train him to catch and ring birds there. Mike’s visits to this Orkney outpost became annual, and he was largely responsible for putting ‘North Ron’ on the migration-studies map, sub- sequently helping with the setting- up of the Bird Observatory. He then became involved in assisting, along with several friends, in the ringing of migrants on Lundy, in the Bristol Channel, making regular visits to the island from the late 1970s to the 1990s. During this period he joined the Chew Valley Ringing Station, became its chairman, and spent much time there once he had retired. Mike was about to embark on a trip to Australia in 1994 when an opportunity suddenly arose to visit The Gambia, to set up and organise a ringing project there. The air tickets were swapped, and he was off on the first of many visits to catch Palearctic migrants on their wintering grounds. Many other ringers joined him on subsequent expeditions. He was still actively involved in this project up to his death, in January 2002. Despite special efforts by the BTO to fast-track a paper, written jointly with John Hutchinson, on ‘Site fidelity and recurrence of some migrant bird species in The Gambia’ (Ring. & Migr. 20: 292- 302), it appeared just a few days after his death. Mike King was a tower of strength and enthusiasm among ringers, and he will be greatly missed. He is survived by a daughter, Carla, and son, Tony. Robin Prytherch 200 © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 200 News and comment Compiled by Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches Opinions expressed in this feature are not necessarily those of British Birds Yellow Wagtail Study Group It has been known for some time that local British populations of Yellow Wagtails Motacilla flava flavissima have been declining. Concerns have been expressed that these declines might be more wide- spread. Following discussions between birdwatchers and the RSPB, a meeting was arranged to bring together a number of indi- viduals and organisations involved with Yellow Wagtail survey and monitoring work, and to review existing data. Fieldworkers from across the country joined RSPB and BTO staff in late November 2001 for the first meeting of the ‘Yellow Wagtail Study Group’. A review of local survey information and analysis of regional population data certainly point to a wide- spread and rapid decline in the breeding population, and a serious contraction in the breeding range, in many grassland and arable areas of the UK. Presentations on Yellow Wagtail ecology, as well as analysis of ringing data and nest record cards, were followed by a discus- sion on the potential causes of the population decline. A number of priorities for future work were identified. The objectives of the Yellow Wagtail Study Group are to con- tinue to collate local survey and regional population data. The group will also exchange informa- tion and assist in co-ordinating further research, survey and moni- toring work. The group would like to hear from anyone already involved in Yellow Wagtail field- work or who would be interested in beginning new studies. More information is available from the Group co-ordinator Kevin Briggs (tel: 01252 5198810; e -mail: kbbriggs@yahoo.com). A detailed summary of the information presented at the meeting is available from lan Court (tel: 01756 752748; e-mail: ian.court@yorkshiredales.org.uk). Barn Owl release scheme disbanded Until early 2002, it was necessary to apply for a licence under section 16 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 if you wished to release a Barn Owl Tyto alba into the wild. This was, at least in part, an attempt to stop highly inappropriate releases which were taking place throughout the country. The release scheme was due to end in 2000, but was extended for a further year to enable a full assessment, and consultation about the future, to take place. Over the past five years, the number of licences issued has decreased signifi- cantly and only small numbers of Barn Owls have been released. It is now considered that the ending of the scheme will have no effect on the conservation status of the species, while concentrating on the restoration of suitable habitat is the best way to re-establish Barn Owls. Licences can still be applied for, but are unlikely to be issued except in special cases such as ongoing research projects. It is now illegal to release a Barn Owl into the wild, and the penalty for doing so is a fine of up to £5,000 or six months in prison. A copy of the consultation paper and the responses that led to this decision can be found at www.defra.gov.uk For peats sake A landmark deal to halt commercial peat extraction on the UK’s three largest surviving lowland raised bogs has been hailed by the RSPB as ‘one of the most important environmental announcements ever’. The Government (via English Nature) has paid £17.3 million to Scotts, an American corporation, to buy out its planning permissions at Wedholme Flow, Cumbria, and on Thorne and Hatfield Moors, South Yorkshire. Some 1,500 ha of land will be added to the 1,300 ha previously handed over by Scotts. All the land concerned has National Nature Reserve status, and English Nature will now start the biggest habitat-restoration project ever seen in England. This is the culmination of a ten-year campaign by the Peatlands Campaign Consortium of environmental organisations, and sets a positive precedent for future buy-outs of controversial mining operations which threaten wildlife and habitats, such as limestone-quarrying and gravel extraction. All three sites are provisional Special Areas of Conservation under the EU Habitats Directive, but the ongoing strip-mining of peat from the sites threatened their formal designation. Despite the widespread habitat degradation at Thorne and Hatfield Moors, this is still one of the most important areas for European Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus in northern England. The moors also support a wide variety of plant and insect species. Peat extraction ceased immediately at Wedholme Flow and Thorne Moors. At Hatfield, extraction will cease on half of the moor, with the remainder being handed over to English Nature by 2004. Scotts had extraction rights until 2023, but they will now concentrate on developing alternatives in a far-sighted move which would gladden the heart of ‘peat-free’ campaigners such as the late Geoft Hamilton of the BBC’s Gardeners World. For more details of this major initiative, see the English Nature website: www.englishnature.gov.uk © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 20 1 -204 201 News and comment Great Expectations in Whitehall threaten a Cliffe-hangar Not content with alienating both the Civil Service and the travelling public, Transport Secretary Stephen Byers is now reportedly taking on the RSPB. Barely had the ink dried on the deeds to the new RSPB reserve at Cliffe Pools, Kent (Brit. Birds 95: 29), when news broke that Cliffe has been ear- marked for a new London airport. It is projected that air traffic will double over the next 20 years in southeast England, and there is bitter opposition to further expansion at Heathrow, following the decade-long planning inquiry into Terminal Five. The attraction of Cliffe is that it would offer 24- hour operation from no fewer than four runways. ‘Ours was the marsh country down by the river’ wrote Charles Dickens on the opening page of Great Expectations. Indeed, the hero, Pip, meets the fearsome convict Magwitch in Cliffe churchyard. But marsh country on either bank of the River Thames has long been coveted by airport planners. Some readers may remember that, 30 years ago, a Conservative government announced that a third London airport would be built on an artificial island at Maplin Sands, on the north bank of the Thames estuary. Oppo- nents of the plan pointed to the wintering population of dark-bellied Brent Geese Branta bernicla bernicla (a subspecies very much rarer then than it is now) as one important reason why the airport should not be built there, although the risk of birdstrikes rather than the conservation priorities of the wintering geese was perhaps more influential in shooting down the proposal. Will a similar argument save Cliffe Pools? For more details, see: www.guardian.co.uk/ Archive/ Article/0, 4273, 4366382, 00.html Dungeness online! In February 2002, Dungeness Bird Observatory became one of an ongoing band of British bird observatories to have their own website. Dungeness, Kent, the most southeasterly point in the UK, is well known in birding circles as a ‘hotspot’ for the unexpected, with rarities such as Black-browed Albatross Diomedea melanophris , Bonaparte’s Gull Lartts Philadelphia , Short-toed Treecreeper Certhia brachydactyla and ‘Turkestan Shrike’ Lanius (isabellinus) isabellinus recorded in 2001. It is perhaps best known as a great location to observe migration, of both landbirds and seabirds. The aim of the new website is to inform and promote the work of the bird observatory. A vast amount of information is featured, which includes: latest bird sight- ings; ringing; seawatching; plants, insects and other wildlife; maps; and details of accommodation. The site is clearly quite new and is still being developed. Visit the site at www.dungenessbirdobs.org.uk; or contact David Walker for further information (e-mail: dungeness.obs@tinyonline.co.uk). Hybrid raptors in captivity In recent years, the breeding of hybrid raptors in captivity has increased sharply. In 1994, 20% of all the birds of prey registered with the Depart- ment of the Environment (now DEFRA - the Department for Environ- ment, Food & Rural Affairs) as being held in captivity were hybrids. By the end of 2001, this figure had increased to some 50% of more than 7,000 raptors registered. Although the latter include over 1,100 Northern Goshawks Accipiter gentilis, 2,000 Peregrine Falcons Falco peregrin us, 90 Golden Eagles Aiptila chrysaetos and 14 White-tailed Eagles Haliaeetus albi- cilla , there is just as much chance of a hybrid escaping, and confusing the birding community. Visit the website: www.defra.gov.uk Isabelline necessary on a mobile phone ? Many of us are familiar with birds which mimic phones; but what about phones which mimic birds? The RSPB has teamed up with a mobile-phone company to offer birdsong ring-tones. They are specifically for Nokia mobile phones and, since Nokia is a Finnish company, the play-list available has a Fennoscandian feel. There is a choice of 38 songs or calls to download as ring-tones, from White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla and Rough-legged Buzzard Buteo lagopus to Red-breasted Fly- catcher Ficedula parva and Common Rosefinch Carpodacus erythrinus, and including Red- flanked Bluetail Tarsiger cyanurus and Blyth’s Reed Warbler Acro- cephalus dumetorum for the com- mitted lister. Or you could try Common Chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita or Coal Tit Parus ater... but with these you may run the serious risk of annoying your fellow train passengers or students in the university library. All the ring-tones can be heard on the RSPB website www.rspb.org.uk (if the feature has moved from the frontpage, just type ‘Ringtones’ in the search facility). It costs £1.50 per minute to call the number and download a ring-tone, but 20p +VAT goes to the RSPB for every ring-tone sold. In Finland, according to Paavo Sallinen in his contribution to the amusing debate on UKBirdnet, the ring-tones have raised £10,000 for conservation in less than one year. The most popular one in Finland was Common Gull Larus canus. Suggestions from British birders have included Mute Swan Cygntis olor (get it?) and, best of all, Isabelline Shrike Lanius isabellinus of the subspecies ‘phone’ icuroides. One half of the N&c team (AP) favours Green Sandpiper Tringa ochropus for his Nokia , but only because the option of a Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris imitating a mobile phone is not available. 202 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 20 1 -204 News and comment Willow Grouse and Gyr Falcons in Siberia A recent paper by C. van Orden and N. Paklina (De Takkeling 8: 136-139) describes observations made during three winter visits to eastern Siberia, where the authors encountered hundreds of snares set for Willow Grouse Lagopus lagopus. Local trappers construct low hedges (about 30 cm high) of willow Salix branches near dwarf willow scrub, leaving small openings of 20 cm at regular intervals. These openings are used by Willow Grouse, which are caught in nylon snares as they pass through. Apart from many other bird species, including Snowy Owls Nyctea scandiaca, a Gyr Falcon Falco rusticolus was found ensnared in all three winters. Apparently, the falcons use the openings to attack Willow Grouse by surprise. A single trapper con- fessed that he accidentally ensnared up to three Gyr Falcons each winter. Five other trappers in the same region related similar experi- ences. Since this method of trap- ping Willow Grouse is widespread in Siberia, it must add substantially to the mortality of a species which is under threat from the illegal trade in falconry in so much of central and eastern Asia. Contact: C. van Orden, Doelenstraat 14, 1601 GL Enkhuizen, Netherlands. More on Slender-billed Curlew As reported in N&c earlier this year (Brit. Birds 95: 92), a comprehen- sive account of the discovery and identification of the Druridge Bay, Northumberland, Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris will appear shortly in British Birds (in the June issue, in fact), a story which culminated in its acceptance in Category A of the British List earlier this year. By coincidence, the May issue of Birdwatch maga- zine includes a profile of the curlew’s finder, Tim Cleeves. Bird- watch is in the shops from 18th April, and will, as usual, be a good read’. > ‘ Blood Lust of the Flesh-Eating Sheep' Perceptive readers will realise that they have read this story before, albeit with a different headline. The account, by Dr Niall Burton, of a Red Grouse Lagopus lagopus chick being eaten by sheep on a Co. Durham moorland (Brit. Birds 95: 87) subsequently reappeared in the daily press. The typically shocking headline above comes from one of Britain’s top-selling tabloid newspapers, The Sun , in its edition of 19th February (and we are aware that the story featured also in the Daily Mail and the Daily Star, as well as in at least one of the broadsheets, The Independent). Sadly, The Suns website does not have an archive, so that BB readers who want to read the entire Wapping version of the original contribution will have to hunt through the paperbank or under their cat’s litter tray. This may be the first time that a BB exclusive has been picked up by the national press - unless any reader knows better. Not one but two questions are left begging by Dr Burton’s account of the threat posed to Red Grouse survival by sheep in the north Pennines. Will gamekeepers now rigorously persecute sheep as they have done Hen Harriers Circus cyaneus? And, as a consequence, will sheep disappear as a breeding species from the uplands of northern England? Volunteers needed at the Strait of Messina Since 1984, volunteers have been a key part of the spring project to survey and protect migrating raptors and storks Ciconia at the Strait of Messina, southern Italy (see Brit. Birds 94: 196-202). In 2002, FMF (the Italian branch of WWF) and LIPU/BirdLife Italy are once again organising an international camp on the Sicilian side of the Strait. The Strait of Messina is well known as a strategic migration flyway into Europe. Almost all of the raptor species on the Western Palearctic List have been recorded there; this is the only reliable place in the Western Palearctic to see Amur Falcon Falco amurensis, while it is perhaps the best site for Pallid Circus macrourus and Montagu’s Harriers C. pygargus. Among other rare and interesting raptors, ‘Steppe’ Buzzard Buteo buteo vulpinus, Long- legged Buzzard B. rufmus, Lesser Spotted Eagle Aquila pomarina, Lesser Kestrel F. naumanni, Red-footed Falcon F. vespertinus , Eleonora’s Falcon F. eleonorae, Lanner Falcon F. biarmicus (of the rare race feldeggii) and Pere- grine Falcon F. peregrinus (including the race calidus) are all possible. The 2002 survey begins on 1st April and ends on 28th May. Volunteers may stay for as long as they like; full board, guidance etc. are provided for only 13 Euros per day (about £20.80). For more information, contact Andrea Corso, Via Camastra 10, 96100 Siracusa, Italy; e-mail: voloerrante@yahoo.it French birds and farming Somewhat regrettably, the bird news from France is frequently dominated by stories of hunting, while many conservation stories go unrecorded on this side of the Channel. It is, therefore, pleasing to pass on some information from the Loire valley area, near Angers. Ligue Pour La Protection des Oiseaux (LPO), the BirdLife partner in France, has been working hard in the region to safe- guard the important populations of Corn Crakes Crex crex which still nest there. In addition to the introduction of sympathetic hay- making techniques, local beef is now marketed under the name ‘L’eleveur & l’oiseau: le boeuf des vallees’, with a Corn Crake featured prominently on the label. Elsewhere in France, at Dicy, Yonne, an organic farm produces apples and pears, fruit juices and continued on page 204 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 201-204 203 ( News and comment French birds and farming continued from page 203 ciders from its traditionally managed orchards. Much of the farm is a ‘Refuge LPO’, where birdlife is protected and encour- aged with the provision of nest- boxes etc. The farm’s produce is marketed under the name ‘Clos de Rochy’, and one item in particular, its apple juice, carries a label ‘cuvee cheveche, LPO Yonne’, to help to promote the Chouette Cheveche (Little Owl) Athene noctua. The Little Owl has declined alarmingly across France, where the removal of old orchards and hedgerow trees has deprived the species of nesting holes and reduced the available prey. Further information is available on the LPO website (in French): www.lpo-birdlife.asso.fr Kakapo population is booming Not quite so ‘sick as a parrot’, the critically endangered Kakapo Strigops habroptilus does, in fact, appear to be doing rather well at the moment. News from New Zealand is that, for the first time in three years, a Kakapo egg has hatched - and not just one: by 28th February, seven chicks had hatched to swell the global population of this giant flightless parrot, which numbered just 62 at the beginning of 2002. A total of 52 eggs has been found by Department of Conserva- tion workers at the Whenua Hou Nature Reserve, on Codfish Island, with almost half expected to be fertile. The Kakapo is an extraordinary bird. It is a flightless, nocturnal parrot that weighs up to 3.5 kg, and it employs lekking as part of its breeding strategy. The males give out a low-frequency boom from their chosen ‘booming gallery’, and the sound carries for up to 5 km. In 2001, good fruiting on rimu trees, generally a predictor of a successful breeding season, buoyed hopes that the number of Kakapos would increase in 2002. Consequently, 1 1 females of breeding age were trans- ferred from Maud Island, in the Cook Strait, to Southland’s Codfish Island to boost the population and maximise mating opportunities. The males’ booming clearly appealed to the new arrivals, and the latter, strengthened by their fresh-fruit diet, laid their first eggs in January. Unless you are David Attenbor- ough, your chances of getting up close and personal with a Kakapo are fairly remote - but at least one member of the RSPB’s North of England office can boast of cud- dling a Kakapo while on sabbatical leave. For those of us who can only dream of a great green parrot nestling in our arms, visit www.kakaporecovery.org.nz Record Bird Fair profits in 2001 The British Birdwatching Fair (BBWF) presented BirdLife International with a cheque for a record £135,000 from last year’s Fair for the ‘Eastern Cuba: Saving a Unique Caribbean Wilderness’ project. The funds raised will be used to improve the existing protected-areas network in eastern Cuba, to secure their long-term conservation, and to help catalyse national and regional Important Bird Area programmes in similar fashion to pre- vious BBWF-funded projects in Brazil and Vietnam. The Fair’s organisers also announced that, in 2002, they will raise funds to help BirdLife to protect the last lowland rainforests of Sumatra, in Indonesia, one of the world’s potential global-extinction ‘hotspots’. Indonesia has the highest number of threatened species (117) in the entire world. Nowhere is the crisis facing Indonesia’s birds and forests more severe than on the island of Sumatra, where a shocking 78 of 102 local lowland- forest bird species are listed as globally threatened or near-threatened. These rainforests face an unprecedented threat to their continued existence from logging and clearance for agriculture and exotic plantations. Not only do they support many threatened bird species, including Red-naped Trogon Harpactes kasumba and Rhinoceros Hornbill Buceros rhinoceros , but they also harbour the world’s last remaining (and critically endan- gered) Sumatran Orang Utans Pongo pygmaeus , Sumatran Tigers Panthera tigris, and Sumatran Rhinoceroses Dicerorhinus sumatrensis. Bonxie memories When you have been birdwatching for some 50 years, there will inevitably be events which have been forgotten unless something jogs the (ageing) brain cells. A recent example concerns a Great Skua Catharacta skua which had been ringed at Hermaness, Shetland, in July 1998, and was found two months later (quite amazingly) in the Czech Republic. An e-mail from a student at Charles University, Prague, to the Shetland Wildlife internet page reported that the skua was undergoing rehabilitation at the Prague Zoo, where it was behaving so aggressively towards other birds in the aviary that it had to be moved. The two small boys who had first found the skua described a ‘strange web-footed buzzard running around among [the] chicken’. This is when the brain cells sprang into action and BS remem- bered an injured Great Skua which he had looked after many years ago, and which was kept within a fenced garden. At the same time, a relatively young dog, recently acquired, was scolded for killing three of his free-range chickens; that was before the skua, which could not fly, was seen chasing a chicken around the garden, catching it by the neck and killing it. lust to complete the tale, the BTO’s version of the ‘web-footed buzzard’ story was illustrated with a line-drawing of a Great Skua by the late Peter Grant (BS’s best man at his wedding). The ringing recovery of a Great Skua in the Czech Republic is, not surprisingly, the first ever from that country. 204 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 201-204 Reviews THE SIBLEY GUIDE TO BIRD LIFE AND BEHAVIOUR: A COMPANION TO THE NORTH AMERICAN BIRD GUIDE Illustrated by David Sibley. Edited by Chris Elphick, John B. Dunning Jr & David Sibley. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. 587 pages. ISBN 0-7136-6250-6. Hardback, £35.00. David Sibley is widely known as the author and illustrator of the superb The North American Bird Guide. Like most field guides, this tells you how to identify birds and roughly where to find them by range and habitat, but little about their biology. Although subtitled as a companion to the field guide, The Sibley Guide to Bird Life and Behav- iour is really a separate book the title of which is branded, I would imagine, in the hope of association with a best-selling field guide. It is an edited multiple-author work, of which Sibley is both the illustrator and one of the editors and authors. It is a book of two halves. About 100 pages cover biology, taxonomy and evolution, habitats, popula- tions and conservation. A longer section (440 pages) treats the fami- lies of birds which occur in North America. Each family has headings such as taxonomy, food and for- aging, breeding, movements, con- servation and accidental species. Extra topics are introduced if there is something interesting to say. A box describes average traits of the family. This is an attractive introduc- tion to the life of birds, pitched at the student or enthusiast. There are other books on general bird biology and on the variety of the world’s birds, but there are few with this book’s mixture. The style is simple and readable. There are no references, even where deriva- tion from a single study or publica- tion is obvious. David Sibley’s artwork is beautiful, and there are colour sketches on most pages. You could read from cover to cover, though 1 imagine that most people would browse and dip. You could hardly fail to learn something new and interesting. I was amazed to discover, for instance, that there are about 30 species of exotic parrot (Psittacidae) commonly recorded and probably established in the USA. Europeans will find this quite an ‘American’ book because most THE SIBLEY GUIDE » BIRD LIFE & BEHAVIOUR III mini ted by DAVID SIBLEY A Companion to The North American Bird Guide of the species and stories are Amer- ican. On the other hand, the fami- lies covered include more than half of all bird families and have a very high overlap with those which are represented in Europe. Bird biology is, of course, universal, although favoured subjects vary. It is especially interesting to see how active and important systematics and taxonomy are in America com- pared with Europe. The spelling is American throughout, with the exception of the title. Someone must have feared that ‘Behavior’ in the title would deter Europeans. I do not think that it should. Colin Bibby THE AVIFAUNA OF HONG KONG By G. J. Carey, M. L. Chalmers, D. A. Diskin, P. R. Kennerley, P. J. Leader, M. R. Leven, R. W. Lewthwaite, D. S. Melville, M. Turnbull & L. Young. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong, 2001. 564 pages; 31 colour plates; 139 maps; 412 figures; 20 tables; line-drawings. ISBN 962-7508-02-0. Hardback, £34.50. Hong Kong has a long tradition of bird-recording. The first docu- mented observations were made in 1860, by Robert Swinhoe, and much has been published on Hong Kong’s birds since then, particu- larly in the last 50 years. There has been a succession of field guides to the birds of the former British colony, and the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society (HKBWS) has published an annual report since 1958. The previous work on the status and distribution of Hong Kong’s birds reached four editions, but this new Avifauna eclipses all of them. It is in a league of its own. The introductory sections, amounting to more than 100 pages, cover such topics as the history of ornithology in Hong Kong, physical characteristics, climate, the breeding-bird survey, winter waterbird counts, and bird- ringing. These are informative and well written. A complete species list © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 205-208 205 Reviews C is also included, as well as breeding-distribution maps (based on the first comprehensive breeding-bird survey of Hong Kong), and a selection of bird and habitat photographs. The species accounts comprise the bulk of the book and these are impressive. Each account begins with a summary of world range and taxonomy, followed by a detailed analysis of the status and distribution in Hong Kong. This is based on 41 years of HKBWS records and surveys, while compar- isons are made with data collated as long ago as 1861. Most accounts are accompanied by one or two graphs. Enormous numbers of records were analysed in order to prepare these charts, and the authors have succeeded in pre- senting a vast amount of informa- tion clearly and succinctly. This important book has been produced to the highest standards. The paper is of top quality, the layout is clear and uncluttered, and the two-colour maps add to the ease of interpretation. The artistic cover may not be to everyone’s taste, but inside these unassuming covers there lies a veritable treasure trove of information. This is an essential reference to the status and distribution of birds in south China, and anyone with an interest in this region should buy a copy. Nigel Redman WRENS, DIPPERS AND THRASHERS By David Brewer & Barry Kent Mackay. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. 272 pages; 32 colour plates; 124 species illustrated in colour; 132 maps. ISBN 1 -873403-95-X. Hardback, £35.00. Wrens, Dippers and Thrashers will appeal primarily to those birders who live in or visit the Americas, where 121 of the 124 species treated are endemic. Winter Wren Troglodytes troglodytes also occurs widely in North America, and only Eurasian Dipper Cinclus cinclus and Brown Dipper C. pallasii are absent from the two continents. The book contains short sections entitled contents, acknowledgements, introduction, explanation of the species accounts, classification and rela- tionships, conservation issues, topography, ;bibliography, index and regional maps. The latter com- prise maps of Central and South America which show the provinces named in the distribution sections of the species accounts. Where appropriate, these chapters seem to have been well researched. Each of the 32 full-page colour plates covers, on average, four species, and contains nine or ten images. Every bird is coded, and is captioned on a facing page with its age, and sex where relevant, and comments on its structure and plumage; there are also statements on each species’ habitat and range. To my eye, the quality of the paint- ings falls short of the high standard which we have come to expect from books in this series. In many cases, the proportions are wrong, the HUM ID WOTM CATION GUIDES WRENS, DIPPERS AND THRASHERS Itavid Brvwi IIHnnau-ri h> Him Kent Mac Kj> I posture is not lifelike, the plumage is too dark and cold-toned, and the birds lodk unnaturally scruffy. An over-reliance on museum specimens may have been a contributory factor. Furthermore, there are no paintings of birds in flight; such images should have been included for certain species in order to illustrate distinctive wing and tail patterns. The systematic section is 160 pages long. The species accounts are subdivided under the headings identification, description, geo- graphical variation, voice, habitat, habits, status and distribution, breeding, food, movements and measurements; all include a distrib- ution map. Understandably, the accounts of historically less well- studied endemic Central and South American species are shorter (on average, just over a page long) than those of species which occur in the USA and elsewhere (on average, two pages long). This major portion of the book appears to have been as thoroughly researched as the impressive bibliography sug- gests, and a wealth of information is authoritatively presented. The attention to detail is such that a number of obscure points of interest can be found in the text, including the occurrence of a Cactus Wren Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus (an apparently sedentary species in southwestern USA and Mexico) in Saskatchewan, Canada, during a blizzard, and the existence of both Dr John Le Conte, after whom Le Conte’s Thrasher Toxostoma lecontei is named, and his cousin, another Dr John Le Conte, of Le Conte’s Sparrow Ammodramus leconteii fame. At £35.00, Wrens, Dippers and Thrashers, with its 32 colour plates and 272 pages in total, is over- priced compared with some other recently published books in the same series: Thrushes, with 60 colour plates and 463 pages overall, also costs £35.00, while Pigeons and Doves, with 76 colour plates and a total of 615 pages, is priced at £38.00. Many of those who bought one or both of these other books after little more than a glance at some of the splendid plates will need longer to discover that Wrens, Dippers and Thrashers, mainly on the strength of its extremely well written text, also deserves a place on their bookshelves. Peter Lansdown 206 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 205-208 Reviews j> C SUNBIRDS: A GUIDE TO THE SUNBIRDS, FLOWERPECKERS, SPIDERHUNTERS AND SUGARBIRDS OF THE WORLD By Robert A. Cheke, Clive F. Mann & Richard Allen. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2001. 384 pages; 48 colour plates; numerous line-drawings; 176 distribution maps. ISBN 1-873403-80-1. Hardback, £37.00. This is the first book since the nineteenth century to cover all the world’s sunbirds, flowerpeckers and spiderhunters (Nectariniidae) in detail, while the allied subfamily of sugarbirds (Promeropinae) is included, too. The introductory sections cover topography, mor- phology, relationships and tax- onomy, behaviour, breeding, distribution and habitat, parasites, mortality and predators, physi- ology, migration and other move- ments, economic importance and conservation. There are 15 pages of references, with approximately 900 citations. The heart of the book is, of .'course, the illustrations and thfe individual species accounts. Tfle ■plates are excellent, well laid-out, aesthetically pleasing and accurate. Richard Allen’s attempts to show the iridescence on sunbirds are quite subtle, and present a less garish por- trayal than is found in some other works, while still conveying some- thing of the brilliance of the birds’ plumage. Backgrounds are also pleasing and show either typical habitat or food plants. The images are mostly numbered consecutively and in the same order as on the opposing caption page. Distinctive races are portrayed and, in some cases, immature or non-breeding males are illustrated. The subjects include some of the most colourful birds in the world and, with some figures approaching life-size, this is one of the most attractive of the Helm Identification Guides. The species accounts follow the now familiar format, and concen- trate mainly on identification, status and distribution. ‘Geograph- ical variation’ describes subspecies and their range. The grey-scale maps are very clear and use a variety of tones, as appropriate. Measurements include mass but do not give an overall size. The sequence, taxonomy and English names are fairly standard, and based mainly on Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World (Sibley 8c Monroe 1990). The few changes include the separation of Grey-headed Sunbird Deleornis axillaris from Scarlet-tufted Sunbird D. fraseri , and different generic names for Ruby-cheeked Sunbird Chalcoparia ( Anthreptes ) singalensis and Golden-winged Sunbird Drepanorhynchus ( Nec - tarinia) reichenowi. I noticed few errors. The map for Western Olive Sunbird Cyanomitra obscura indicates the species’ presence on Zanzibar Island and Pemba Island, Tanzania, when in fact it is the preceding species, Eastern Olive Sunbird C. olivacea, that is found there. Closer reference to The Birds of Africa Vol. IILIJ4 IDENTIFICATION GUIDES SUNBIRDS A Guide In the Sunbirds, FhwnperMrrs, Spiderhunters and Sugarbirds of the World VI (Fry, Keith 8c Urban 2000) would have avoided errors such as mapping Blue-throated Brown Sunbird C. cyanolaema for Kenya, and also giving an altitudinal range there, despite the single record from Kakamega having been rejected. Bronze Sunbird Nec- tarinia kilimensis is mapped for Ethiopia and Red-chested Sunbird Cinnyris erythrocerca mentioned as a vagrant to that country, even though these records were dis- missed in The Birds of Africa. Tsavo Purple-banded Sunbird Cinnyris tsavoensis is described (incor- rectly?) as occurring in southern Ethiopia and Sudan, though not mapped for either. j This is a beautiful and well- produced book whiqh is both a delight to browse through and a great source of detailed informa- tion. It is a worthy adaption to the series and, being the fl^rst mono- graph on the group to be published since 1880, is surely destined to become the standard work for some time to come. Iain Robertson GULLS: A VIDEO GUIDE TO THE GULLS OF EUROPE, ASIA 8t NORTH AMERICA Filmed by Paul Doherty; narrated by Bill Oddie. Bird Images Video Guides, Sherburn in Elmet, 2001. Double video set; running time 5 hours 32 minutes; at least 56 taxa covered. £27.95. The latest in an impressive list of video guides filmed by Paul Doherty, this double cassette deals with all the familiar (and some less familiar) gull (Laridae) taxa of the northern hemisphere. It is a com- prehensive distillation of much of the current proliferation of work on gull identification, illustrating at least 56 taxa in a range of age- classes with high-quality video footage, complemented by freeze- frames and some still photographs. A 12-minute introduction pro- vides an excellent summary of how to approach gull identification, which includes detaifs of ageing, moult, and plumage topography, and stresses the bewildering range of individual variation. Each of the more distinct taxa is then treated separately, with a general introduc- tion followed by an overview of status and distribution, including British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 205-208 207 Reviews ) comments on real, as well as poten- tial, vagrancy patterns. Poorly understood subspecies or forms are also mentioned in some accounts (e.g. Black-headed Gull Laras ridi- bundus of the form sibiricus and California Gull L. californicus of the form albertiensis). The identifi- cation accounts describe size and structure, followed by plumage details from juveniles through to adults, all footage being labelled with dates and locations. For closely related species, very useful direct comparisons are made by using freeze-frame and stills to highlight the main plumage cri- teria for separation. Finally, the calls of most gulls are given, a sur- prisingly useful feature in locating some species. This is an excellent video, with some superb footage (the Red- legged Kittiwakes Rissa brevirostris are quite stunning) which I really enjoyed watching. The commen- tary is easy to follow, and Bill Oddie did not get where he is today without being able to keep viewers entertained (despite the - arguably - rather dry subject matter). The work is thorough and clearly well researched and, in particular, 1 liked the pragmatic approach adopted, avoiding some of the dogma associated with current gull identification and taxonomy. While there is some treatment of hybrid gulls (particularly from the west coast of North America), I felt that this could have been expanded to include, for example. Herring L. argentatus x Lesser Black-backed Gulls L. fuscus. I would also have appreciated some advice con- cerning where to watch gulls (most birders do not habitually visit land- fill sites, sewage outfalls or pig farms) and the most appropriate weather conditions to choose (cold, sunny days are quite the worst conditions). These are, however, minor quibbles. This video provides an excellent refer- ence for even the most seasoned gull-watchers, as well as for reason- ably experienced birders who have yet to grasp the proverbial nettle, although there is perhaps rather too much detail here for beginners. At just over five-and-a-half hours, there is a lot of material to get through, and even for the most obsessed gull-fanatic this is a lot to watch. Surely, a DVD or CD-ROM version would make it a much more practical source of reference; not since watching the film Basic Instinct have I employed the pause and rewind buttons so much on my video. Love them or loathe them, gulls always generate some form of debate. If you wish to be a little more informed, this video is well worth buying, although there is no substitute for your local rubbish dump. Stephen Votier NORFOLK: A BIRDWATCHER’S SITE GUIDE By Phil Benstead, Steve Rowland & Richard Thomas. Shoebill Books, Cambridge, 2001. 106 pages; maps. ISBN 0-9528065-1-7. Paperback, £12.95. At last, Norfolk, Britain’s premier county for birdwatching, has its own site guide, and this well-pro- duced book is most welcome. With a suitable colour photograph adorning the front cover, the authors have divided the county into four main areas: West, North, East and the Broads, and the Brecks. Within each area, the bird- watching sites are described in detail, with excellent maps for the most important locations. It was good to see the Birdwatcher’s Code of Conduct brought to prominence at the beginning, and spread over two pages. The individual site entries contain a great deal of information on a selection of species throughout the year. The location, the car-parks and how to get there are all noted, using Ordnance Survey six-figure map references, and the opening times and access arrangements of reserves are well covered. A selection of 'bird- watching tips’ for each site is most useful when planning a trip, partic- ularly for special species. I espe- cially liked the inclusion of directions to the nearest garage and other useful amenities. There is obviously some bias towards the famed north Norfolk coast, and certainly this is true for Holme, Titchwell, Holkham, Wells and Cley. It was good to see other less well-known areas mentioned, such as Stiffkey Fen and Kelling Quags, although 1 found the omis- sion of Scolt Head’s potential, and of the seawatching facilities and track-record of both Sheringham and Cromer, puzzling. In the East and Broads section, which I know best, 20 chosen sites were well spread out, and in most cases care- fully researched. In Great Yarmouth, however, Mediterranean Gulls Larus melanocephalus are best looked for in the central beach area, not north of the town, and the harbour entrance is, sadly, no longer a haunt of Purple Sand- pipers Calidris maritima, although these are, admittedly, only minor inaccuracies. I would also have chosen to include both Winterton south dunes and the Burgh Castle area. For the West section, it was good to see the Cambridgeshire Ouse Washes mentioned (since they link up with Welney), but, for the Brecks, the authors have listed Mayday Farm without mentioning that it is in fact in Suffolk. The book concludes with a full Norfolk species list, plus a list of all useful addresses, together with tele- phone numbers and websites. I thought that the book was a little overpriced for a spiral-bound volume, but it is easy to read and is an essential guide for all seasoned birdwatchers who live in or intend to visit this magical county. Peter Allard 208 British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 205-208 Monthly Marathon 1 09. 'Monthly Marathon’. Photo no. 1 85 — first stage in the twelfth Marathon. I 1 0. 'Monthly Marathon'. Photo no. 1 86 - second stage in the twelfth Marathon. III. ‘Monthly Marathon'. Photo no. 1 87 - third stage in the twelfth Marathon. As reported in the March issue {Brit. Birds 95: 150-151), the long- running eleventh ‘Marathon’ was eventually won by Peter Sunesen, and a new one has now started. In order to give as many new competitors as pos- sible a chance to enter the twelfth ‘Marathon’ (for which the first three pictures have already appeared), we have extended the closing date for the answers to all three of the first stages of this competition to 30th April 2002. To recap: photo no. 185 (plate 10, in the January 2002 issue) is the first stage in the twelfth ‘Marathon’, photo no. 186 (plate 36, in February) is the second, and photo no. 187 (plate 77, in March) is the third stage; all are repeated here as plates 109-111. Read the rules (see page 36), then send in your answers on a postcard to Monthly Marathon, c/o The Banks, Mountfield, Roberts- bridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY, or by e-mail to editor@british- birds. co.uk, to arrive by 30th April 2002. Each answer should be sent on a separate postcard or in a separate e-mail. Do not miss the chance to take part in this competition. Remember that you could be the next one to win £1,500 towards the SUNBIRD holiday of your choice. Photo no. 188 (the fourth stage in this twelfth competi- tion) will appear in the May issue of BB. For a free brochure, write to SUNBIRD (MM). PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG 1 9 I DF, or telephone 01767 682969 Sunbird The best of bird watching tours © British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 209 209 Vlike Ash forth Robin Chittenden George Reszeter Recent reports Compiled by Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan I 1 2. Black-necked Grebes Podiceps nigricollis, Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire, March 2002. 1 1 3. Snowy Egret Egretta thula, Isle of Arran, Ayrshire, March 2002. I 1 4. Adult Bonaparte's Gull Larus Philadelphia (right), with Black-headed Gull L ridibundus, Millbrook. Cornwall, February 2002. 210 © British Birds 95 • April 2002 - 210-212 Mike Ash forth Recent reports I his summary of unchecked reports covers mid February to mid March 2002. White-billed Diver Gavia adamsii Loch Gairloch (Highland), 3rd March. Snowy Egret Egretta thula Isle of Arran (Ayrshire), until at least 9th March. Great White Egret Egretta alba Warham Green (Norfolk), 13th February, presumed same at Fladdiscoe Marsh, Acle and Great Yarmouth, 16th February, and Hemsby, 19th- 23rd February (all Norfolk); one still in Cheshire, until at least 10th March. Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis Studland (Dorset), until at least 9th March. King Eider Somateria spectabilis Holkham (Norfolk), until at least 9th March. Gyr Falcon Falco rusticolus Quoys of Reiss (Highland), 14th February; Islay (Argyll), 22nd February to 4th March; Kilcar (Co. Donegal), 23rd-26th February; Stronsay (Orkney), lst- 2nd March; Fanad Head (Co. Donegal), 2nd March; South Stack, Anglesey (Gwynedd), 7th- 9th March. Long-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus scolopaceus One still at Belfast Harbour Estate (Co. Down), to at least 10th March. Bonaparte’s Gull Larus Philadelphia Adult still at Millbrook (Cornwall), until at least 8th March. Iceland Gull L. glaucoide s 75 at Killybegs (Co. Donegal), 20th February, and 40 there on 8th March. Ross’s Gull Rhodostethia rosea Adult still at Ply- mouth (Devon), until 5th March; adult, Nimmo’s Pier (Co. Galway), until 2nd March; Sennen Cove (Cornwall), 19th February; adult, Killybegs, lst-2nd March; Peterhead (Northeast Scotland), 9th- 10th March. Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea Adult still at Blackrock Sands (Gwynedd), until 27th February; Fairhaven Beach (Lancashire), 14th- 15th February. Olive-backed Pipit Anthus hodgsom Lynford Arboretum (Norfolk), until 15th February. Hume’s Warbler Phylloscopus humei One still at Newbiggin (Northumberland), until at least 9th March. European Serin Serinus serinus Foot’s Cray (Greater London), 28th February to 10th March. Arctic Redpoll Carduelis hornemanni One still at Titchwell (Norfolk), until at least 14th February. I 1 5. Adult Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea, Blackrock Sands. Gwynedd, February 2002. In the last few months, the rare-bird headlines seemed to have been dominated by gulls, but we make no apologies for including more pictures of the same individuals this month. Many observers have commented that they did not realise just how startlingly white an adult Ivory Gull is until seeing the Gwynedd bird. 21 I British Birds 95 • April 2002 • 2 1 0-2 1 2 Alan Tate Recent reports 1 1 6. Olive-backed Pipit Anthus hodgsoni, Lynford Arboretum, Norfolk, February 2002. I 1 7. Hume's Warbler Phylloscopus humei, Newbiggin, Northumberland, March 2002. a Rare Bird News supplies all its information free to British Birds. Call 09063 888 1 I I for the latest, up-to-date news (28p/min cheap rate; 4 I p/min other times; including VAT) Call 07626 923923 to report your sightings to the hotline Recent BBRC decisions This regular listing of the most recent decisions by the British Birds Rarities Committee is not intended to be comprehensive or in any way to replace the annual 'Report on rare birds in Great Britain’. The records listed are mostly those of the rarest species, or those of special interest for other reasons. All records refer to 2001 unless stated otherwise. Accepted: Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps Upper Tamar Lake (Devon/Cornwall), 8th January to 24th February. Black-browed Albatross Diomedea melanophris Dunge- ness (Kent), 4th May; Rockall Bank (Sea area Rockall), 3rd- 4th August. Baillon’s Crake Porzana pusilla Oare Marshes (Kent), 26th June to 6th July. Black-winged Pratincole Glareola nordmanni Mona (Anglesey), 4th-20th July. Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gre- garius Pett Level (East Sussex), 30th September to 4th October. Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus Long Nanny Burn (Northum- berland), 24th-25th June. Laughing Gull Larus atricilla Stewartby Lake (Bedfordshire), 27th January to 4th February. Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea Scalloway (Shetland), 12th November. BrUnnich’s Guillemot Uria lomvia North Ronaldsay (Orkney), dead, 29th January. Great Spotted Cuckoo Clamator glandarius Sandwich Bay (Kent), 7th March. Eurasian Scops Owl Otus scops Cunningsburgh (Shetland), 14th May. Little Swift Apus affinis Netherfield lagoons (Nottinghamshire), 26th-29th May. Cliff Swallow Hirundo pyrrhonota St Agnes and other islands (Scilly), 26th- 30th October. Sardinian Warbler Sylvia melanocephala St Margaret’s (Kent), 10th-25th March. Short-toed Treecreeper Certhia brachydactyla Dunge- ness, 27th-30th March. Two- barred Crossbill Loxia leucoptera Fame Islands (Northumberland), 8th- 10th July. White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis Oil instal- lation Maerske Curlew (Sea area Dogger), 6th June. ZEISS The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd. Chairman; Colin Bradshaw, 9 Tynemouth Place, Tynemouth, Tyne & Wear NE30 4BJ Secretary: M. J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, St Ives, Cornwall TR26 3AZ 212 British Birds 95 • April 2002 * 210-212 Jim Pattinson Classified advertising RATES Text: 50p per word. Minimum cost: £10. Semi-display: Mono. £15 per see (width 40mm) or £32 per dec (width 85mm). Minimum 2cm. Series: 5% discount for 6, 10% discount for 12. (All rates exclude vat at 17.5%) Payment for all classified advertisements must be made in advance by VISA, Mastercard or by cheque payable to British Birds. Copy deadline: 10th of the month. Contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd., 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2627. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BOOKS BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD. Visit our website for our online catalogue Visit our shop and see our extensive collection. Hawkridge Books, The Cruck Barn, Cross St, Castleton, Derbyshire S30 2WH. Tel: 01433 621999. Fax: 01433 621862. Email: books@hawkridge.co.uk. Web: www.hawkridge.co.uk RARE AND OUT OF PRINT books on Ornithology. Isabelline Books. Tel: 01326 210412. Fax: 0870051 6387. BACK NUMBERS OF ALL leading ornithological and natural history journals, reports, bulletins, newsletters, etc. bought and sold. Catalogue details: David Morgan, Whitmore, Umberleigh, Devon EX37 9HB or www.birdjournals.com The original BIRDWATCHER’S LOGBOOK The most concise way to record your observations. Monthly, annual and life columns for 762 species, plus 159 diary pages. Send £7.45 inclusive P/P to: Coxton Publications, Eastwood, Beverley Rd, Walkington, Beverley, HU17 8RP. 01482 881833 HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION England NORFOLK - BLAKENEY. COMFORTABLE cottage with marsh views. Quiet location, short walk to quay. Sleeps 4. Fully equipped, with washing machine and drier. Tel: 01582 769323. Scotland SPEYSIDE, NETHY BRIDGE cottages by river & forest. Private gardens, sleep 2-9 STB : of Europe - Jonsson - #49559 12.99 u r -dwatching Guide to Eastern Spain - #108192 9.95 L i : of Israel - Shirihai - #21254 u ' ; of the Western Palearctic - Complete (9 V tees) - #32807 C , of the Western Palearctic - Complete (CD) 1 r a 8 Perrins - #28660 £ ns Bird Guide - Svensson et al. - #113220 12.99 I ns Bird Guide: Large Format - #106883 22.99 - CComplete Guide to the Birdlife of Britain 21.00 a:, rope - Hayman 8 Hume - #121 164 t i Atlas of European Breeding Birds - #53830 S > of Britain & Europe - Peterson et al. - #22327 C: Guide to Birds of the Middle East 25.99 } etal.- #45653 ng Birds in Britain - Lee GR Evans - #123780 - i New to Britain & Ireland - Palmer - #111106 C a I book of Bird Identification Beaman & Madge #17061 52.00 5 : rical Atlas of Breeding birds in Britain 6 nd - Holloway - #44008 5 idic Bird Guide - #120994 27.99 G t'ification Guide to Non-passerines - Baker - #29342 G • ification Guide to European Passerines -■ on - #889 G 1 rtant Bird Areas of Europe - Heath & Evans - #101969 3 ' Tlacmillan Birder's Guide to European and V Eastern birds - #52543 G '• Macmillan Field Guide to Bird Identification - #24237 G Atlas of Breeding Birds - Gibbons et al. - #20923 J t >lk A Birdwatcher’s Site Guide - Benstead et al - #126833 G : e to Watch Birds Herefordshire, Shrops, SW Warwickshire, Worcs - Helm - #65059 3' eto Watch Birds in Thames Valley and the q r is (NYP 04/2002) - Helm - #125993 89.00 hbk 6569 pbk 6965 pbk 78.95 hbk 250.00 hbk 116.33 CD -46:99 pbk -29:99 hbk 6566 hbk 59.95 hbk 19.99 hbk -34435 hbk 19.95 pbk 25.00 hbk -6560 hbk 31.95 hbk 6265 hbk 19.50 pbk 36.00 pbk 75.00 pbk 17.99 hbk 14.99 pbk 53.95 hbk 12.95 pbk 12.99 pbk 14.99 pbk N ) America ■ fer's Guide to Florida - #779 24.50 spr cider's Guide to the Rio Grande Valley - #100616 24.50 spr Oder's Guide to SE Arizona - #44527 22.95 spr ider's Guide to S. California - #86478 24.50 spr Guide to the Birds of N. America 12.99 pbk al Geographic - #8871 1 lide to N. American Birds Part 1 - Pyle - #75330 29.99 pbk American Bird Guide - Sibley - #106918 a 25.00 pbk South & Central America & Caribbean □ Where to Watch Birds in Mexico - Howell - #85698 15.99 □The Birds of Ecuador vol 1 - Ridgely 8 Greenfield - #21379 44.00 □The Birds of Ecuador vol 2 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #117744 32.00 □The Birds of Ecuador, 2-volume set - #118677 64.00 □ Birds, Mammals & Reptiles of the Galapagos 13.99 - Swash & Still - #86419 □ Birds of the West Indies - Raffaele et al. - #69140 28.99 □ Birds of Southern S. America 14.99 - de la Pena & Rumboll - #66504 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Peru 36.99 - Clements et al - #63442 □ Guide to Birds of Costa Rica - Stiles et al. - #4386 32.00 □ Guide to Birds of Trinidad & Tobago - French - #14770 25.00 □ Lista de Chequeo de las Aves de Colombia / 10.00 Checklist of the Birds of Colombia - #126076 Africa, Middle East & Indian Ocean Islands □The Birds of Africa vol 1 - Fry et al. - #571 □The Birds of Africa vol 2 - Fry et al. - #572 □The Birds of Africa vol 3 - Fry et al. - #2780 □The Birds of Africa vol 4 - Fry et al. - #10567 □The Birds of Africa vol 5 - Fry et al. - #19103 □The Birds of Africa vol 6 - Fry et al. - #19104 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - #40871 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - field guide - #127592 □ Birds of Madagascar: a Photographic Guide - #54245 □ Birds of Western Africa: An Identification Guide - #40675 □Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of Eastern Africa - #43706 □ Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of S Africa - #86446 □ Birds of East Africa - Stevenson & Fanshawe - #22326 □ Birds of the Gambia & Senegal - Barlow et al. - #31919 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Seychelles - #116115 □ Important Bird Areas in Africa and Associated Islands - #120103 □ Important Bird Areas in Uganda - RSPB, Byaruhanga et al. - #124739 □ Newman's Birds of Southern Africa - #115772 □SASOL Birds of Prey of Africa & its islands - #85607 □SASOL Birds of Southern Africa - #691 10 Asia & Pacific □Checklist of Birds of the Oriental Region - #54331 □ Field Guide to Birds of Bhutan - #97388 See BB Books online at www.nhbs.com/bb-books 6969 pbk 6569 pbk 6969 pbk -8969 pbk 6665 pbk 6569 hbk 6969 pbk 6969 pbk 6969 pbk 6299 pbk 6269 pbk 13060 hbk 130.00 hbk 130.00 hbk 115.00 hbk 120.00 hbk 115.00 hbk 40.00 hbk 16.99 pbk 28.00 hbk 55.00 hbk 19.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 29.95 hbk 28.00 hbk 25.00 pbk 55.00 hbk 16.00 pbk 15.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 10.00 pbk 16.99 pbk JBirdwatching Guide to Oman - Eriksen et al. - #126092 JBirds of the Indian Ocean Islands - #70343 JBirds of the Indian Subcontinent - Grimmett et al - #69141 □The Birds of Japan - #10075 22.00 □The Birds of New Guinea - #1683 □ Field Guide to the Birds of China - #101745 □ Field Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #66407 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Korea - Woo-Shin et al - #1 19805 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Nepal - #107846 □ Field Guide to the Birds of SE Asia - Robson • #126456 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka - #83310 JField Guide to Birds of W. Malaysia & Singapore - #83306 □Guide to the Birds of the Philippines - #101746 □Guide to the Birds of Thailand - #9945 □Guide to the Birds of Wallacea - #31250 □ Birdwatchers' Guide to India - #82704 □Threatened Birds of Asia (2 Volume Set) - #120107 □Threatened Birds of Asia CD-ROM - #125996 Australasia □ Collins Field Guide to Birds of Australia - #88226 □ Field Guide to Australian Birds - Morcombe - #122064 □ Field Guide to Birds of Australia - Simpson 8 Day - #107606 □ HANZAB vol 1 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10556 □HANZAB vol 2 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10667 □ HANZAB vol 3 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10668 □ HANZAB vol 4 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10669 □ HANZAB vol 5 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10670 □The Hand Guide to the Birds of New Zealand - #116574 World □ Birds of the World: a checklist - Clements - #101888 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 1 - #17555 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 2 - #17556 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 3 - #17557 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 4 - #17558 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 5 - #17559 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 6 - #17561 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 7 - #17562 □ Handbook to the Birds of the World. Volumes 1-7 - #127049 □Threatened Birds of the World - BirdLife - #1 10198 □World Bird Species Checklist - Wells - #77401 Monographs □ Albatrosses - Tickell - #101886 □The Atlantic Gannet - Nelson - #123245 □ Buntings & Sparrows - Byers et al. - #21255 □The California Condor - Snyder 8 Snyder - #105565 □ Crows & jays - Madge 8 Burn - #97387 □Cuckoos, Cowbirds & other cheats - Davies - #104272 □ Raptors of Europe, Middle East 8 N. Africa - Clark 8 Schmitt - #54599 □ Finches & Sparrows - Clement et al. - #97396 □The Golden Eagle - Watson - #53818 □The Great Auk - Fuller - #101175 20.00 pbk 17.99 pbk 55.00 hbk -40^0 hbk 35.00 pbk 29.99 pbk 25.00 hbk 24.95 pbk 19.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 29.95 pbk 32.50 pbk 34.95 pbk 45.00 hbk 41.00 hbk 18.75 pbk 55.00 hbk 12.00 CD 19.99 pbk 23.95 pbk 24.99 pbk 155.00 hbk 75.00 hbk 75.00 hbk 145.00 hbk 135.00 hbk 19.50 pbk 35.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110 00 hbk 770.00 hbk 70.00 hbk 29.50 hbk 40.00 hbk 24.50 hbk 28.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 16.99 pbk 24.95 hbk 26.50 pbk 19.99 pbk 31.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 15.40 □ Gulls: A guide to identification - Grant - #580 □ Swallows & Martins - Turner 8 Rose - #3929 □The Hobby - Chapman - #103400 □ Munias and Mannikins - Restall - #54237 □The Mute Swan - Birkhead 8 Perrins - #1 165 □ New World Blackbirds - Jaramillo 8 Burke - #82707 □ New World Warblers - Curson et al - #29510 □ Nightjars & their Allies - Holyoak - #105584 □ The Nuthatches - Matthysen 8 Quinn - #69079 □ Owls - Konig et al - #66408 □ Parrots - Juniper a Parr - #65486 □The Peregrine - Ratdiffe - #858 □ Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse - #66365 □ Pigeons 8 Doves - Gibbs et al. - #66403 □ Pittas, Broadbills and Asities - #29868 □ Rails - Taylor 8 van Perlo - #66402 □ Raptors of Europe and the Middle East - Forsman - #55844 23.95 □ Raptors of the World - Ferguson-lees et al, - #5601 □The Red Kite - Carter - #115639 □ Seabirds: An Identification Guide - Harrison - #851 □ Seabirds of the Word: A photographic guide - Harrison - #63122 □ Shorebirds - Hayman et al. - #554 □ Shrikes - Lefranc 8 Worfolk - #54240 □ Shrike 8 Bush-Shrikes - Harris 8 Franklin - #105227 □ Skuas 8 Jaegers - Olsen 8 Larsen - #63425 13.20 □ Starlings a Mynas - Feare 8 Craig - #82706 □ Sunbirds 8 Flowerpeckers - Cheke 8 Mann - #66414 □ Swifts - Chantler 8 Driessens - #86417 □Sylvia Warblers - Shirihai et al. - #107849 □ Thrushes - Clement et al. - #107850 □Tits, Nuthatches 8 Treecreepers - Harrap 8 Quinn - #13707 □Toucans, Barbets and Honeyguides - Short a Horne - #101743 □ Tundra Plovers - Byrkjedal 8 Thompson - #69080 □Warblers of Europe, Asia 8 N. Africa - Baker - #65060 □ Wildfowl - Madge 8 Burn - #2621 □The World of the Hummingbird - Burton - #124511 □Wrens, Dippers 8 Thrashers - Brewer - #66416 25.95 hbk 27.99 hbk 22.50 hbk ~28r00 hbk 15.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 27.99 hbk 50.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 36.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 38.00 hbk 26 00 hbk 35.00 hbk ^95 hbk 49.00 hbk 22.50 hbk 29.99 hbk 15.99 pbk 29.99 hbk 25.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 24-00 hbk 32.00 hbk 37.00 hbk 28.00 hbk 60.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 29 99 hbk 60.00 hbk 29.95 hbk 32.00 hbk 29.99 hbk 27.95 hbk 35 00 hbk Recordings & Videos □ African Bird Sounds, 2-Volume Set - Chappuis: North, West 8 Central Africa and Atlantic Islands - #119048 □ Bill Oddies’s Video Guide to British Birds - #98805 □The Birds of Britain and Europe, 4-Video Set - #39466 □ Bird Songs and Calls of Britain and Europe (Complete 4 CD Set) - #63342 □ Eastern Rarities: The Birds of Beidaihe - #86435 □The Raptors of Britain and Europe - Video - #49316 □ Sound Guide to Nightjars 8 related Nightbirds - #82371 □ A Sound Guide to the Owls of the World - #84226 □The Warblers of Britain and Europe - Video - #86434 159.95 CD 17.95 vid 49.94 vid 4694 CD 8.28 17.95 vid 17.95 vid -44t99 CD 24.99 CD 17.95 vid Miscellaneous □ Birders - tales of a tribe - Cocker - #120708 □ Who Killed the Great Auk? - Gaskell - #111124 15.99 hbk 18.99 hbk BB binders are now available from British Birds, tel: 01580 882039 Prices quoted in £ (UK Sterling). All special offer prices are valid until 31 May 2002, other prices quoted are subject to any publishers increases and all sales subject to NHBS Ltd Terms & Conditions (available on request). VAT is included in the price of CDs, Videos etc as applicable. Make all cheques and POs payable to NHBS Ltd. Payment can also be made in USS & C, please contact customer services for details. Orders are normally despatched promptly from stock, but please allow up to 21 days for delivery in the UK, longer if abroad. Name Address Telephone Postcode Subscriber No Email Please sign here Please debft my Visa/Mastercard/Switch/AMEX | _ | _ | _ | Switch - Start date I I I / I I I Issue No AMEX - Start date Goods total £ P&P total £ Total £ Expiry date UJ /|. I / I I Codel VISA Standard Service (books) postage & packing charges and delivery times Special overseas postaqe rates apply to sets & heavy items Video Maps/CDs Over In transit (Per (Per Up to ^nd £5.00 including £10.00 £30.00 £45.00 £65.00 £100 £100 times (ti oin i If | ,i * . Ill item) item) United Kingdom£1.00 £2.00 £4.00 £4.50 £5.50 £7.50 £7.50 3 days £2.00 £1.25 Europe £1.50 £4.00 £5.00 £6.50 £8.50 £10.50 11% 5 days £2.50 £1.50 Rest of World £2.00 £4.50 £6.00 £7.00 £10.00 16% 16% 20 days £3.00 £2.00 Please send order to: BB Books, do NHBS Ltd, 2-3 Wills Rd, Totnes, Devon TQ9 5XN, UK A4DIW OCCIOH I A10A9 OCCA19 UU U/\/\l/r/^lr«UUr . -sliN/ai/r ni ant a KU.UaaI/c iltlkoA Al’^P^' Guidelines for contributors British Birds publishes material dealing with original observations on the birds of the Western Palearctic. Except for records of rarities, papers and notes are normally accepted for publication only on condition that the material is not being offered in whole or in part to any other journal or magazine. Photographs and drawings are welcomed. Referees are used where appropriate, and all submissions are reviewed by the 88 Editorial Board or Notes Panel. Contributions should, if possible, be submitted on disk or (preferably) by e-mail, to the Editor. Most word-processing applications are suitable, but, if you are not using an up-to-date, standard program, it is best to submit two versions, one in the original word-processed format and one in a basic text format such as RTF (Rich Text Format). For contributors without access to a computer, text should be submitted in duplicate, typewritten, with double spacing and wide margins, and on one side of the paper only. Hand-drawn figures should be in black ink on good-quality tracing paper or white drawing paper; lettering should be inserted lightly in pencil, while captions should be typed separately. Please discuss computer-generated maps and figures with the Editor before submitting them. For use in main papers, notes and letters, photographs should preferably be either 35-mm transparencies or high-quality prints. Digital images are acceptable, but, to ensure good reproduction, these should be saved as a TIFF or an EPS file with a resolution of no more than 300 dpi and an image width of at least 13 cm and supplied on a CD-ROM. Digital images with lower resolution, or in other formats (e.g. JPEGs), do not reproduce well, and will be used more sparingly, and usually only when there is no alternative (for example, for ‘Recent reports’). Digital images should be sent to the Design and Production team atThe Banks (see inside front cover), and large images should be submitted on CD-ROM. With the increasing use of digital photography, some photographers will wish to supply images taken with digital cameras. To ensure that our high standard of photographic reproduction is maintained, however, we would ask all photographers to read the Code of Practice for the Supply of Digital Images issued by the Association of Photographers, posted on its website as a downloadable Adobe Acrobat PDF file www.aophoto.co.uk/aoppdfs/DIGcode.pdf Only images of the very highest quality, supplied as a 35-mm transparency, will be considered for a front-cover illustration. Papers should be concise and factual, taking full account of previous literature and avoiding repetition as much as possible. Opinions should be based on adequate evidence. Authors are encouraged to submit their work to other ornithologists for critical assessment and comment prior to submission. Such help received should be acknowledged in a separate section. For main papers, an abstract summarising the key results and conclusions should be included, but should not exceed 5% of the total length. Authors should carefully consult this issue for style of presentation, especially of references and tables. English and scientific names and sequence of birds should follow The ‘British Birds’ List of Birds of the Western Palearctic (1997); or, for non- West Palearctic species, Monroe & Sibley (1993), A World Checklist of Birds. Names of plants should follow Dony et al. (1986), English Names of Wild Flowers. Names of mammals should follow Corbet & Harris (1991), The Handbook of British Mammals, 3rd edition. Topographical (plumage and structure) and ageing terminology should follow editorial recommendations (Brit. Birds 74: 239-242; 78: 419-427:80:502). Authors of main papers (but not notes or letters) will receive five free copies of the journal (plus three each to subsidiary authors of multi-authored papers). Further copies may be available on request in advance, but will be charged for. A schedule of payment rates for contributors (including authors, artists and photographers) is available from the Editor. If you would like further details of a particular tour, please call us now! Or visit www.naturetrek.co.uk ZAMBIA 08-17 Feb 2002 05- 1 4 Apr 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 Naturetrek, Cheriton Mill, Cheriton, Alresford, Hampshire S024 ONG Tel: 0 1 962 73305 1 Fax: 0 1 962 736426 e-mail: info@naturetrek.co.uk web: www.naturetrek.co.uk These action-packed, long-haul birding tours - each led by an expert local ornithologist - offer excellent value for money, and outstanding birding. ETHIOPIA 08-17 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 NAMIBIA 18 - 27 Jan 2002 08- 1 7 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 ETHIOPIAN ENDEMICS 15-24 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 22 Nov - 0 1 Dec 2002 NEPAL Departs every Friday throughout Jan & Feb 03- 1 2 May 2002 17-26 May 2002 FLORIDA 08-17 Feb 2002 GAMBIA 25 Oct - 05 Nov 2002 INDIA 08- 16 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 06 Apr 2002 15-23 Nov 2002 KAZAKHSTAN 16-24 May 2002 23-31 May 2002 MALAWI 08-17 Feb 2002 08-17 Mar 2002 NEPAL - THE IBISBILL TREK 10 - 19 May 2002 24 May - 02 Jun 2002 SOUTH AFRICA 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SOUTH AFRICA - CAPE BIRDING 23 Mar - I Apr 2002 23 Aug - 0 1 Sep 2002 06-15 Sep 2002 SOUTHERN MOROCCO 15-24 Feb 2002 01 - 10 Mar 2002 05- 1 4 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SRI LANKA 08-17 Feb 2002 15 -24 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 15-24 Mar 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 THAILAND 08-17 Feb 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 WASHINGTON STATE 1 3 - 2 1 Apr 2002 UAE & OMAN 24 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 31 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 10- 17 Nov 2002 Bird Photograph of the Year ritish Birds ISSN 0007-0335 British Birds Established 1907, incorporating The Zoologist, established 1843 Published by BB 2000 Limited, trading as ‘British Birds’ Registered Office: 4 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London WC2E 8SF British Birds aims to be the leading journal for the modern birder in the Western Palearctic Its key objectives are to: ♦> provide a forum for contributions of interest to all birdwatchers in the region; ♦> publish material on behaviour, conservation, distribution, ecology, identification, movements, status and taxonomy; •> embrace new ideas and research; and ♦> maintain its position as the respected journal of record. British Birds Editor Roger Riddington Assistant Editors Caroline Dudley 8c Peter Kennerley Editorial Board Ian Carter, Richard Chandler, Martin Collinson, Robin Prytherch, Nigel Redman, Roger Riddington Art Consultants Robert Gillmor 8c Alan Harris Photographic Research Robin Chittenden David Tipling Design Mark Corliss Rarities Committee Chairman Colin Bradshaw Hon. Secretary Michael J. Rogers Paul Harvey, John McLoughlin, John Martin, Doug Page, Adam Rowlands, Ken Shaw, Brian Small, Jimmy Steele, Reg Thorpe, Grahame Walbridge Archivist John Marchant Statistician Peter Fraser Museum consultant Ian Lewington Notes Panel Colin Bibby, Ian Dawson, Jim Flegg, Ian Newton FRS, Malcolm Ogilvie, Angela Turner (Co-ordinator) Annual subscription rates Libraries and agencies - £72.00 Personal subscriptions UK and overseas surface mail - £56.50 Overseas airmail - £88.00 Concessionary rates (Available only to individual members of the RSPB, BTO, IWC, SOC, County Bird Clubs 8c Societies and other National or Regional organisations) UK - £42.00 Overseas surface mail - £46.00 Overseas airmail - £69.50 Single back issues - £6.50 Available from British Birds, The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Rarities Issue - £10 (available as above) Please make all cheques payable to British Birds Guidelines for Contributors: see inside back cover or visit the BB website. www.britishbirds.co.uk EDITORIAL Chapel Cottage, Dunrossness, Shetland ZE2 9JH Tel 8c Fax: 01 950 460080 Papers, notes, letters, illustrations, etc. Roger Riddington E-mail: editor@britishbirds.co.uk ‘News 8c comment’ information Bob Scott 8c Adrian Pitches, 8 Woodlands, St Neots, Cambridgeshire PE19 1UE Tel: 01480 214904 Fax: 01480 473009 E-mail: abscott@tiscali.co.uk Rarity descriptions M. J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, Cornwall TR26 3AZ CIRCULATION & PRODUCTION The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel: 01 580 882039 Fax: 01580 882038 Subscriptions & Circulation Vivienne Hunter E-mail: subscriptions@britishbirds.co.uk Design & Production Philippa Leegood E-mail: design@britishbirds.co.uk Accounts dr Administration Hazel Jenner E-mail: accounts@helm-information.co.uk ADVERTISING: for all advertising matters, please contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd, 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London Nl 3QP Tel: 020 7704 9495 Fax: 020 7704 2767 E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk Front-cover photograph: Atlantic Puffin Fratercula orctica Hermaness, Shetland, June 2000. David Tipling SWAROVSKI O P T I K WITH THE EYES OF A HAWK Swarovski U.K. LTD. • Perrywood Business Park • Salfords, Surrey RH1 5JQ Tel. 01737-856812 • Fax 01737-856885 • E-mail: Christine. percy@swarovski.eom ur all-rounder in a new light: the warovski SLC series* now with a orldwide unique prism coating! A/AROBRIGHT® is an innovative coating jchnology making it possible for the rst time to selectively control the light in the prism system id, as a result, the colour behaviour. A/AROBRIGHT® thus ensures a degree : reflection of 99.5 °/o over the entire idth of the light spectrum. The optical ^ Exception: Swarovski SLC 8 x 30 WB advantages of our SLC models are thus even clearer: best colour fidelity and the highest light transmission. However, the SLC binoculars have further striking benefits: • Durable light-alloy housing for extreme sturdiness despite the light weight. • Absolutely air- and watertight thanks to nitrogen filling and interior focus- ing. • Ergonomic design with perfect balance and thumb depressions. • Noise and shock-absorbing rubber armouring: pleasant to handle even in extreme cold conditions. • Ergonomic central focusing wheel: easy to use, even with gloves. For further information about the Swarovski SLC models visit our web- site at www.swarovskioptik.com or contact your Swarovski dealer. New Diascopes from Carl Zeiss ZEISS New Carl Zeiss Diascopes T* FL • 65 mm and 85 mm Objectives • Straight and Angled bodies. • 2 fixed magnification eyepieces and 1 variable eyepiece • Fluoride glass • Waterproof, Nitrogen filled For details of your nearest Carl Zeiss Dealer. Please contact our helpline 01707 871350. British Birds Volume 95 Number 5 May 2002 2 1 4 David Christie: an appreciation 2 1 6 Descriptive update on gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull’ Valery A. Buzun 233 Flight identification of Common Eider, King Eider and Steller’s Eider Anders Blomdahl, Bertil Breife and Niklas Holmstrom 240 Bird Photograph of the Year Roger Riddington, Tim Appleton, Richard Chandler, Robin Chittenden and David Tipling Regular features 249 Looking back - 75 years ago 250 Conservation research news Compiled by Ken Smith and Jeremy Wilson 25 I Looking back - 75 years ago 252 Note White-tailed Black Storks in the Iberian peninsula Luis Santiago Cano Alonso 253 Letters Conservation problems with the recognition of new species W. R. P. Bourne The use of digital images in record assessment Ian Copley Ruddy Duck: facts and fiction Bernard Zonfrillo The 1945 winter Cornish record of the Common Rosefmch D. I. M. Wallace 257 Obituary Karel Hendrik Voous (1920-2002) 260 News and comment Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches 263 Q Rarities Committee news BBRC request records of Red-headed Buntings The role of BBRC in the review of records for county avifaunas 264 @ Monthly Marathon 265 Reviews Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse: A Guide to the Pheasants, Partridges, Quails, Grouse, Guineafowl, Buttonquails and Sandgrouse of the World by Steve Madge and Phil McGowan, with Guy M. Kirwan Mike Everett Hummingbirds of North America: The Photographic Guide by Steve N. G. Howell Peter Lansdown Bird Migration: A General Survey by Peter Berthold David Parkin Hybrid Ducks: The 5th Contribution Towards an Inventory by Eric and Barry Gillham Keith Vinicombe A Farewell to Greenland’s Wildlife by Kjeld Hansen Kaj Kampp 268 Recent reports Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan © British Birds 2002 Carmelia (Cam) Christie HU David Christie: an appreciation 1 5 KAY 2G 2 KV David A. Christie first joined British Birds on 1st February 1973. On that same date, James Ferguson-Lees relinquished his post as Executive Editor of BB , that position being taken over by P. F. Bonham, to whom David acted as Assistant Editor. At that time, the editorial office was in Bedford, BB was still owned by H. F. & G. Witherby, and the annual subscription was £4.50. Soon after, on 1st April 1973, Macmillan Journals became owners of BB. In June 1974, Pat Bonham, and therefore the editorial office, moved to Rye in East Sussex, and David chose to go with it. Since he had been brought up on the Hampshire coast, and as the new office had a superb bird reserve nearby, at Rye Harbour, the decision was not a difficult one. One year later, however, in the midsummer of 1975, Pat Bonham resigned his post as Editor. At short notice, David agreed to take on the role of Acting Editor of BB , although this meant that he would be required to work from the Macmillan offices in London. David moved back to Southampton, where he had last lived in 1965 before he went to univer- sity, and commuted daily from there to London by train. For one year, he acted as the editor of BB almost unaided, with only minimal (but nonetheless much-appreciated) editorial and secretarial assistance. When, after many months, the post of Editor was finally adver- tised, David had decided that, enjoyable though the work was, he preferred to have at least some spare time available to pursue other ornitholog- ical matters. He did not, therefore, apply for the position, which was offered to Tim Sharrock. As a result of this appointment, the editorial office moved back to Bedfordshire, where the journal’s printers and Tim both resided. David resumed his former role of Assistant Editor, this time on a part-time basis and working from his home in Southampton. At the time when David took on the role of Acting Editor of BB, the journal’s publication was some three months behind schedule. During his year in London, David succeeded in bringing the publication I 1 8. David Christie, wearing newly purchased Tilley Hat', birdwatching at Studland, Dorset, April 2002. David’s old white hat has been one of the key field characters by which people identify him at long range. They should be informed that he has moulted into a new head plumage. 214 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 * 214-215 David Christie: an appreciation c back on schedule, so that readers could at last expect to receive, for example, the December issue in December, rather than in February or March. From July 1976, David worked in tandem with Tim Sharrock, helping to produce a first- rate journal, on schedule each month, and incorporating many of Tim’s innovative ideas. This close relationship, which soon developed into friendship, lasted just seven months short of 25 years, daily communication being by post, telephone and, in recent times, e-mail. Tim has commented that he could not have had a more skilled, meticulous, loyal, dedicated and helpful colleague. With Tim Sharrock’s retirement in December 2000, David once again held the edi- torial reins at BB until the present Editor, Roger Riddington, was appointed and took up his post, in February 2001. Even though David sub- sequently reverted to the role of Assistant Editor, his influence during this transition period was enormously valuable. During his first year, Roger admits that he would have struggled to survive without David’s constant help and sound judgement on all matters (with the exception of the state of English football), and endorses the tribute paid to David by Tim Sharrock. Over the years, David has always considered that ornithological accuracy and correct use of English should be given equal importance. His knowledge of foreign languages has been of immense value to the journal. In 1974, not long after joining BB , he translated from French a paper by Jacques Vielliard on the Purple Swamp-hen Porphyrio porphyrio in the marismas of the Guadalquivir, Spain {Brit. Birds 67: 230-236), and in subsequent years he has provided many translations of papers published in Swedish and German for use by the BBRC and by various authors whose work has appeared in BB. Although ‘only’ the Assistant Editor, David has dealt with an enormous range of texts throughout his time with the journal. Not only is he the ‘master’ of notes and letters on all kinds of subjects, but he has also edited well over 200 papers, both small and large, on topics ranging in diversity from official Reports and the results of scientific enquiries to texts on biology, ecology, distribution and population, accounts of influxes, identification, and many others. From the late 1980s onwards, he became increasingly involved with the editing of complex texts on, for instance, migration and identification, and co-authored a number of these with his good friend Hadoram Shirihai (e.g. Brit. Birds 85: 141-186; 91: 12-35). David says that he has thoroughly enjoyed all his years with BB, during which period he has, he tells us, learnt an indescribable amount about ornithology (and ornithologists!), as well as making many good friends. He informs us that he considers himself to have been greatly privileged to have had the chance to associate with the likes of Stanley Cramp, James Fer- guson-Lees, lan Wallace and others, and he retains the greatest respect for all those with whom he has worked during his time with BB. David’s service to BB, from his ‘initiation’ on the first day of February in 1973 to his depar- ture on the last day of March in 2002, spans 29 years and two months. This period of direct and active involvement in the editorial side of British Birds is longer than that of anybody else in the journal’s 95-year history, with the sole exception of its founder, Harry Witherby. This, together with the fact that he has effectively ‘saved’ BB on two separate occasions, confirms that he has made a truly outstanding contribu- tion to the journal. As such, we are delighted to announce that David is the latest addition to the list of Honorary Subscribers to British Birds. We wish David, and his wife Cam, all the very best for the future, and hope that David’s ‘retirement’ is as enjoyable as it deserves to be. To replace David, British Birds has appointed not one but two Assistant Editors. Taking the main responsibility for copy-editing and proof- reading is Caroline Dudley. Caroline, who began work at BB on 1st April, nows lives on the Isle of Wight where she works as a freelance proofreader and copy-editor. Previously, she had worked for the BTO as Assistant Nest Records Officer from 1986 to 1999. Peter Kennerley will also assist with editorial matters from 1st May. Peter lived and worked in Hong Kong from 1983 to 1993, and during that time he played an important role in the devel- opment of the Hong Kong Bird Report. He has now returned to Britain to live, and has co- authored a recent paper in BB {Brit. Birds 95: 42-61), as well as working on the forthcoming Helm Identification Guide Reed and Bush War- blers of the World. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 214-215 215 Descriptive update on gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull’ Valery A. B uzun ABSTRACT Information on the appearance, behaviour and ecology of taxa within the evolutionarily young ‘large white-headed gull’ complex (taxa currently grouped by three species, Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus fuscus. Herring Gull L. argentatus and Yellow-legged Gull L. cachinnans) is of interest to those ornithologists who study their identification, systematics and speciation. A sharp discrepancy has arisen between the demand for information about some of these taxa and the lack of elementary primary data. The delay in gathering data is due to the inaccessibility of the breeding grounds of some forms and to difficulties with systematic methodologies within the group. There is a critical lack of information about three forms in particular: ‘West Siberian Gull’ L. heuglini antelius, ‘Taimyr Gull’ L. h. heuglini (= ‘taimyrensis') and ‘Baraba Gull’ L. cachinnans barabensis. This paper presents data on the plumage, biometrics, sexual dimorphism and geographical variation ofWest Siberian Gull. The identification of the Stuttgart type-specimen of heuglini is reviewed. It is suggested that this specimen is, in fact, a Taimyr Gull, and that West Siberian Gull should, therefore, be reassigned the subspecific name ‘antelius'. Footnote: In this paper, the vernacular and scientific names used for the key taxa of interest are those preferred by the author, although this does not necessarily reflect editorial policy. 216 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 Gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull' C The basis for the designation of a species or a subspecies is the original description of its morphological characteristics and biometrics. Subsequent to that original descrip- tion, and with the accumulation of further data, new characters may be found and it may be recognised that some of the criteria by which a particular taxon was defined are invalid. Leaving aside moments of real discovery, our knowledge is based on the accumulation of observation and experiment. Subjective errors are part of the learning process. Despite innovations in biological methods, and the large amount of new information which results from them, intuition and mor- phological classification remain essential in the field of modern systematics. Large numbers of professional zoologists and other interested parties will never be satisfied solely by the con- tributions made to systematics by molecular biologists and ethologists. Although advanced methods produce generally reliable results, tra- ditional methods which base classification on physical morphology meet the needs of the majority of fieldworkers. The paradigm that all individuals of a taxon conform to the ‘type’ has long been replaced in science by the idea that, although different taxa may appear to be dis- crete, individuals within each taxon are poten- tially variable. Against the background of brilliant innovations in molecular biology, the collection of morphological data is a funda- mental part of systematics. For some taxa, however, the initial descrip- tive work is weak and, owing to the limited availability of data, progress is either extremely slow or non-existent. This may occur when the taxa of interest are located in an area which is geographically isolated, or where local adminis- trative problems obstruct researchers. These difficulties are exacerbated if the taxa concerned have only recently diverged from each other. Such a situation, whereby sibling or closely related taxa suffer from a paucity of descriptive data, inevitably results in disagreements among scientists. The activities of enthusiastic amateur taxonomists and fieldworkers, keen to publish their own research, lead to the risk of unsup- ported hypotheses being introduced into the scientific literature. Just such a difficult situation has developed with respect to the evolutionarily young ‘large white-headed gulls’ in the genus Larus (the complex of taxa currently grouped by three species: Lesser Black-backed Gull L. fuscus , Herring Gull L. argentatus and Yellow-legged Gull L. cachinnans). Systematists face particular difficulties in this case because of the lack of high-quality primary data. The variety of taxo- nomic decisions affecting this complex of some 25-35 forms has become paradoxical, such that it appears that all possible combinations of phy- logenetic arrangements have been proposed. Kist (1961) described the situation as ‘Baby- Ionic’. For those who try to understand the problems posed by these gulls from the data in the literature, there are opportunities to accept or reject, defend or refute, any selected taxo- nomic position. The real data on which opin- ions are formed are, however, often limited, and the subsequent proliferation of working hypotheses is not constructive, owing to the impossibility of verifying them in the light of the available facts. A more fruitful approach to the under- standing of phylogeny and speciation of large gulls is not to build on existing data (with all its accumulated errors), but to undertake a complete programme of laboratory and field research covering all the gulls in the complex. In the face of conflicting results, enthusiastic ornithologists may oversimplify or misinter- pret the data obtained by their own research or from the literature, as discussed by Chylarecki (1993) and Yesou et al. (1994). Disagreements will not be resolved until large amounts of data can be collected by ornithologists hand- ling gulls of undisputed identity on the breeding grounds. Discussion of several taxa is hindered by the predominance of data from the wintering grounds, where the accuracy of identification is doubtful and cannot be con- firmed. Within the large white-headed gull complex, ‘Heuglin’s Gull’ [L. heuglini] has been so little studied that experts are sometimes compelled to warn against the mythology surrounding it (Hario 1992). It is a large, dark-mantled gull 1 19. (Left) Tundra of the Russkii Zavorot peninsula, Russia, June 1 996. Water and wetlands dominate this tundra, where thousands of karst and lagoon lakes with connecting channels allow 'West Siberian Gulls' Larus heuglini antelius to nest on isolated areas of land. V(A. Buzun British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 217 V.A. Bu zun V.A.Buzun Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull' 1 20. Colony of 'West Siberian Gulls' L arus heuglini antelius, Russkii Zavorot peninsula, Malozemel'skaya Tundra, Russia, June 1 996. This colony is in the coastal part of the peninsula, on a 1.8-ha lake islet. 121. Colony of 'West Siberian Gulls' Laru s heuglini antelius, Russkii Zavorot peninsula, Malozemel'skaya Tundra, Russia, June 1 996, Part of the same colony as that in plate 1 20. Distance between nests can be as little as 1 .2 m, although it averages 1 0.8 m in colonies (standard error = I . I ; n = 38) and 462.6 m on open tundra (s.e. = 80.0; n = 6). Details of the spacing of nest sites ofWest Siberian Gull are given in Buzun (in press). 218 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull > c which breeds in the Arctic region between the White Sea and the Yenisei River. The type-speci- men is in Stuttgart, Germany, although its iden- tity is controversial (see Appendix on page 231). Heuglin’s Gull has been variously designated as a subspecies of Herring Gull L. argentatus heuglini (e.g. Vaurie 1965; Grant 1986) or of Lesser Black-backed Gull L. fuscus heuglini (Cramp & Simmons 1983). It has also been regarded as a separate species comprising two races, the ‘West Siberian Gull’ I. h. heuglini and the ‘Taimyr Gull’ L. h. taimyrensis, which is the treatment that I adopt in this paper. The aim of my current research is to deter- mine the limits of variability in morphology, plumage patterns and biometrics of the various forms in the large white-headed gull complex, and to ascertain the areas in which these char- acters do not overlap. In the present paper I deal with the West Siberian Gull. In an appendix, I argue that the type-specimen is, in fact, an example of Taimyr Gull, and that the West Siberian Gull should be named L. h. antelius, following Iredale (1913). In the fol- lowing text, the West Siberian Gull is referred to as antelius and the Taimyr Gull as heuglini. I shall also refer to the Armenian Gull L. armenicus simply as armenicus and to the ‘Baraba Gull’ L. cachinnans barabensis as barabensis. Approximate breeding ranges of some of these forms were described by Grant (1986). Materials and methods Between 1987 and 1996, I carried out research into the morphology and behaviour of yellow- legged forms of large white-headed gulls. Where possible, I caught and examined live birds. On the northern Taimyr peninsula, in southwest Siberia, and on the Russkii Zavorot peninsula (Malozemel’skaya Tundra), some gulls were killed with alpha-chloralose, in accordance with appropriate local guidelines, and the fresh specimens were processed. In addition, skins from the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University were examined. The nature of the study, looking at very similar and recently diverged forms, means that large numbers of individuals have to be examined in order to obtain statistically significant morphological data. Not all of my samples are sufficiently large. A precise estimate of mantle colour was achieved, based on Voous (1959, 1961) and using the grey scale from the colour standards of Ridgway (1912, table 53, LIII). For each indi- vidual gull, mantle colour was assigned to a defined shade of grey or given an intermediate value between two shades (table 1). A quantita- tive estimate of the colour pattern of the pri- maries was also made (table 2). Goethe’s (1961) technique, used for classifying the primaries of argentatus and cachinnans, was found not to be suitable for the Siberian dark-mantled gulls. Details of measurements taken to record the extent of black pigment in the primaries are illustrated in fig. 1, and data for antelius are presented in table 3. To control for size differ- ences between taxa and for sexual dimorphism within taxa, four indices were calculated (il- i4): these represent the extent of black pigment per 1 mm of wing length on the external (il = aio/WL) and internal (i2 = bio/WL) webs of the outermost primary (P10) and on the external (i3 = ag/WL) and internal (i4 = bs/WL) webs of P9. Thirty-seven adult West Siberian Gulls were obtained near the nests on the Russkii Zavorot peninsula and Chayachii Island (68°21’N, 53°49’E), and four second-years and one first- year were shot on the Zakhar’in coast. Measure- ments were taken with a ruler to an accuracy of 1 mm, or with callipers to an accuracy of 0.05 mm, for the following: wing length, flattened and stretched (WL); humerus (HL); ulna from olecranon to the labrum condyli (UL); sternum from the apex to the edge of the cartilage at the caudal end (S); tail (C); tarsus (TL); middle toe without nail (MTL); length of skull from the crista frontalis interior to the tip of the bill [equivalent to head + bill] (KDB); length of bill from border of feathering (BL1); length of bill from front edge of nostril (BL2); vertical depth of bill from tip of gonys to the culmen, without compression (BH1); inclined depth of bill per- pendicularly from the proximal side of the gonydeal angle to as far as the culmen (BH2); vertical depth of bill at level of rear of nostrils (BH3); width of bill at level of rear of nostrils (BW). As a criterion for the estimation of body size, individuals with intestines empty were weighed to the nearest 5 g (M). The mass of a gull varies seasonally, being lowest in summer during the nestling-feeding period (Barth 1967). The majority of specimens for this study were judged to be close to the final stages of incubation. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 2 1 6-232 219 Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull' Results Plumage and bare-part characteristics of adult and subadult antelius Mantle colour A standardised estimate of the shade of grey on the mantle of antelius , using Ridgway’s (1912) colour standards (see above), showed that antelius is darker than most other forms in the large white-headed gull complex (table 1). The mantle and wings of antelius exhibit none of the bluish tones which are characteristic of argentatus. The form antelius can, therefore, be grouped with three other taxa which have a slaty-coloured mantle, namely heuglini , barabensis and armenicus. As a result of an incomplete pre-breeding moult, 31% of breeding individuals from the Russkii Zavorot peninsula retained old, unmoulted feathers which lent a brown cast to the mantle. Stegmann (1934) characterised the average mantle colour of antelius but did not specify the range of variation. Devillers (1983) and Grant (1986) suggested that antelius was darker (close to Lesser Black-backed Gull of the race graellsii over much of its range) than it really is. Primary pattern There is extensive black in the primaries of antelius, as with the rest of the group of slaty- mantled gulls. About 5% of individuals show black in only the six outer primaries; the rest show black in seven or eight primaries (the pro- portions of each type are approximately equal). The results of my classification of the wingtip pattern of antelius from two sites within the breeding range are presented in table 2. A sample of the most common type of pattern is given in fig. 1. Although antelius shows more black in the outer primaries than do the other slaty-mantled gulls, it also has extensive white mirrors on the outermost primary (P10). About 50% of indi- viduals possess a shadowy grey patch encom- passing between a quarter and one-sixth of the total area of the mirror on the internal web of P10. Typically, mirrors are smaller or absent on P9: approximately 30% of individuals have one mirror on the outer web, and 8% have small mirrors on both webs of P9 (table 3). The white tip of P10 is reduced; 63% of individuals have a white tip on the external web only, and 24% have no white tips at all. Table I. Indices of mantle colour of 'West Siberian Gull' Larus heuglini antelius from Kanin, the Russkii Zavorot peninsula and the Gulf of Ob, Russia (Kanin sample includes one individual from northern River Dvina). Terms used for colour shades follow Ridgway (1912). Locality No. Mean mantle shade S.D. Mode Limit (standard names) Kanin 5 12.2 (>Slate Grey) 0.45 — Russkii Zavorot 40 1 1.4 (Slate Grey) 1.17 11 8-13 (>Deep Gull Grey-Slate Colour) Ob 15 9.6 (>Dark Gull Grey) 0.98 9 8-1 1 (>Deep Gull Grey-Slate Grey) Table 2. Classification of wingtip-pattern types of 'West Siberian Gull' Larus heuglini antelius from the Russkii Zavorot peninsula and the Gulf of Ob, Russia. Locality Primary No. % Type 1 % Type 2 % Type 3 % Type 4 % Type 5 Russkii Zavorot P10 38 2.6 51.3 23.1 15.4 7.7 P9 38 0 5.3 21.1 73.7 0 Ob PI0 17 0 84.0 11.0 5.0 0 P9 17 0 0 26.0 74.0 0 Typological scheme for recording wingtip patterns of ‘dark-mantled’ gulls: P 1 0: Type I: Two large, open mirrors; distal mirror connected with white tip of the feather. Type 2: Large outer open mirrors; white tips discernible. Type 3: Mirror closed (surrounded by black) on outer web; white tips not present, or present on outer web only. Type 4\ Mirrors closed on both webs. Type 5: Only one closed mirror (often on inner web). P9: Type I : Two large mirrors (but always smaller than those on P 10); outer mirror frequently not entirely surrounded by black (open). Type 2: Small, closed mirrors. Type 3: Closed (or, less often, open-ended) mirror on only one web (often the inner one). Type 4: No mirrors present. 220 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 Gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull' C Importantly, antelius shows one feature which is much more completely developed in ‘Caspian Gull’ L. cachinnans cachinnans : a white or off-white base of the primaries. Although it is not so obvious as the white ‘tongues’ on the primaries of many cachinnans (Garner & Quinn 1997), 70-75% of antelius have a white or whitish base of the internal web of P10; in 25- 30% of individuals, this base is grey. (It is impossible to give the exact proportion of birds with a grey or a white basal area of P10 because of the difficulty of discerning shades of very pale grey.) The base of the inner web of P9 is normally grey, but on a very small number of individuals it may be grey-white (in compar- ison with the grey base of P8). It is usually possible to determine a distinct border between the basal grey and distal black portions of P10, although this is not the case with about 5% of individuals. The shape of this border is largely straight, as in armenicus, and is not concave or convex (fig. 1). The basal grey portion of the primaries of antelius is the least extensive of those of all members of the large white-headed gull complex. Moving descendently from P10 in the half-open wing, the grey portion of the outer web first becomes visible (projecting beyond the tips of the primary coverts) between P7 and P5 on 55-60% of individuals, whereas in all other forms (except nominate fuscus) it is seen on P8-P9 (fig. 2). The grey base of the primaries is evident from P6-P7 in about 15% of armenicus. In heuglini, the grey primary bases are usually visible on P8-P9; on only about 5% of birds is the grey first apparent on P7. Consequently, about 50% of antelius, with very restricted grey in the pri- maries, can be confidently distinguished in the hand from heuglini on the basis of this feature. Stegmann (1934) asserted that antelius always possesses black subterminal pigment in P4, and frequently also in P3, a statement con- firmed by Devillers (1983). In summary, antelius shows the most extensive development of black pigmentation in the primaries within the large white-headed gull complex, with the exception of fuscus. This is evident not only in the number of pri- maries with black subterminal bands, but also in the percentage extent of black across the primaries. Iris colour In common with the other Siberian dark- Fig. I. The most common wingtip pattern of 'West Siberian Gull' Larus heuglini antelius. Measurements (a, b, c) used to quantify the extent of the black pigment on PIO and P9 are shown. The size 'b' on P9 is the same as on PIO. Maximum lengths are measured for white subterminal ‘mirrors'. The basal grey portion of PIO is usually lighter than represented here. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 2 1 6-232 221 Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull Table 3. Wingtip-pigment parameters of ‘West Siberian Gull' Larus heuglini antelius from the Russkii Zavorot peninsula, Russia. For explanations of sizes a, b and c, see fig. I ; indices i I , i2, i3 and i4 are described in the text. Abbreviations m I , m2, m3 and m4 refer to the length of the mirrors on, respectively, the outer web of P 1 0, inner web of P 1 0, outer web of P9 and inner web of P9. Characteristics Size index No. Mean (mm) S.D. Range (mm) Length of black a 37 216.4 23.5 102-245 phase on P10 b 37 202.7 19.1 168-291 c 37 1 19.5 23.0 65-175 Length of black a 37 217.9 13.1 190-240 phase on P9 b 37 190.7 15.2 147-215 c 37 117.5 30.1 40-165 Length of ml 35 27.8 9.5 11-47 mirrors m2 36 27.9 8.2 10-46 m3 6 6.5 3.7 2-13 m4 7 9.4 5.2 4-18 Indices of black it 37 0.49 0.05 0.22-0.54 phase i2 37 0.45 0.04 0.39-0.68 i3 37 0.49 0.03 0.41-0.53 i4 37 0.43 0.03 0.31-0.47 mantled gulls and armenicus, antelius normally has some dark pigment in the iris. Only 5% of antelius have a completely yellow iris. In some 29% of individuals, the dark speckles in the iris cover only 2-5% of the total area, so that, from a distance, the iris appears completely pale. In the remaining 66%, the iris has a whitish, pale yellow or yellow background over which patches of grey, black or, occasionally, brown pigment are dispersed. The average percentage of the iris marked with dark pigment, estimated visually, is 23.4% (s.e. = 3.9, n = 39). Orbital-ring colour The orbital ring of about 80% of antelius is dark (coral-) red. The anterior part of the ring may be paler, and in 1 5% of individuals the orbital ring is a mixture of orange and red. In the remaining 5% it is orange, or even orange-yellow. Leg colour The legs of antelius are not uniformly coloured. The tarsus is usually paler and greyer than the rest of the leg, especially along the scales at the front of the leg. In normal field views, about 92% of individuals appear to have yellow legs (pale yellow, lemon- yellow or ochre) and 8% to have grey- yellow to grey legs, although the webs of the feet are always yellow. It appears that those with greyer legs tend to nest in colonies on marine islands. Bill colour Adult antelius has a yellow bill with a red-orange subterminal spot on the lower mandible. Of 37 adults col- lected near the nest, eight (22%) had a small black smudge or black band, 3-7 mm wide, on the bill. Fig. 2. Extent of grey in proximal section Of primaries of 'West Siberian Gull’ Larus heuglini antelius. This diagram of the open wing shows the most frequent pattern, with the grey basal portion of the primaries first appearing beyond the tips of the primary coverts on P7 (arrow). 222 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull' ) 122. The long-call display of 'West Siberian Gulls' L arus heuglini antelius, Russkii Zavorot peninsula, Malozemel'skaya Tundra, Russia, June l996.The angle made by the slope of the head and neck with the plane of the back varies from 30° to 50° in the third phase of the display.This is similar to the same phase of the Herring Gull L. argentatus display In the second phase of the long-call display, however 40% of West Siberian Gulls from Russkii Zavorot do not bend the head below the breast; instead, they lower the head only to the level of the crop, in contrast to Herring Gulls. In armenicus, the presence of black marks on the bill is a feature of young adults, and is not retained on older birds. I investigated whether this was also the case for antelius. Of the adult antelius collected, 38% had longitudinal streaks of black or dark grey on some of the greater primary coverts, indicating, as with argentatus , that they were 3-4 years old. A statistical analysis showed that there was a significant cor- relation between the presence of black marks on the bill and black marks on the primary coverts, and therefore between the former and age (x2 = 6.03; d.f. = 1; p < 0.01). In only 8% of individ- uals which showed definitive adult plumage were black areas found on the bill, these being very small marks 1-5 mm in extent. In 5% of four-year-old individuals, there were no black marks on the bill, but red pigment on the upper mandible at the level of the gonys, as is frequently observed on armenicus (Buzun 1993). I believe that red pigment on the upper mandible is a feature of young adults, because, on armenicus , the red colour is present on areas of the bill that were previously black. Morphometric characters As noted earlier, the existing data on size mea- surements of antelius are insufficient for a com- prehensive biometric analysis. Outside Russia, only 30 specimens exist in museums (Cramp 8c Simmons 1983), and not all of them can be assigned to antelius with any certainty, since most were collected outside the breeding range. The wintering areas of a number of dark- mantled taxa probably overlap. The most complete collection of antelius skins is stored in the Zoological Institute in St Peters- burg, Russia. These specimens have been only partially described biometrically, by Stegmann (1934) and by Yudin 8c Firsova (1988), neither of which detailed the methods used to obtain mea- surements. The lengths of the wing, bill and tarsus were analysed only on an elementary level, and for sample sizes which were diverse and vari- able. Yudin 8c Firsova (1988) did not clearly specify the borders of the breeding range of antelius, and in both cases there was no correc- tion for known shrinkage of stored skins (see Barth 1967). Together, these factors have influ- enced the results reported in previous studies. Sexual dimorphism As significant differences in size between the sexes are known for argentatus, cachinnans and armenicus, the biometric data for antelius need also to be analysed separately for males and females. By a combination of skull measure- 6 ritish Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 223 V. A. Buzun Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull' D cn _Q O D o o w_ D (/) oo 03 2 d> E c .3 £ ; O d -9 ij < E z or _0> _o V Cd £ o — m, in in, ni r^> in rn ni dS m of 00 vO I n! IT, ni ni oi in cd LT, 00 ■Of 00 sd n 00 vO in ni nj oc Of mi m, cd — — 1 of m ni -- 1 N 03 of Of Of — rr, l n rn m m, o c cn of rn ON r4 n. o m ni ni — < m Of fN| in m rn K vq rn in 00 in q O'" m cc rn m q ni ni m ni Of q oo mi 15 t/3 C/3 LU ni of ~ *r ni “ cn of rn sO rn vC i i vd ni q ni 00 q d . q vd ni Of q vd L±- of of of i i of rn od* m in 1 Of d Of m vO n. of rn xb q d vo ON m ON cd On LO ni rn ni Of , ■ vd Of nj vO vd oo rn q rn ■ q oc o vO q ni 00 Tf of 1 1 oo “ rn 00 in ni m 00 o IS) C 0 > c 7 ON 7 7 ON (N m 06 7 vd m vd 7 in I m on 7 rn in 00 c cS o Z 00 c «— « , tO 4 O) ci c . 03 O ^ z 2 on 0, whereas for females DF < 0. DF = (0.14 x KDB) + (1.03 x BH1) -45.89 or DF = (1.31 x BH1) + (0.32 x'BLl) -40.64 or DF = (0.83 x BH1) + (0.95 x BH3) -31.02 It is hoped that these discriminant equations will be widely applicable, because geographical size variation is likely to be weak (see below). Body-size parameters The biometric data for antelius from three geo- graphically discrete populations are presented in table 4. It seems that heuglini is the longest- winged form of the Siberian dark-mantled complex. Taking body size as a whole among the dark-mantled gulls, antelius appears to be second largest after heuglini. The average wing length of antelius from the Russkii Zavorot peninsula is probably exceeded only by that of L. [cachinnansl] mongolicus (Piechocki 1968; Firsova & Yudin 1988; but sample sizes extremely small) and L. cachinnans michahellis from the Camargue (Isenmann 1973). Stegmann (1934) gave maximum wing length for antelius of 490 mm, seemingly measured without stretching the wing or correcting for dehydration of the specimens; the same figure is quoted by Cramp & Simmons (1983). With the exception of bill length and tarsus length. antelius is smaller than heuglini in most mea- surements. Nevertheless, antelius has a rather small head, with a short skull. The bill is of medium length and depth; for males, the ratio between the two is 2.98 (s.e. = 0.04; n = 17). The legs are relatively long: for males, the mean ratio (MTL/TL) x 100 = 75.1 (s.e. = 0.72; n = 17); for females, mean = 75.7 (s.e. = 0.65; n = 23). The wide variation in the weights of males (7.6%), females (10.9%) and both sexes com- bined (13.7%) is of note. These coefficients are slightly higher than is the case with, for example, argentatus from Norway (Barth 1967) or Germany (Kuschert 1979). This variation can probably be explained by the changes in fat deposits within the abdominal cavity of antelius during the breeding season. The degree of vari- ation in other biometric characters does not differ from equivalent figures for argentatus. Primary moult On the Russkii Zavorot peninsula, in 1996, the stage of primary moult differed not only between breeding birds and immatures, but also between those nesting on tundra and those nesting on marine islands. Of five individuals aged from one to three years, three had begun their primary moult at some time during the first ten days of June. By the end of July, P6 was moulted. For adults, the beginning of primary moult (the loss of PI) occurred between 20th June and 20th July. Con- sequently, for any given population, there is about one month’s variation among individ- uals. By the middle of July, 25% of adults nesting on marine islands had moulted P3, whereas 30% of adults nesting on tundra had moulted P4 (and some individuals were even more advanced). Geographical variation in antelius In addition to the specimens from the Russkii Zavorot peninsula, specimens from both the eastern (Obskaya Bay) and western (Kanin peninsula) parts of the breeding range of antelius were examined. Although the western border of the breeding range can be determined with precision (Filchagov et al. 1992), the eastern limit and the area of overlap or intergradation with heuglini have not been suf- ficiently studied. The analysis of the geograph- ical variation of mantle colour by Stegmann (1934) demonstrated that the area of overlap between these two forms is extensive and lies between the Gydan peninsula and Yenisei Bay. The samples from the River Ob considered here, therefore, represent the extreme eastern populations of antelius, with the Russkii British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 2 1 6-232 227 V.A. Buzun Gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull 1 25. Nesting ‘West Siberian Gull' Larus heuglini antelius, Chayachii Island, Pechora Sea, Russia, July 1 996. A proportion ofWest Siberian Gulls nests on marine islands in elevated areas in the supralittoral zone; for details, see Buzun (in press). Zavorot population representing the centre of the range. As shown in table 1, the mantle colour of antelius darkens from east to west (see also Stegmann 1934). There is, however, consider- able variation at any one site, such that, although dark individuals are more frequent in extreme western areas, it is difficult to find any darker than the most dark-mantled birds from the Russkii Zavorot peninsula (‘Slate-colour’ in Ridgway 1912). The wingtip pattern of antelius also varies from east to west (table 2). The frequency of the dark variant of P10 (one or two small, closed mirrors) increases, while the frequency of birds showing two large open mirrors decreases by 1.5 times, between the Russkii Zavorot penin- sula and the River Ob. Variation in size of the white mirrors is, however, independent of the total area of black pigment in the primaries: the standardised indices (corrected for other body measurements as described earlier) of black pigment hardly vary from east to west, although there may be a slight reduction in black on P9. The uncorrected raw data erroneously suggest a gradual reduction in black pigment from east to west. It follows from table 4 that variation in wing length from east to west is simply an artefact of small sample size. When the sexes are combined for samples from Kanin and Russkii Zavorot, all the differences are not significant (Wilcoxon t- test). There are no significant tendencies for weight and other body-size parameters to increase towards the eastern end of the breeding range. If clinal size variation exists, the trends are extremely weak. Acknowledgments I thank my colleagues, Pranas Mierauskas and Edmundus Greimas, for their support in the difficult expedition to Yamal, and for allowing me to use their data from the Kanin peninsula. I thank RTomkovich for giving me the opportunity to work with the collections at the Zoological Museum at Moscow State University, and E. Greimas for collaboration during work on skins. References Amadon, D. 1 966. The superspecies concept. Syst. Zool. 15: 245-249. Barth, E. K. 1 967. Standard body measurements in Larus argentatus, L. fuscus, L. canus and L. marinus. Nytt. Mag. Zool. 14:7-83. Bree, C. R. 1 876. History of the Birds of Europe. Vol. 5. 2nd edn. London. Buzun, V.A. 1993. Armenian Gull, Larus armenicus Buturlin, 1934: morpho-biometrical and behavioural distinctions with indication of taxonomical status. Russ .J. Orn. 2: 47 1-491. — In press. Studies of Siberian dark-mantled gull ecology: West Siberian Gull (Larus heuglini antelius Iredale 1913). Avian E col. Behaviour 6. Chylareck.i, R 1993. New Herring Gull taxonomy. Brit. Birds 86:316-319. Cramp, S., & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.) 1983. The Birds of the Western Pa/earct/c.Vol. 3. Oxford. 228 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 2 1 6-232 Gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull' c 1 26 & 1 27. Nesting adult, and nest site of West Siberian Gull’ Larus heuglini antelius, Russkii Zavorot peninsula, Malozemel'skaya Tundra, Russia, June 1996. Concealment of nests is not typical, but some pairs nesting on mainland tundra use willows Salix arctica or S. glauca to shelter the nest. For details, see Buzun (in press). The callipers in plate 127 show 10 cm. Dementiev, G. R, & Gladkov, N, A. 1951. The Birds of the Soviet Union. V ol. 3. Moscow. Devillers, RJ. 1983. Bare parts and geographical variation of Larus fuscus. In: Cramp, S„ & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.), The Birds of the Western Palearctic.V ol. 3. Oxford. Filchagov, A.V., Bianki.V.V, Cherenkov, A. E„ & Semashko, V. Yu. 1 992. Relation between Lesser Black-backed Gull, Larus fuscus and West-Siberian Gull, L. heuglini in the contact zone. Zool. Zhurn. 71:1 48- 1 52. Garner M„ & Quinn, D. 1997. Identification ofYellow- legged Gulls in Britain. Brit. Birds 90: 25-62. Goethe, F. von. 1961. ZurTaxonomie der Silbermowe ( Larus argentatus ) im stidlichen deutschen Nordseegebiet. Vogelwarte 21:1 -24. — 1973. Zum Typus' von Larus argentatus heuglini Bree im Staatlichen Museum fur Naturkunde zu Stuttgart. Stuttgarter Beitr. Naturk., Sen A, Nr 26 1 : 1-8. — 1 982. Larus fuscus heuglini Bree 1 876 and Larus fuscus taimyrensis Buturlin 191 I. In: Glutz von Blotzheim, U. N„ & Bauer K. M. (eds.), Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropas. Wiesbaden. Grant, RJ. 1986. Gulls: a guide to identification. 2nd edn. Calton. HafferJ. 1982. Systematik undTaxonomie der Larus orgentotus-Artengruppe. In: Glutz von Blotzheim, U. N„ & Bauer K. M. (eds.), Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropas. Wiesbaden. Hario, M. 1 992. Myyttinen heuglini - tietoja ja otaksumia. Lintumies 27: I 13-117. Heuglin, M.Th, von. 1 873. Ornithologie Nordost-Africas der Nilquellen- und Kusten-Gebiete des Roten Meeres und des nordlichen Somal-Landes. Cassel. Hirschfeld, E. 1992. More gulls with bill bands. Birding World 5: I 1 6. Iredale.T 1913. Larus fuscus antelius. nom. n. for Larus affmis Saunders (nec Reinhardt). Bull. BOC 3 1 : 68-69. Isenmann, R 1 973. Biometrische Untersuchungen an der Gelbfussigen Silbermowe aus der Camargue. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 229 V. A. Buzun V. A. Buzun V. A. Buzun V. A. Buzun Gull taxonomy: ‘West Siberian Gull / 128. 'West Siberian Gulls' Larus heuglim antelius, Chayachii Island, Pechora Sea, Russia, June-July 1 996. This photo illustrates two extreme variants of mantle colour from slightly darker than 'Deep Gull Grey' to 'Slate Colour’ (see Ridgway 1912), found in a sample of 23 individuals from this island, Vogelwarte 27: 1 6-24. Kennerley, R R„ Hoogendoorn, W„ & Chalmers, M. L. 1995. Identification and systematics of large white-headed gulls in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Bird Report 1994: 1 27- 156. Kist, J. l96l.'Systematische' beschouwingen naar aanleiding van de waarneming van Heuglins geelpootzilvermeeuw, Larus cachinnans heuglim Bree, in Nederland. Ardea 49: 1-51. Kuschert, H. 1 979. Die Silbermowe (Larus argentatus ) in Schleswig-Holstein. Ein Beitrag zur Diskussion uber ihre taxonomische Stellung. Beitr. z. Vogelforsch. 6: 87- 1 1 2. McKitrick, M. C., & Zink, R. M. 1988. Species concepts in ornithology. Condor 90: I - 1 2. Mayr E. 1 963. Animal Species and Evolution. Cambridge, Mass. Neumann, O. 1 934. Remarks on the nomenclature, winter dress and migration of some Palearctic gulls. Bull. BOC 54: 133-135. Piechocki. R. 1968. Beitrage zur Avifauna der Mongolei.Teil I . Non-Passeriformes. Ergebnisse der Mongolisch- Deutschen Biologischen Expeditionen seit 1 962. Mitt. Zool. Mus. Berlin 44: 1 49-292. Ridgway, R. 1912. Color Standards and Color Nomenclature. Washington. Short, L. L. 1 969. Taxonomic aspects of avian hybridization. Auk 86: 84-105. Stegmann. B. K. 1934. Ueber die Formen der grossen Mowen ('subgenus Larus') und ihre gegenseitigen Beziehungen./ f. Orn. 82: 340-380. 1 29. 'West Siberian Gulls' Larus heuglini antelius. River Ob delta, Russia, June l998.Two extreme variants of mantle coloration in a sample of eight individuals from this area. 230 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull' c Vaurie, C. 1 965. The Birds of the Palearctic Fauna. Non- Passeriformes. London. Voous, K. H. 1 959. Geographical variation of the Herring Gull, Larus argentatus. in Europe and North America. Ardea 47: 176-187. - 1961. Micro-geographical variation in Netherlands Herring Gulls, Larus argentatus. Ardea 49: 69-72. Yesou, R, Filchagov, A.V., & Dubois, RJ. 1994. An answer to Chylarecki's comments on the ‘new Herring Gull taxonomy’. Brit. Birds 87: 73-78. Yudin, K, A., & Firsova, L.V. 1 988. The Herring Gull. In: lliyichev, V. D„ & Zubakin.V. A. (eds.), Birds of USSR. Moscow. Valery A. Buzun, Laboratory of Vertebrate Zoology, Biological Institute of St-Petersburg State University, Oranienbaumskoye sh. 2, Starii Peterhof 198904 St-Petersburg, Russia Appendix Revision of classification of the Stuttgart heuglini type-specimen The identity of the two gulls described by Bree (1876), collected in winter on the coast of Somalia by Theodor von Heuglin, remains unclear. The type-specimen of ‘Heuglin’s Gull’ is stored in the Stuttgart Museum of Natural Science, Germany, and has repeatedly been re- examined (Neumann 1934; Goethe 1973, 1982; Devillers, in Haffer 1982). Neumann classified it as taimyrensis, but he had no specimens of West Siberian Gull for comparison, whereas Goethe changed his mind between 1973 and 1982. From the detailed description of the specimen pub- lished by Goethe and information on the fresh specimen examined by Heuglin (1873), it is pos- sible to extract the following characteristics (table 5). Table 5. Description and identification of the 'heuglini' type-specimen from the Stuttgart Museum of Natural Science, Germany. Character descriptions are taken from Heuglin (1873) and Goethe (1973). Character antelius Candidate taxa heuglini {— taimyrensis) barabensis armenicus 1 ‘Neutral Grey’ mantle (Ridgway 1912) 2 Large mirrors on P10; black subterminal XX XXX XXX XXX band present (tip ragged) XXX XXX XXX XXX 3 No mirrors on P9 XXX XXX XX XXX 4 Black on six outermost primaries 5 Whitish base to P10, becoming X XXX X X progressively more restricted on P9-P7 ?o XXX XXX 0 6 Coral-red orbital ring* 7 Brick-red iris with 65-70% coverage XXX XXX XXX X of blackish pigment XXX XXX XXX XXX 8 Black patch on mandible XX X X XXX 9 Pale yellow legs XXX XX XXX XXX 10 Length of wing = 460 mm XXX XXX XX o 1 1 Length of tarsus = 60 mm 1 2 Sparse, narrow head streaking, O XXX XX X coarser on nape and hindneck XXX XXX ?o XXX XXX = character is absolutely consistent with this taxon. XX = character is shown by a smaller proportion of individuals of this taxon. X = character is at limit of range of variation within this taxon. O = character probably excludes this taxon. * Note that in Plate XXXVI of Heuglin (1873), the orbital ring and the background of the iris are shown as being paler and more yellowish than stated in the written description. In addition, the state of moult of the type-specimen is as follows: P1-P4 fresh; P5 growing; P6 in pin; P7-10 old feathers. The individual was collected between 17th and 25th October. Dementiev & Gladkov (1951) state that antelias completes primary moult in October, whereas Cramp 8< Simmons ( 1983) give January-March. From character 3, identification as barabensis is dubious. Character 4 almost excludes barabensis, armenicus and antelius. On the basis of 5 it is possible to exclude armenicus and perhaps antelius. Character 10 also excludes armenicus and is further evidence against barabensis. Character 1 1 excludes antelius and suggests also that the type-specimen is neither barabensis nor armenicus. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 231 Gull taxonomy: 'West Siberian Gull The Stuttgart type-specimen offers an opportunity to test our ability to identify an isolated individual of one of the Siberian dark- mantled taxa away from the breeding location. Until now, this has been a rather difficult problem. On the basis of the evidence gathered by my colleagues and myself, I believe that the ‘Stuttgart gulf is very probably a taimyrensis or is perhaps an intergrade between taimyrensis and antelius. On approximately one-third of taimyrensis individuals, the base of P10 is whitish, and on many individuals traces of white may be found at the base of several other primaries, too. This feature is commonly shown by barabensis (85% of individuals), but that form can be ruled out because barabensis males have, on average, a larger number of primaries with black, as well as shorter wings and longer tarsi. In addition, barabensis would probably show a less streaked head and neck in winter plumage. As suggested in the preceding text (page 220), antelius is characterised by a mantle which is darker than that of the Stuttgart specimen, and would also be expected to show a greater number of primaries with black subterminal pigment. Male antelius never have such a short tarsus, while the traces of whitish at the bases of P8 and P7 almost certainly rule out antelius. The short tarsus of the Stuttgart gull almost unequivocally places the bird with taimyrensis. The yellow legs are not an obstacle to its identi- fication as taimyrensis , since this feature is shown by 38% of individuals of this form. The black marks on the bill are not typical for breeding taimyrensis, but possibly occur more frequently in winter (Hirschfeid 1992). The second specimen, in immature plumage, is also of interest, but has now unfortunately been lost. Neumann (1934) designated it a syntype. Heuglin (1873) believed it to belong to the same taxon as the adult, with ‘perfectly satu- rated smoke-grey tone on the back’. It was in second-winter plumage, but the sex is not recorded. Judging by the length of the bill (54 mm), it was probably a male. The length of the tarsus was 61 mm, which also places it within shorter-legged taimyrensis. If this revised identification is correct, then the rules of zoological nomenclature dictate that taimyrensis be given the subspecific name heuglini ( L . heuglini heuglini). The use of 1 heuglin i for this taxon has rarely been used, and then usually with an explanatory paren- thetical explanation, i.e. ‘ heuglini (- taimyrensis)'. The use of the subspecific name heuglini for the ‘Taimyr Gulf is unlikely to be popular, since the widespread adoption of the name taimyrensis is assisted by the fact that that name conforms with the bird’s geographical location. Again according to nomenclatural rules, the ‘West Siberian Gull’ should reacquire the subspecific name antelius ( L . heuglini antelius), which was the name given to speci- mens collected near the River Ob and described by Iredale (1913). It has also been suggested that the use of subspecific vernacular names should cease (see arguments in McKitrick 8c Zink 1988). Never- theless, the potential or actual reproductive iso- lation between some forms of the large white-headed gull complex requires us to refer to them as probable species and to assign them a specific name. Such treatments of the Siberian dark-mantled gulls are, however, based on poor research. Neither of the common names of ‘Heuglin’s Gull’ given in Russian sources (‘West Siberian Gulf and ‘Eastern Lesser Black-backed Gulf) is fully appropriate, since two-thirds of the breeding range lies outside Siberia, and it is doubtful that the taxon is a Lesser Black-backed Gull. In the light of my revision of the identifi- cation of the Stuttgart heuglini type-specimen as a Taimyr Gull, the common name of ‘Heuglin’s Gull’ clearly cannot be used as the vernacular subspecific name for antelius. If antelius and heuglini (= taimyrensis) are regarded as different subspecies of the same species, L. heuglini, then ‘Heuglin’s Gull’ may be used to denote the whole species. Possible options are to retain the subspecific name ‘West Siberian Gulf for antelius, or to use the literal translation of antelius from the Greek ‘avxqZio^’ and to call the taxon ‘Eastern Gulf. Alternatively, since the specimens used by Iredale (1913) were obtained from the Ob by O. Pinsch, the name ‘Linsch’s Gulf may be appro- priate. furthermore, the possibility that the Stuttgart type-specimen is a hybrid or inter- grade between West Siberian and Taimyr Gulls should be considered, although this is perhaps not verifiable. If such were the case, the name heuglini would become invalid; the West Siberian Gull would be termed antelius and the Taimyr Gull would return to L. taimyrensis taimyrensis Buturlin 1911. 232 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 216-232 Flight identification of Common Eider, King Eider and Steller’s Eider Anders Blomdahl, Bertil Breife and Niklas Holmstrom 1 30. Common Eiders Somateria mollissima, Sweden, April. Spring flocks impart a vivid black-and-white impression. They are rarely confused with other ducks, but other species of eider can be overlooked in the flock. Seawatching in the Baltic is quite different from that around the coasts of Britain & Ireland, and from that farther south in Europe. Species such as Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis , Northern Gannet Morns bassanus, and shearwaters and storm-petrels (Procel- lariidae) are true rarities in the Baltic, while divers Gavia , grebes Podiceps , wildfowl (Anatidae), and gulls and terns (Laridae) migrate through the region in large numbers. One of the most numerous species in the Baltic is the Common Eider Somateria mollissima , and in early April or October, in good conditions, it is not unusual to see 100,000 or more migrating eiders in a single day. It is likely that, during the course of the season, the persistent seawatcher will identify small numbers of King Eiders S. spectabilis among the Common Eider flocks and, if he or she is really lucky, even a Steller’s Eider Polysticta stelleri. The techniques for finding these rarer species among groups of Common Eiders are certainly useful in other areas of western Europe, and this paper summarises and illustrates the key features for identification in flight. One of the best ways of finding a King or a Steller’s Eider in a flock of Common Eiders is to count the birds in the flocks. The discipline of counting forces the observer to scan every flock closely, thereby increasing the chances of spotting the different species. Colours and shades are often visible over moderate distances in good light. If the light deterior- ates and the sky becomes overcast, however, then eiders at long range often appear monochrome in white, brown and black, like many diving ducks. Subtle features, such as particular shades of a colour, are rarely of any help in these circumstances. The sea- watcher then needs to focus on any prominent plumage features, such as the position, size and shape of any white areas. These characters should be used in combination with silhouette, the flight pattern, and flock behaviour. It is difficult to see the silhouette of individual ducks in low-flying, dense flocks, especially against a dark background or if they frequently disap- pear in wave troughs. In such cases, concentration and perseverance are the answer, coupled with the realisation that not every bird will be identifiable. Regular practice and close attention to migrating Common Eiders are essential if a seawatcher is to understand the variations shown by these ducks and thus become proficient in eider identification. In most cases, careful scrutiny of a putative King Eider will, sooner or later, reveal characters which do not fit that species. Silhouette and size are important factors; for example, if the suspected King Eider is of the same size as accompanying Common Eiders, then it is just another Common. The determined observer may one day, however, find an arctic gem among the com- moner species. © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 233 Flight identification of eiders c Common Eider Somateria mollissima Size Length 60-70 cm, wingspan 95-105 cm. Common Eider is the largest European diving duck. It is similar in size to Brent Goose Branta bernicla or Common Shelduck Tadorna tadorna, but is usually perceived as being smaller, owing to its different build, shorter wings and faster flight. Silhouette The silhouette is characteristic, and easy to recognise. The head shape is similar to that of a Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus, with a pow- erful, wedge-shaped bill which merges seamlessly with the head. The body is bulky, with a compara- tively short neck, while the wings are broad, with a rounded hand. The silhouette, combined with the species’ tendency to form large flocks, renders it easily recognisable from a distance, even against a pale background. Flight and flocking Active flight is direct and heavy, not unlike that of a small diver or goose, and Common Eiders are easily separated from other diving ducks outside the Somateria genus. Low-flying birds twist and turn their bodies in the manner of Common Scoters Melanitta nigra, but less rapidly and less nervously. A flock seen approaching head-on, or from the side, typically has a leading group, followed by a ‘billowing tail’, while a high-flying flock seen from below can often appear ‘U’-shaped. Common Eiders differ from geese in forming denser flocks, and they can also be distinguished by their faster wingbeats. Although such flocks often contain just Common Eiders, it is not unusual to find that they are accompanied by small numbers of other wildfowl, especially Common Scoter, Velvet Scoter M. fusca, Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope, Brent Goose and (perhaps surprisingly, given its size) Eurasian Teal A. crecca. In addition, Steller’s Eider and King Eider, when they venture to southern latitudes, rarely miss the opportunity to join a flock of Common Eiders. Plumage and bare parts Migrating flocks of Common Eiders are easy to identify in spring and autumn, when the con- trasting black-and-white plumage of the males, combined with the evenly dark-coloured females, produces a characteristic impression even at long range (plate 130). Adult male In breeding plumage, mainly white with black flight feathers, belly and tail. The upperparts are diagnostic, with a shining white forewing and back contrasting with black flight feathers, especially on those flying low with the sea as a backdrop. 1'he green sides of the nape can be seen only at close range. The bill is comparatively pale, but in poor light it appears dark and, together with the black forehead and crown and dark nape sides, creates a dark upper border to the white face. Adult male eclipse Generally all black, apart from white forewings and tertials, and pale patches on the back. The white areas of the upper mantle and ‘shoulders’ can give an impression of the whole back being white, especially if viewed from the side (plate 132). Differs from most immature males in having pure white upperwing-coverts. Adult female Appears mostly brown, with paler underwing-coverts. The exact tone of the plumage varies among individuals, from greyish-brown to reddish-brown, and colour alone cannot be used to rule out female King Eider. The bill is powerful and pale compared with that of female King Eider, which has a very short, dark bill. The speculum is dark, outlined in front and behind with white, and resembles that of Mallard Anas platyrhynchos. Although juvenile females usually lack the white speculum border, this feature is sufficiently vari- able to make it unreliable for ageing. Juvenile female Similar to adult female, but typ- ically with more uniformly greyish-brown plumage. Juvenile male Superficially resembles female, but in late summer to autumn, during the moult to first-winter, gradually acquires a more blackish- brown plumage, especially on the head, belly, sides of the body and back, this becoming particularly noticeable in late autumn and winter. The wings are evenly dark-coloured. There is great individual variation in the plumage of immature males, and at this age Common Eiders are most easily mistaken for immature King Eiders. First-winter male The most common and typical plumage for a first-winter male is a blackish body with paler, mottled breast and upper mantle, dark head, and white-mottled shoulders and back. The upperwings are evenly dark. Common Eider is very similar to King Eider in this and first-summer plumage (plate 133), but the two species differ in size, silhouette and bill colour (yellowish on King Eider, greyish on Common Eider). Individual variation increases towards spring, when some males show a white breast and adult-type head and neck, but also dark upper- wings and mantle. Second-winter male As moult to second-winter commences, many become similar to adults and are then often difficult to separate. Some individ- uals show a black back and an isolated white area on the upperwing-coverts, which again may cause confusion with King Eider. 234 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 Flight identification of eiders } 131. Adult female and male Common Eiders Somateria mollissima, Norway, April l992.The female shows atypical wedge-shaped head profile, and a dark grey bill which lacks the contrast with the facial feathering shown by female King Eider S, spectabilis. 1 32. Eclipse male Common Eiders Somateria mollissima, Norway, July 2000. Note the dark body, which appears blackish overall, and the upperwing pattern, which is like that of adult male in breeding plumage. 1 33. Adult male and female, and first-summer male Common Eiders Somateria mollissima, Sweden, May 199 1 .This photograph shows typical first-summer males, with dark upperparts, white breast and dark head. Common Eider can be confused with King Eider S. spectabilis in this plumage, but concentrate on size, silhouette and bill colour. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 235 John Larsen Tom/ Muukkonen Gull-Britt Nilsson Flight identification of eiders King Eider Somateria spectabilis Size Length 55-63 cm, wingspan 87-100 cm. The smaller size of King Eider is useful when direct comparison with Common Eider is possible, par- ticularly when scanning through flocks of Commons for female or immature King Eiders. Silhouette Females and juveniles are particularly similar to Common Eider, but appear more compact, with a shorter neck and bill. The head profile is more rounded, this accentuated by the bill shield, which is striking on breeding males and subtle, but still perceptible, on females. Unlike Common Eider, females and juveniles never show the ‘wedge’ effect of the bill merging with the head. Nonetheless, female-types are difficult to detect among Common Eiders, since they lack distinctive plumage features. In addition to general size, the head-and-bill shape and bill colour are the main characters, but these can be difficult to see even at moderate distances. Flight and flocking The flight pattern is similar to that of Common Eider, but typically with slightly quicker wingbeats. A lone individual migrating with a flock of Common Eiders will, however, adjust its wingbeats to those of the flock. Flocks composed solely of King Eiders occur only in the Arctic, where the flock formation is usually denser than that of Common Eider. Farther south, obser- vations usually involve one or perhaps two King Eiders in a flock of Commons. Note that even a distinctive adult male King Eider can be surpris- ingly difficult to keep track of in a passing flock of Common Eiders, as the angle of observation and the relative position of each bird change. Plumage and bare parts Adult male In breeding plumage, the adult male is unmistakable even at long distance if light condi- tions are good, having a yellowish-orange bill shield, bluish-grey nape and faintly green cheeks. It also differs from adult male Common Eider in having black upperwings and back, with oval- shaped white areas on the wing-coverts. The upper mantle is white when seen from the side, but the body appears mainly dark, contrasting with the pale fore parts. Head-on, the leading edge of the wing is a good character, being entirely black on King Eider, but with a white arm on adult Common Eider (but note that young male Common also shows a completely black leading edge). Adult male eclipse Appears mostly dark (almost sooty), like male Common Eider in eclipse. The white areas of the upperwings are visible at some distance, and the orange-yellow bill shield, sur- rounded by black, is also visible at moderate dis- tances (plate 136). The shield, although smaller in eclipse, is usually still evident on individuals in flocks of Common Eiders. (Eclipse males are often identified as subadults, partly because some field guides state that eclipse males are not seen in western Europe in autumn. Single males in full breeding plumage can be seen from mid October onwards.) Adult female Very similar to adult female Common Eider. The plumage is warm reddish- brown, but Common Eider can sometimes appear similar, and, since juvenile King Eiders are greyish- brown in autumn, this character is not reliable for identification. The speculum is dark, bordered with white bars. The best characters for separating female King Eider from Common Eider are King’s smaller size, the short dark bill (which often appears black) and the head-and-bill shape. Unlike Common Eider, King Eider never shows the grey culmen merging with the forehead. Some females have paler feathering near the bill base, which emphasises the blackness of the bill (plate 135), while others are more evenly coloured. Juvenile female Very similar to adult female, but with greyish-brown plumage. Juvenile male Gradually acquires blackish- brown plumage, mainly on the head, belly, flanks and back, which is obvious in late autumn and early winter. The wings are evenly dark. As with Common Eider, immature males in their various plumage stages exhibit a wide degree of individual variation. First-winter male Has blackish body and back, with paler, mottled upper mantle and breast, dark head, and yellowish base to the bill, with a sugges- tion of a shield. The upperwings are evenly dark, as on Common Eider. The pale breast and the pale patch on the thighs vary in prominence during the first winter and until the summer, when the imma- ture moults into an eclipse plumage; it is then similar to an eclipse adult male, but differs in having completely black wings. Second-winter male Difficult to separate from adults once the moult into second-winter has commenced, but usually shows a less prominent shield, and duller colours on the head, with the cheeks usually white. The upperwings are as on adults, but the oval patch on the wing-coverts varies from completely dark to pure white (plate 137). 236 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 Mikael Nord Flight identification of eiders } 1 34. Adult male King Eider S omateria spectabilis with Common Eiders S. mollissima, Sweden, April 1991. The King Eider is unmistakable, but nevertheless easily overlooked in a flock of Commons. Its smaller size and more compact, stockier body are always the best indicators, and the coloration will then make identification easy. Note the typical white oval on the uppeiwing-coverts. 1 35. Adult female and male King Eider Somateria spectabilis, Norway, April 1992. For both sexes, note the shape of the head and bill. The bill of the female is short and blackish, and contrasts with the pale feathering at the base of the bill (cf. Common Eider S. mollissima ), while the head is more rounded, never appearing triangular like that of Common Eider 1 36. King Eiders Somateria spectabilis, Svalbard, July 1 985. The flock contains three second-summer males, two females, two first-summer males and one adult male in eclipse (right). The last is in almost full eclipse plumage, and the head and body will be evenly dark blackish-brown later in the summer; the wings remain similar to those of adult breeding. 137. King Eiders Somateria spectabilis, Norway, March 1 992. Adult males and females, with one second-summer male (in front). The second-summer male is similar to an adult, but the bill shield is smaller and the head pattern more dusky than on an adult.This individual has completely dark uppeiwings, rather than the usual white oval on the wing-coverts. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 237 John Larsen Lars Carlsson Gull-Britt Nilsson Flight identification of eiders ) Steller’s Eider Polysticta stelleri Size Length 42-48 cm, wingspan 68-77 cm. A medium-sized diving duck which, although closely related to the Somateria eiders, is considerably smaller. It is similar in size to Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula , but appears heavier and bulkier. Silhouette The general impression of Steller’s Eider is of a compact duck, not so bulky as the other eider species. In flight, it appears heavy at the rear, while the silhouette and whirring wings prompt comparison with a giant Black Guillemot Cepphus grylle (plate 138). The rather square head shape, which is so obvious on resting birds, cannot be seen in flight, even if the steep forehead and the short, thick neck are often apparent. The bill can be likened to that of a ‘cartoon duck’, and at close range it appears like a cone glued onto the head; it is perhaps more similar to the bill of a dabbling duck than to that of the other diving ducks. Flight and flocking The flight is fast and direct with whirring wingbeats, similar to that of Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula. Steller’s Eider usually migrates singly in the southernmost parts of its range, and may join other wildfowl, especially Mallards, or diving ducks such as Common Eiders. If several Steller’s Eiders are present in a mixed flock, they will usually stick close together. Farther north, large single-species flocks occur and the formation of these is very dense, both on the water and in the air, not unlike flocks of Aythya species. Plumage and bare parts Adult male Gives a pale general impression, with a predominantly white head, back, flanks and upperwing-coverts. The throat is black, as is the complete neck-ring, which merges with a broad black stripe running down the back to the tail. The underparts are orange or pale rusty-brown, but appear dark at long range. The bill is dark, and the eye is strikingly dark, set in a pale face. The white forewing, dark speculum and broad white trailing edge combine to give a distinct upperwing pattern. Adult male eclipse The body colour is similar to that of adult females, giving a dark general impres- sion, like other eiders. The upperwings, however, are similar in colour and pattern to those of breeding males (plate 141). Adult female Appears predominantly blackish- brown, darker than most other diving ducks. The speculum appears dark (the glossy bluish col- oration is difficult to see in flight) and is outlined by white bars in front and behind. A diffuse, pale eye-ring may be visible at close range, while the white underwing-coverts are striking in sharp light. Juvenile Very similar to adult female, but the white lines bordering the speculum are thinner and less distinct. In particular, the rear bar can be very narrow, and effectively invisible in the field. First-winter male Similar to adult female during the first winter and spring, but then starts to show plumage features of adult male. The plumage becomes more generally greyish-brown in col- oration, although this is difficult to determine over long distances. The general paleness and/or the presence of pale feathers within the breast, neck and head help to age and sex such individuals. The forewing lacks white (as on adult). Similar to adult male once the moult into second-winter plumage has commenced, but some individuals may show dark feathering within the white shoulders and forewing. Acknowledgments This article forms the basis of the eiders chapter in the pher Helm/A & C Black. The editors of British Birds are forthcoming book Flight Identification of European Seabirds grateful to the publishers for allowing the reproduction by the authors listed below, to be published by Christo- here of the text and photographs from that book. Anders Blomdahl, Aldervagen 2, S-375 92 Kallinge, Sweden Bertil Breife, Alby 3307, S-380 62 Morbyldnga, Sweden Niklas Holmstrbm, Stora Sundby Gdrd, S-640 40 Stora Sundby, Sweden 238 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 Markus Varesvuo Flight identification of eiders c ) 1 38. Adult female and three adult male Steller's Eiders Polysticta stelleri, Norway, March 1 996. The females are uniformly dark brown, with white unden/vings. Note the rear-heavy impression. 1 39. Adult male Steller's Eider Polysticta stelleri, Norway, March 1 998. Note the contrastingly patterned upperwing. The lack of black on the belly instantly separates it from males of all other eider species. 140. Female Steller's Eider Polysticta stelleri, probably first-winter Norway, March 2000.This individual is similar to an adult female, but has narrower white bars bordering the speculum (on some first-winters, these bars are virtually absent). British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 233-239 239 Pekka Helo Tomi Muukkonen John Larsen Bird Photograph of the Year Sponsored by: functional outdoor clothing systems HarperCollinsPr/6//s/zm J "udging for this year’s competition was as difficult, but just as enjoyable as ever. Even though the number of entries was slightly lower than in recent years, the overall standard entries, which was reduced to 18 after much debate and collective scratching of heads. All five judges, as in previous years, then estab- lished their own order of preference for the top was felt to be just as high. A protracted initial selection brought the judges to a short-list of 29 18 entries, and the vote resulted in the following sequence: 1st Lesser Kestrels Falco naumartni (plate 142) Roger Tidman (Norfolk) 2nd= Dunlin Calidris alpina (plate 143) Mike Lane (West Midlands) 2nd= Eurasian Jay Garrulus glandarius (plate 144) Peter Preece (Warwickshire) 4th Great Skuas Catharacta skua (plate 145) Mike Lane (West Midlands) 5th Briinnich’s Guillemots Uria lomvia (plate 146) Jens Eriksen (Oman) 6th Wryneck Jynx torquilla (plate 147) Richard Brooks (Norfolk) 7th Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla (plate 148) Alan Petty ( Kent) 8th Tundra Swans Cygnus columbianus (plate 149) Tony Hamblin (Warwickshire) 9th= Black-headed Bunting Emberiza melanocephala (plate 150) Wendy Conway (West Midlands) 9th= Grey Heron Ardea cinerea (plate 151) Mike Lane (West Midlands) 11th Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus (plate 152) Richard Brooks (Norfolk) 12th= Spotted Crake Porzana porzana Richard Brooks (Norfolk) 12th= Red Kite Milvus milvus Robert Snell (Staffordshire) 14th Common Shelducks Tadorna tadorna Tony Hamblin (Warwickshire) 15th= Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybridus Hanne Eriksen (Oman) I5th= European Roller Coracius garrulus Roger Tidman (Norfolk) 17th Black Storks Ciconia nigra Roger Tidman (Norfolk) 18th Purple Heron Ardea purpurea Jens Eriksen (Oman) Other photographers whose work was included in the initia il short-list were : Neil Bowman (Norfolk), Wayne Richardson (Teesside), Terry Wall (West Midlands) . and Steve Young (Liverpool). Si> ; photographers submitted transparencies and Roger T idman. Three others - Jens Eriksen, of sin ch a consistently high standard that all Alan Petty , tnd Steve Young - had two trans- three of their entries were chosen in the initial parencies sel lected. Furthermore, no fewer than selection. Congratulations for this fine achieve- three photographers had all three of their entries me nt are due to Richard Brooks, Wendy chosen for the final short-list; Richard Brooks, Conw ay, Tony 1 lamblin, Mike Lane, Robert Snell Mike Lane ; md Roger Tidman were clearly on 240 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 240-249 142. BIRD PHOTOGRAPH OFTHEYEAR. Lesser Kestrels Falco naumanni, Spain, April 2001 (Canon EOS 3; 500-mm, with 1 ,4x converter; 1/640, f5. 6, Fuji Sensia 100). Roger Tidman top form with their cameras during 2001. Roger Tidman’s winning photograph shows a pair of Lesser Kestrels Falco naumanni in Spain in April. The photograph was taken from a pylon hide, erected near the colony, with the necessary permissions obtained from the rele- vant local authorities, before the start of the breeding season. Roger claims that he spent many hours in the hide, and witnessed copula- tion on six occasions during a two-week period before he managed to capture the couple shown in plate 142. This pair was ideally positioned, being both clear of the roof and at a suitable distance from his lens. ‘Well worth the time and effort, 1 thought’ was his comment; we can only concur. This photo, like his winning entry last year, was highly rated by all five judges, and given two firsts and three seconds in the indi- vidual voting (thus achieving a remarkable 87 votes out of a possible 90). The vivid blue sky and the lichen-encrusted pantiles contribute to the setting, while the photograph is technically excellent, being perfectly exposed, bright and sharp. It illustrates a key element of the breeding behaviour of a species which has declined sharply in Europe in recent years, and consequently ‘tells a good story’ in a single image, something which the judges of this com- petition are always looking for. With previous successes in 1996 and 2001, this is the third time that Roger has won the British Birds photo- graphic award in its 26-year history, and he is the first person to win on three occasions. The prizes for our winner this year include a Sprayway GORE-TEX jacket, and a selection of books from leading natural history book pub- lishers HarperCollins and New Holland, as well as an inscribed salver and a cash prize. In joint-second place this year, each com- manding 71 votes, were studies of a Dunlin Calidris alpina and a Eurasian Jay Garrulus glandarius. Mike Lane’s photograph of a territo- rial Dunlin, taken on a trip to Iceland, is a won- derful mixture of bird and background (plate 143). Indeed, Mike commented that ‘The perch and the background are as important to me as the bird itself. This singing Dunlin used various grassy mounds within his territory, but this wonderful, lichen-covered rock was the one and only spot that I wanted pictures from.’ The judges particularly liked the low angle from which this shot was taken, and also admired the ‘songpost’ and the brilliant blue sky which forms a superb backdrop to the wader, all of which combine to create an exceptionally pleasing image. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 240-249 241 Bird Photograph of the Year C 143. (Left) SECOND EQUAL. Dunlin Calidris alpina, northern Iceland, June 2001 (Canon EOS 3; 600-mm f4 IS; 1/350, f8, Fuji Sensia 100). Mike Lane Sharing second place, Peter Preece’s shot of a Eurasian Jay about to swallow an acorn instantly conveys all the character of an autumn day in woodland. This is the first time that Peter has entered our competition, and it is good to see a new face doing so well first time around. With permission from the Worcestershire Wildlife Trust, he had built a wooden hide in Rough Hill Wood, near Redditch, and baited the site with acorns from his freezer for more than a year. In October 2001, five jays, comprising two adults and three juveniles, were visiting the site regularly and he was able to take many pictures of them feeding and collecting acorns. They were observed swallowing up to five acorns at a time before heading off, presumably to a nearby cache. The individual portrayed in plate 144 had just swallowed one acorn and was preparing to gulp down a second. Peter described how the jay would hold an acorn in its bill and then throw the head back to allow the acorn to slip down its throat. This superb photograph is an excellent illustration of the Eurasian Jay’s ability to carry large quantities of seeds; they can carry no fewer than nine acorns in the gullet ( BWP ). Both second-placed entries will receive book prizes from HarperCollins and New Holland, as well as a cash prize. Mike Lane’s portrait of two Great Skuas Catharacta skua displaying (plate 145) was placed fourth, and means that for the second year in a row we have featured a displaying Bonxie on Handa, Highland. Mike describes Handa as ‘the’ place to capture this species on film, and he visited the island in August. Dis- playing birds are more difficult to find at this relatively late stage of the season, but he eventu- ally found one that obliged, and on a photo- genic rock too! The judges thought that, although displaying Great Skuas are not infre- quently photographed, Mike’s shot had every- thing: both birds perfectly sharp, wonderfully composed in the frame, with a pleasing back- ground. You can almost taste the salt in the air by looking at the photograph! That last comment applies equally, if not 1 44. (Below) SECOND EQUAL. Eurasian Jay Garrulus glandarius, Redditch, Worcestershire, October 200 1 (Canon EOS 5; Canon 100-400-mm; 1/125, f6, Fuji Sensia 100). Peter Preece 1 45. FOURTH. Great Skuas Catharacla skua. Handa, Highland. August 200 1 (Canon EOS IV; 600-mm f4 IS; 1/350. f8, Fuji Sensia 100). Mike Lane 146. FIFTH. Brunnich's Guillemots Uria lomvia, Lomfjordsfjellet, Svalbard, July 2001 (Nikon F5; Nikkor 300-mm AF-S 1 :2.8D; I /800, f2.8. Fuji Velvia 50). Jens Eriksen 1 47. SIXTH. Wryneck Jynx torquilla, Lesvos, Greece, April 200 1 (Nikon FI 00; 500-mm f4 AFS, with l.4x converter; 1/320, f8, Fuji Sensia 100, rated at 125 ASA). Richard Brooks 1 48. SEVENTH. Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla, Dover, Kent, July 200 1 (Nikon F 1 00; 500-mm f4 AFS, with 1 ,4x converter; I /500, f5.6, Fuji Velvia, rated at 1 00 ASA). Alan Petty 149. EIGHTH. Tundra Swans C/gnus columbianus, Welney, Norfolk, December 2001 (Canon EOS IV; Canon 500-mm AF, with 1 ,4x converter; 1/500, f8, Fuji Sensia 100, rated at 200 ASA). Tony Hamblin more so, to Jens Eriksen’s sensational action shot of two Briinnich’s Guillemots Uria lomvia in Svalbard (plate 146). Jens recalls that he was sitting in a Zodiac inflatable beneath the tow- ering cliffs at Lomfjordsfjellet, when two Briin- nich’s Guillemots landed near the boat and commenced a ferocious fight which lasted several minutes. For most of that time, the birds were either fully submerged or there was so much water splashing around that they could hardly be seen. Jens took many pictures, but this is his favourite, since one can identify the species yet still get a good feeling for the severity of the dispute. In terms of perfection, it would have been preferable to have taken this photo from a slightly higher elevation, but such fine-tuning is rarely possible when bouncing around in a small boat! Richard Brooks has now achieved sixth place two years in a row, and all three of his entries this year were taken on the Greek island of Lesvos. The shot of a Wryneck Jynx torquilla (plate 147) appears at first glance to be a good, but perhaps not exceptional, photograph, until one looks more carefully and notices the long, needle-like tongue probing the deep cracks of an old Almond Primus dulcis tree. Richard first saw the Wryneck as it flew into the tree and, in the hope of photographic opportunities, he settled down in his car, from where this shot was taken. He says that this was the first time he had ever managed to capture the species ‘hoovering’ up ants in this way. Alan Petty takes us back to seabird cliffs, with a dizzying composition of two bickering Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla , taken at Dover, Kent, in July 2001 (plate 148). He recalls having watched the two tussling in mid-air, and squeezing the shutter whenever he could get them in focus. Like the Briinnich’s Guillemots in plate 146, this picture conveys the intensity of such disputes, which are commonplace at many seabird colonies. In December 2001, Tony Hamblin took full advantage of beautiful, soft afternoon light, and two obliging Tundra Swans Cygnus columbianus coming in to land at Welney, Norfolk (plate 149). The swans chose a stretch of water devoid of other wildfowl, and were captured in an almost identical pose as they prepared for touchdown. Tied in ninth place this year, we have a frame-filling Grey Heron Ardea cinerca in (light, and the only small passerine to make the final short-list. The adult Grey Heron is Mike Lane’s third contribution to the top ten, and was pho- 246 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 240-249 Bird Photograph of the Year C tographed in Hertfordshire in early May. As he confesses, flight photography has become so much easier with autofocus and image-sta- bilised lenses. As the heron took off, Mike was caught unawares, but his reactions were sharp enough to swing the camera and let the auto- focus do the rest. The result is very impressive, and captures the huge broad wings, and con- trastingly long skinny neck and legs of the species very well. As mentioned earlier, it is always good to be able to welcome a new face amongst the final- 150. NINTH EQUAL. Black-headed Bunting Emberiza melanocephala, Lesvos, Greece, April 2001 (Canon T90; Canon 500-mm, with I Ax converter; f4.5, Fuji Sensia). Wendy Conway British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 240-249 247 151. NINTH EQUAL. Grey Heron Ardea cinerea, Hertfordshire, May 200 1 (Canon EOS 3; 100-400-mm 6.6 IS; 1/800, 6.6, Fuji Sensia 100). Mike Lane 1 52. ELEVENTH. Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus, Lesvos, Greece, May 200 1 (Nikon F 1 00; 500-mm f4 AFS, with I Ax converter; I /320, 6, Fuji Sensia 1 00, rated at 1 25 ASA). Richard Brooks Bird Photograph of the Year ) ists, and Wendy Conway has made an impres- sive debut in this competition with her beauti- fully composed portrait of a singing male Black-headed Bunting Emberiza melanocephala. Wendy describes how she watched this partic- ular individual for some time, on the banks of the East River, Lesvos, in April 2001. The shot was taken using a car as a hide. The last of the photographs featured here is yet another picture from Lesvos, and another from Richard Brooks. This Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus was one of a large group feeding on a rapidly drying section of the Kalloni East River. Their position, close to the main road, meant that it was possible to drive a car down to the water’s edge and sit quietly without causing undue disturbance. Richard comments that he had seen ibises indulging in this distinctive wing-drying/stretching ritual before, but had never managed to photograph it. Luckily, this particular individual maintained the pose long enough for him to secure a number of photos, and even to change a roll of film in the midst of doing so! It is a beautiful portrait, and is one which seems to cry out for a suitable humorous caption. . . A regular part of the Bird Photograph of the Year competition is the search for the Young Photographer of the Year, traditionally spon- sored by the Eric Hosking Charitable Trust. Dis- appointingly, there was a dearth of entries this year, and the judges were of the opinion that the standard was not sufficiently high to merit the presentation of an award. We very much hope that this situation will be remedied next year, and would like to take this opportunity to encourage all up-and-coming young photogra- phers to send us some examples of their work. Thanks to the support of our sponsors, Sprayway, HarperCollins and New Holland, the 14 photographers whose work was chosen in the initial selection will all be invited to attend the reception at the British Birdwatching Fair at Rutland Water, in August, at which the award and prizes will be presented to the top three photographers. Next year’s competition will assess pho- tographs taken during 2002, and the rules will be announced in the January 2003 issue of British Birds, and on our website (www.british- birds.co.uk) before the end of the year; they will also be available from the address below. In addition to our usual awards, we also plan to give recognition to the best newcomer in the competition. Each year we look forward greatly to seeing the entries of a number of familiar photographers who consistently provide stun- ning images for this competition. In case, however, the regular appearance of the same names each year acts to inhibit rather than inspire new contributors (and we sincerely hope it is the latter!), we have decided to introduce this newcomers’ award. We hope that the success of Peter Preece and Wendy Conway this year will encourage more new faces to enter next year! Dr Roger Riddington, Tim Appleton, Prof. Richard Chandler, Robin Chittenden and David Tipling do British Birds, Chapel Cottage, Dunrossness, Shetland ZE2 9JH Looking back Seventy-five years ago : 'HOMING INSTINCT IN ROBINS. Following my experiments in homing with Hedge-Sparrows [ Prunella modular is ] (Vol. XIX., p. 24), I have always hoped to investigate the same with Robins ( Erithacus rubecula). ‘Unfortunately, I have never had a Robin which was sure to visit my traps more than once a day; I did, however, find one (ringed F. 1030) which I took a dis- tance of five miles by speedometer on a fairly straight road on December 20th, 1926, at about 2.30 p.m., and recaught the next morning at about 9.30 a.m. where usually taken. I think this bird was home by nightfall on the 20th. ‘Another Robin (ringed F.1034) became a fairly frequent trap visitor. On November 16th, 1926, I caught it and tied some red wool on its tarsus, releasing it \/i miles away with a rise 300 feet high intervening, at about 1 1 a.m. I am of [the] opinion that I saw this bird with the naked eye at home about an hour later, and established its return by telescope at 2.30 p.m. A. H. R. Wilson.’ ( Brit. Birds 20: 294-295, May 1927) British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 240-249 249 Conservation research news Compiled by Ken Smith and Jeremy Wilson Female Willow Tits suffer in their old age The Willow Tit Parus montanus is a declining woodland species in the UK which is likely to be included in the Red List of Birds of Conserva- tion Concern at the next revision (RSPB, in prep.). In Scandinavian forests, however, it is one of the most numerous resident tits and as such has been the subject of many long-term projects. In a recently published study, Orell & Belda (2002) looked at the survival rates of colour-ringed male and female Willow Tits during a 15-year period. In males the annual survival rate was around 64% irrespective of age, but females survived less well after the age of five (annual survival 46% compared with 61% for younger birds). In any single year, a small proportion of birds did not breed but this had no impact on their subsequent chance of surviving to the next season. Intriguingly, Orell & Belda found that females which skipped a breeding year at any time during their first five years of life had a significantly higher annual survival rate in later life compared with those which bred in every year. It appears that there is a long-term survival cost to the females in breeding, so that those females which do not breed every year will live longer. Unfortunately, the authors present no data on reproductive output, so it is not pos- sible to say whether, by not breeding every year, females will live long enough to produce more young overall. There were no significant differ- ences in the survival rates of the males, so pre- sumably breeding is less stressful for them. Orell, M„ & Belda, E. J. 2002. Delayed cost of reproduction and senescence in the Willow Tit Parus montanus. J.Anim. Ecol. 7 1 : 55-64. Disease: a challenge for bird conservation in the 2 1 st century Vector-borne disease is an increasing challenge to humans and domestic stock as a result of the globalisation of human travel and commerce, climate change, habitat modification, and the evolution of resistance to traditional control measures in the pathogens themselves. Foot- and-mouth disease, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), AIDS, and the resur- gence of diseases such as malaria and leishman- iasis are recent examples. In an important review, Friend et al. (2001) argue that these challenges are just as likely to apply to wild birds, and that avian conservationists should recognise that disease is increasingly likely to limit the success of bird conservation based solely on management of habitat and predators. There are already warning signs. For example, the introduction of avian malaria and pox to Hawaii limits the abundance and distrib- ution of native forest bird species; and mycoplasmal conjunctivitis in populations of House Finches Carpodacus mexicanus, well- publicised in its spread but not thought to be a major threat to this widespread species, is a new addition to the list of diseases now challenging bird communities. Ominously perhaps, the spread of introduced disease agents extends to some of the most pristine ecosystems on the planet; for example, antibodies to a viral pathogen of domestic chickens have been found at both poles: in Emperor Penguins Aptenodytes forsteri in the Antarctic, and in Spectacled 250 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 250-25 1 c Conservation research news > Eiders Somateria fischeri in Alaska. The same pathogen may now be responsible for declines of 6-10% per annum in populations of Common Eiders S. mollissima in the Gulf of Finland. Friend et al. also note that diseases may have even greater conservation significance and cost when they afflict populations which are either very small or in severe decline. For example, 15-20% of the endangered western population of American White Pelicans Pele- canus erythrorhynchos was killed by a single out- break of avian botulism, while a foster-parenting programme for Whooping Cranes Grus americana in the 1970s failed when avian tuberculosis wiped out 39% of the birds in the flock. Perhaps the most spectacular current example of avian population decline caused by disease emergence (which, in this case, is prob- ably viral) is the rapid decline of White-backed Gyps bengalensis and Long-billed Vulture G. indicus populations to less than 5% of their former numbers over much of the Indian part of their range. This also illustrates the potential for wider ecological, economic and social con- sequences. In India, carcasses of domestic animals are traditionally left in the open for consumption by vultures, and the disappear- ance of the birds has probably allowed the rapid increase in populations of feral dogs, and encouraged the appearance of wintering Griffon Vultures G. fulvus in larger numbers than is usual. The dogs now pose a nuisance and a human health threat and there is a risk that the disease will be transmitted to vulture populations farther west in Eurasia, and perhaps in Africa. Friend et al. conclude that increasing human demands will continue to alter landscapes and habitats in ways which increase the probability of disease emergence and spread among wild birds. If we are to sustain avian biodiversity and abundance in the future, they emphasise that avian conservation biologists must overcome two barriers presented by conventional thinking. First, we must discard the traditional perspective that disease is not (generally) a sig- nificant factor in the population dynamics of wild species. Second, we must recognise the importance of managing the environment to minimise the probability of disease emergence, rather than managing the disease organism, or the affected bird species, once the pathogen has become established. If we do only the latter, then, increasingly, our efforts will be too little, too late. Friend, M„ McLean, R. G„ & Dein, F. J. 200 1 . Disease emergence in birds: challenges for the twenty-first century, Auk I 1 8: 290-303. Dr Ken Smith and Dr Jeremy Wilson, Conservation Science Department, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SGI 9 2DL This feature, contributed by the RSPB's Research Department, reports the most interesting recent scientific news relevant to the conservation of Western Palearctic bird species. Looking back Seventy-five years ago: GREAT GREY SHRIKE IN KENT IN SPRING. On April 6th, 1927, my son, W. H. Hale, and I saw a Great Grey Shrike ( Lanins e. excuhitor) at Hothfield. It is well known that as an autumn and winter visitor this bird occurs almost every year in Kent, but according to Ticehurst (B. of Kent, p. 115), only three have been recorded in spring or summer. I take this opportunity of recording another bird shot at Hollingbourne on February 19th, 1906. James R. Hale.’ ( Brit. Birds 20: 294, May 1927) British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 250-25 I 251 White-tailed Black Storks in the Iberian peninsula There are several reports of Black Storks Ciconia nigra with a completely or partially white tail (e.g. Olsson et al. 1980; Ryder & Ryder 1982; Firmanszky & Horvath 1997; Ullman 1999), although there is no reference to the phe- nomenon in any major handbook (e.g. Bauer & Glutz von Blotzheim 1966; Cramp & Simmons 1977; del Hoyo et al. 1992). Published observa- tions refer to breeding populations in central Europe, including Hungary, Bulgaria, former Yugoslavia and Greece, but also one in Africa (Ryder & Ryder 1982). Explanations for white feathers in the tail vary from the existence of a recessive local gene, resulting in partial albinism (Olsson et al. 1980; Ullman 1999), to stains caused by faecal excretions (Harvey 1982). During the 2001 breeding season, in the Madrid region of central Spain, I made a careful check for the occurrence of white-tailed Black Storks. In order to ensure reliability of data and to avoid double-counting of certain individuals, I recorded only breeding pairs at the nest. Nine pairs of Black Storks bred in Madrid in that year. At one nest, both adults showed a white tail from below, but with the central rectrices appearing black from above. At another nest, one adult had a completely white tail. In addition, I am aware of no fewer than 78 sightings of completely or partially white-tailed Black Storks in different parts of the Iberian peninsula between March 1996 and September 2001. Such individuals have been recorded in east Portugal (Parque Internacional do Rio Douro), and in all the Spanish regions where the species breeds: Andalucia (Parque Natural del Entorno de Donana, Huelva), Castilla- La Mancha (Toledo), Castilla y Leon (Avila and Salamanca provinces), Extremadura (Badajoz and Caceres provinces) and Madrid. These varied from completely white-tailed individuals to others on which just the central feathers were white. Furthermore, white-tailed Black Storks have been observed throughout the year in a resident population at Tietar valley (between Avila and Toledo provinces). Clearly, Black Storks having a white tail are not restricted to central Europe. The above observa- tions, together with that from Africa (Ryder & Ryder 1982), indicate that this is a relatively wide- spread phenomenon. Moreover, my regular obser- vations in Madrid demonstrate that the white tail is not an artefact caused by faecal soiling. Instead, it seems to be the result of genetic processes pro- ducing partial albinism, as previously suggested by Olsson et al. (1980) and Ullman (1999). Partial albinism is relatively frequent among birds (Rosier 1999; Kapischke 2001 ), and is generally due to the expression of recessive alleles that alter the devel- opment of melanic pigmentation in the feathers (Bensch et al. 2000). The observation of a breeding pair in which both the male and the female had a white tail demonstrates that this phe- nomenon is not linked to sexual genes and may, therefore, occur in both sexes. It would be interesting to obtain reliable data from elsewhere in the species’ breeding range in order to ascertain the true frequency of this trait in different populations. I thank Dr Santiago Merino and Dr Roger Riddington for their generous collaboration. I also acknowledge the translations of Axel Mahlau and Vamosi Krisztian. Finally, I thank Flora Cano, Fina Alonso, Alicia Her- nansanz, Manuel Fernandez and the company Ges- Natura s.l. for their support. This work is also supported by project BOS2000-1125 of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology. References Bauer; K. M„ & Glutz von Blotzheim, U. N. 1 966. Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropas. Vol. I . Frankfurt am Main. Bensch, S., Hansson, B„ Hasselquist, D.. & Nielsen, B. 2000. Partial albinism in a semi-isolated population of Great Reed Warblers. Hereditas (Lund) 1 33: 1 67- 1 70. Cramp, S„ & Simmons, K. E. L (eds.) 1 977. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.V 61. I . Oxford, del Hoyo.J., Elliott, A., & SargatalJ. (eds.) 1992. Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. I . Ostrich to Ducks. Barcelona. Firmanszky, G., & Horvath, M. 1 997. Black stork with white tail. Tuzok 2: I 1 3. Harvey, W. G. 1 982. White-tailed Black Storks. Brit. Birds 75; 93. Kapischke, H. J. 200 1 . Notizen zu teilalbinotischen Amseln. Om. Mitt 53: 106-109. Olsson, J„ Asterling, R, & Larsson, L. 1 980. White-tailed Black Storks. Brit. Birds 73: 1 04. Rosier; R 1 999. Beobachtungen von Faibanomalien bei einigen Vogelarten. Om. Mitt. 5 1 : 46-49. Ryder, J. H„ & Rydei; B. A. 1 982. White-tailed Black Storks. Brit. Birds 75: 93. Ullman, M. 1 999. Black Stork with white tail. Brit. Birds 92: 1 64. Luis Santiago Cano Alonso C! Quevedo 1 6, E-05430 La Adrada (Avila), Spain; e-mail: catuchedPtclcline.es 252 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 252 Letters Conservation problems with the recognition of new species The trouble with debates about the identity of potential ‘firsts’ (e.g. Brit. Birds 95: 12-16) is that they may delay the recognition of new species deserving special attention. In July 1989, for example, two dark-rumped storm-petrels caught at Tynemouth, Tyne & Wear, were iden- tified within hours as being probably Swinhoe’s Storm-petrels Oceanodroma monorhis (Brit. Birds 88: 342-348). Nearly five years of discus- sion then followed, during which time, one of these petrels continued to reappear, showing a brood-patch, at this increasingly well-known site. Had the petrels bred in Britain, and the nest been robbed, there would have been no penalty available for the offence, because a species has to be on the British List to qualify for protection under the Wildl.ife & Country- side Act. While many rare birds appear to be most vulnerable when breeding, this is not always the case. Most mortality among our Roseate Terns Sterna dougalli, for example, occurs on the win- tering grounds, in Africa. A new risk to the rare petrels of the Atlantic islands (possibly also including Swinhoe’s Storm-petrel) has emerged with the discovery that their range at sea extends west to the American coast, where records of new species are traditionally accepted only after collection of a specimen. This is most serious with regard to the gadfly-petrels of the genus Pterodroma. Three of these - Capped Petrel P. hasitata, Herald Petrel P. arminjoniana and Fea’s Petrel P. feae - may still number thou- sands, but two - Bermuda Petrel P. cahow and Zino’s Petrel P. madeira - are now reduced to scores, and are among the rarest birds in the world. Capped Petrel and Herald Petrel have been collected, and Fea’s Petrel photographed, off eastern North America, but there is room for dispute about the last because both Bermuda and Zino’s Petrels closely resemble it. In con- sequence, there have been comments such as ‘Bermuda Petrel... obviously a specimen will be needed to confirm the species in our waters’ ( American Birds 39: 157). In 1996, I wrote to the President and Acting Chair of the Committee on Classification and Nomencla- ture of the AOU, with a request for clarifica- tion. He replied as follows: 'Bermuda Petrel is listed as endangered and therefore protected from collecting (or anything else) without a special permit. None of the mollis/ feae/madeira complex is protected by US federal law because they are not listed in the regulations as migratory birds, largely because they are not known to occur here on a regular basis. To my knowledge, none is listed as endangered. So, basically, they are unpro- tected... The Check-list Committee is inter- ested in scientifically documented information on bird identification and distri- bution. In most instances this requires speci- men evidence. I think that this is one of those cases where photographs or detailed notes will not be definitive. I think that those who are concerned about the collecting of a few indi- viduals from a population of birds are overly worried. If the population is, in fact, so low that the removal of a few individuals over a decade or so means extinction of the popula- tion, it is probably doomed.’ In other words, one of the rarest European birds, Zino’s Petrel, will remain unprotected in North America until it has been collected there, if only in mistake for Fea’s Petrel, which is itself scarce. This is in complete contrast to the problem presented by known pests such as House Crow Corvus splendens (see Brit. Birds 94: 291, 548), or the parakeets discussed recently in British Birds (95: 17-20). Sir Christopher Lever (1994, Naturalized Animals ) reported that, in their native range of central Africa and India, Rose- ringed Parakeets Psittacula krameri ‘are severe pests of a wide variety of agricultural crops’, and that they are ‘a severe nuisance on the island of Mauritius’. Similarly, in their native range in South America, Monk Parakeets Myiopsitta monachus ‘are extremely destructive of a wide range of crops...’ and ‘crop losses can in some cases be as high as 45%’; while ‘in the United States, Monk Parakeets feed on a large number of commercial crops’. Where species new to a country are con- cerned, it seems time for international agree- ment whereby, as soon as such a species appears, it is determined whether it is on any ‘red list’ or is known to be a ‘nuisance’. Appro- © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 253-256 253 Letters priate action should then be taken without ence, which may take a period of years, awaiting bureaucratic proof of the species’ pres- Dr W. R. P. Bourne Deportment of Zoology, Aberdeen University, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ At the request of the author, the vernacular names of petrels in this letter follow those given in Sea Swallow 42: 16-27, for reasons detailed there, rather than the standard BB reference on names, which is The ‘British Birds’ List of Birds of the Western Palearctic (1997). Note that, for species not on the West Palearctic List, BB follows A World Checklist of Birds (Monroe & Sibley, 1993). Eds. The use of digital images in record assessment The discussion of a ‘mystery raptor’ in north- west England (Brit. Birds 95: 12-16) presented a refreshingly pragmatic summary of the identifi- cation and assessment debate. To take up your invitation for comments, I do not feel that it would be appropriate, nor indeed desirable, if the absence of photographic evidence of a potential ‘first for Britain’ were to render a record inadmissible. It is, however, undeniable that supporting photographic evidence, when available, can be of immense value. A significant factor not mentioned when discussing photographic evidence is the increasing popularity of digital photography, and digital images created by scanning tradi- tional photographic prints. These images can be manipulated to the extent that the end product depicts a bird in a location and environment very different from the one in which the orig- inal photograph was taken. Shouldn’t we, there- fore, be considering what is an acceptable photograph? Should transparencies, or prints capable of being supported by the original neg- atives, be the only acceptable evidence? While these, especially the latter, may also be subject to manipulation, this can be detected in most instances. My view is that original digital images should at the very least be subjected to greater scrutiny, and that supporting evidence (including corroboration by other observers) should be to a higher standard than may be demanded in support of a ‘traditional’ photo- graphic image. Ian Copley 5 Greengates Crescent, Little Neston, Cheshire CH64 OXH EDITORIAL COMMENT The ease with which digital images can be manipulated was emphasised by the recent publication of pictures of an Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea in Shetland (e.g. Birding World 14: 449). Although, in this instance, the aim was simply to provide a more appealing back- ground to a bird in captivity, and was therefore entirely innocent (and arguably quite acceptable), such images do illustrate Ian Copley’s argument perfectly. Ruddy Duck: facts and fiction In expressing concern over the future of the White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala (Brit. Birds 94: 546-547), Piero Genovesi adds little that is new on the cull of Ruddy Ducks O. jamaicensis in the UK, conveniently ignores the facts, and, like others before him, misjudges completely the magnitude of the perceived problem. There is no genuine scientific evidence to show that the Oxyura hybrids in Spain presently constitute more than one or, perhaps, two mated pairs per annum, and this is far from convincing evidence that White-headed Ducks are threatened with extinction or, indeed, are at risk from ‘genetic swamping’. The IUCN ‘knee- jerk’ guidelines should be abandoned. The assumption that Ruddy Ducks wintering in France are derived from UK breeders is also without a single shred of evidence. Similar numbers of Ruddy Ducks winter locally in 254 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 253-256 Letters Scotland, which may indicate that many, if not all, of the UK breeding population winter entirely within the UK. Ringing recoveries seem to confirm this contention. Since many wild- fowl collections in France and Spain also contain Ruddy Ducks, the small congregations in northwest France may well originate from within that country. Further, Genovesi does not cite a single instance of a bird species suffering gene- swamping by another; the examples which he gives concern subspecies. By definition, sub- species - a purely contrived designation - of a given species must be capable of readily inter- breeding, otherwise they would be given dis- tinct species status. If we examine the case of the Pacific Black Duck Anas superciliosa of the nominate race (the 'New Zealand Grey Duck’ A. s. superciliosa), it is hardly convincing. This subspecies has a population over one million strong in New Zealand, despite frequent hybridisation with female Mallards A. platyrhynchos (New Zealand Department of Conservation data). As it also has an annual shooting ‘bag’ of 200,000 individ- uals, it is hardly the lost cause which Genovesi makes it out to be. The species is also abundant and widespread in Australia, perhaps num- bering several millions; the subspecies there, rogersi, is known as the 'Australian Black Duck’, Dr Bernard Zonfrillo 28 Brodie Road, Glasgow G21 3SB differing only slightly (in size) from the nomi- nate form. Similarly, the 'Seychelles Dove’ is a subspecies ( rostrata ) of the Madagascar Turtle Dove Streptopelia picturata. Whatever sub- species remains in the Seychelles, it will no doubt evolve its own characteristics over the course of time. Overall, there is no species loss. I might also add that not one of the mammals that Piero Genovesi mentioned in the context of ‘genetic swamping’ is remotely endangered. There have never been more Red Deer Cervus elaphus present in the UK than there are today, despite some hybridisation. Moreover, in the case of the Scottish Wild Cat Felis silvestris, protection and contact with feral Domestic Cats F. catus have actually increased the species’ numbers and range in recent years (see Kitchener, 1995, Wildcats). Since its intro- duction by the Romans, F. catus has been present in the UK, and no doubt hybridising with F. silvestris, for nearly 2,000 years. We still have Wild Cats in Scotland, and in another 2,000 years we shall still have White-headed Ducks in Europe, if man does not kill them off. The future of the White-headed Duck in Europe will depend primarily on habitat con- servation and the cessation of hunting of the species. Gene-swamping as a cause of extinction of bird species remains something of a myth. EDITORIAL COMMENT Dr Baz Hughes, of The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, has commented as follows: 'Up to 1999, 308 Ruddy Ducks ringed in Britain had generated only ten recoveries, all within the UK. The chance of a ringed individual being recovered in Spain is, therefore, small. Among those which have been recovered, one had travelled 173 km and two others had moved 90 km. In their native North America, Ruddy Ducks naturally migrate over many thousands of kilometres from their breeding grounds in the Prairie Potholes to wintering areas in Mexico and along the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf coasts. 'Regarding the origin of Continental Ruddy Ducks, up to the end of 1996 there had been over 900 records of 1,500 Ruddy Ducks in 19 Western Palearctic countries, especially along the North Sea coasts of the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, and in France and Spain. The number which remain to breed on the European mainland is, however, very low, fewer than ten pairs in total each year. In January 1997, about 30 Ruddy Ducks were recorded in northern Spain following freezing conditions across northern Europe, and some 30-40 (and up to 80) have wintered annually at Lac de Grand- Lieu in northern France since 1995/96. It is unlikely that the seasonal appearance of such large flocks can be explained by the escape of captive wildfowl. DNA fingerprinting has also ruled out the possibility that those appearing in mainland Europe are natural transatlantic vagrants, while research to determine the origin of Ruddy Ducks occurring in Spain is ongoing. ‘Since 1984, the Spanish authorities have shot 98 Ruddy Ducks and 58 Oxyura hybrids. That so few hybrids are seen in Spain, paired or not, reflects the fact that the Spaniards have proved very effective at culling. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 253-256 255 Letters ) 'Regarding the New Zealand Grey Duck Anas superciliosa superciliosa , government scientists in New Zealand estimate the combined population of Mallards A. platyrhynchos , hybrids and Grey Ducks to be five million birds, of which at least 80% are hybrids. This proportion of hybrids has increased from only 5% in 1960 (Green 1992) and is thought to be still growing. A DNA-based study to determine whether there are any pure New Zealand Grey Ducks left in New Zealand has just started (see www.raredna.com/projects/ducks/duck.html). ‘Hybridisation with naturalised Mallards currently involves four species and three subspecies: New Zealand Grey Duck (Rhymer et al. 1994), Australian Black Duck A. superciliosa rogersi (Paton et al. 1992), Mexican Duck A. diazi (Anon. 1978), Hawaiian Duck A. wyvilliana (Browne et al. 1993), American Black Duck A. rubripes (Merendino et al. 1993), Florida Duck A. fulvigula fulvigula (Moorman & Gray 1994) and African Yellow-billed Duck A. undulata (Shaw, in prep.). One of these, Hawaiian Duck, is included on the IUCN Red List Database/BirdLife International World Bird Data- base of globally threatened taxa (BirdLife International 2000; Hilton-Taylor 2000) as under threat from hybridisation. This list contains 28 other taxa, 1 1 of which are birds, including White-headed Duck.’ References Anon. 1 978. 'Mexican Duck' not a Mexican Duck. Oryx 14: 307. BirdLife International. 2000. Threatened Birds of the World. Barcelona and Cambridge. Browne, R. A., Griffin, C. R., Chang, R R, Hubley, M., & Martin, A. E. 1993. Genetic divergence among populations of the Hawaiian Duck, Laysan Duck and Mallard. Ibis I 10: 49-56. Green, A. J. 1992. Wildfowl at risk, 1992. Wildfowl 43: 160-184. Hilton-Taylor; C. 2000. The 2000 IUCN Red List ofThreatened Species. IUCN, Gland and Cambridge. Merendino, M.T., Ankney, C. D., & Dennis, D. G. 1993. Increasing Mallards, decreasing American Black Ducks: more evidence for cause and effect.]. Wildl. Manag. 57: 199-208. Moorman, T. E„ & Gray, R N. 1 994. Mottled Duck Anas fulvigula. In: Poole. A., & Gill, F. (eds.), The Birds of North America. No. 8 1 . Philadelphia and Washington D.C. Paton, J. B„ Storr, R„ Delray, L., & Best, L. 1992. Patterns to the distribution and abundance of Mallards, Pacific Black Ducks and their hybrids in South Australia in 1 987 .Journal of South Australian Ornithology 31:1 03- 1 1 0. Rhymer; J. M., Williams, M. J., & Braun, M.J. 1994. Mitochondrial analysis of gene flow between New Zealand Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos ) and Grey Duck (A. superciliosa). Auk III: 970-978. Shaw, K. A. In prep. Draft report on the regulated and prohibited waterfowl species in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. Cape Nature Conservation. The 1 945 winter Cornish record of the Common Rosefinch In my History of the Common Rosefinch in Britain and Ireland, 1869-1996 (Brit. Birds 92; 445-471), I used a record from Golant, near Fowey, Cornwall, from 9th to 15th February 1945, as early evidence of successful wintering by Common Rosefinch Carpodacus erythrinus. I have recently come across E. W. Hendy’s illus- trated account of the bird ( More About Birds, 1950), and to my considerable disappointment 1 find that the record is unsound. First seen on 6th February, the undoubted finch resided in a garden until 10th December 1945 and was pho- tographed on a bird table several times by the finder, Mrs Aylwin. Its identity was claimed by this lady and two other observers, and con- firmed by experts, including the Editor of The Field and the Editors of British Birds. A letter proclaiming its presence was published in Country Life (19th October 1945) and an account appeared in British Birds (38: 295-296). Regrettably, however, the photographs show a classic Fringilla finch in size, structure and plumage pattern, with a bill which is clearly straight-sided on both mandibles. Add to these points the song’s similarity to a Common Chaffinch F. coelebs and a two to four note ‘cheerful’ call and, not withstanding the overall pink and brown plumage tones, the odds are that it was, indeed, a Common Chaffinch. Nor- mally, I am a great respector of past records, but clearly this one fails. No undoubted winter record of the Common Rosefinch survives from the pre-BBRC period of field identifications, which now starts in 1950. I). I. M. Wallace Mount Pleasant Farm, Main Road, Anslow, Burton on Trent, East Staffordshire DEIS 9QE 256 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 253-256 Obituary Karel Hendrik Voous PhD , N\A ( 1 920-2002) On 31st January 2002, Professor Dr K. H. Voous, a winner of the Gold Medal of the British Ornithologists’ Union, an Honorary Member of the BOU and an Hon- orary Subscriber to British Birds , died at his home in Huizen, the Netherlands. He was in his 81st year. Born in 1920, in Amsterdam, the Nether- lands, the son of a first-team soccer player with the renowned local club ‘Ajax’, Karel became interested in birdlife at a very early age. His first publication, in the Dutch journal De Levende Natuur, was written when he was only 16 years old. At that time, he was a member of the Netherlands’ Youth Organisation for the Study of Nature (NJN), a more or less anarchistic club in which the members of the local branch roamed the fields and marshes surrounding the city, teaching each other the fine details of bird identification in an age when field guides were virtually unheard of. This love of nature led Karel, in 1938, to enrol as a student of biology at the University of Amsterdam. Here, the lectures on zoogeography by Professor L. F. de Beaufort of the Zoological Museum (ZMA) soon attracted his attention. Karel deplored the fact that the professor paid little regard to birds, a failing which was largely the result of the museum having insufficient specimens to enable anything more than some theoretical examples to be demonstrated. In an attempt to resolve this situation, Prof, de Beau- fort made Karel his assistant in 1940. At that time, the bird collection of the ZMA consisted of little more than a few thousand mounted birds and a handful of skins, the latter mainly of aberrant individuals such as albinos. Karel per- suaded his old friends to send in as many dead birds as they could pick up, in order to create a workable, instructive and modern bird collec- tion. The intervention of the Second World War, however, soon put a stop to all such activi- ties, and Karel decided to direct his attention instead to the proper labelling of existing speci- mens. During the course of this pursuit he came across several new taxa for the Dutch avi- fauna. Owing to a scarcity of paper during the war years, the number of publications from Karel’s pen was as yet small, and a heart condi- tion also prevented him from spending long days working on the collection; during this period, he temporarily used a wheelchair, but whether this was because of the lack of appro- priate medicines during the war years or was a way of avoiding the German Arbeitseinsatz (‘mobilisation of labour’) is a matter of debate. Soon after the war, the situation improved greatly. Thanks to Karel’s efforts, the ZMA col- lection increased markedly, not only as a result of the renewed contacts with former friends, but also through the setting up of a network of lighthouse keepers who sent in the corpses of lighthouse victims. All ‘superfluous’ specimens were exchanged with other museums for alter- native material, and in this way a collection was built up which comprised specimens from many Palearctic countries and which, by 2002, numbered about 50,000 well-labelled bird skins. At the same time, the number of Voous’s publications also rose markedly, culminating in his 1947 thesis on the geographical variation and speciation of the Great Spotted Wood- pecker Dendrocopos major and its allies, to be followed later by many other reviews of Palearctic species. In 1949 Karel Voous became Bird Curator of the ZMA, and in 1955 he was appointed as Professor in Biogeography at the University of Amsterdam. The steady flow of papers on geographical variation, and the appearance in 1960 of his Atlas of European Birds , ‘an exciting and original work illuminating bird distributions for ama- teurs and specialists alike’ ( Ibis 117: 430), bestowed upon him an international repute. This inevitably gave rise to several invitations from abroad to accept professorships elsewhere, all of which Professor Voous declined. When the Free University of Amsterdam offered him a position as Professor in Zoogeography, however, he could not refuse, because this post provided him with the opportunity to establish an entirely new laboratory, with his own staff, where he could also undertake work on avian ecology and nature conservation. He left the University of Amsterdam at the end of 1963, although he still retained formal links with the ZMA in the form of a working room and secre- tary, while most of his students were housed in © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 257-259 257 Henny C. Voous-Luiting Obituary - Karel Voous 1 53. Professor Karel Voous ( 1 920-2002), at home, in his library. the ZMA during their practical work. At the Free University he supervised a great number of students, of whom 13 produced doctoral theses and several are themselves now professors. The ringing stations of the Free University’s field laboratory on the isle of Schiermonnikoog were famous among students, as also were the excur- sions to such areas as Falsterbo, in south Sweden, the French and Spanish Pyrenees, and the former Yugoslavia, places which were, in the 1960s, considered remote. Voous, because of his poor health, often remained the whole day in an easy chair on a slope near the base camp, while his students made long forays on foot; it was not unusual for Voous, at the end of the day, to have logged more species than had his students. In 1970, Professor Voous organised the XV International Ornithological Congress in The Hague, Netherlands, having been appointed as Secretary General of that IOC, and in the same year he was also deeply involved in the organi- sation of the European Conservation Year, acting as Chairman of the Netherlands Com- mittee. These additional tasks, together with his workload at the University, where students were demanding increased participation, as well as his editorship of several journals, became too great a burden for his health to withstand: he suffered a relapse and, in fact, never regained the energy which he had possessed before. He had little option but to accept early retirement from university duties in 1975. Nevertheless, Karel Voous managed to work on quietly behind the scenes, being actively involved in the work of various bird- and nature-conservation bodies. Of the hundreds of papers that he wrote (a full listing of the titles of which covers 45 pages of A4 format), most of those produced before 1975 were published in internationally renowned journals, but his pro- duction of papers in subsequent years in popular Dutch journals is scarcely less impres- sive: he did everything to make the Dutch people and government aware of the impor- tance of maintaining reserves for marsh birds and of protecting red-listed species such as raptors (Accipitriformes, Falconiformes) and owls (Strigiformes). He also wrote a number of books in his later years, the ones which received widest attention being the Birds of the Nether- lands Antilles (1983) and Owls of the Northern Hemisphere (1988), the latter acclaimed as ‘Bird Book of the Year’ by British Birds. A further significant achievement was the appearance of the ‘List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species’, originally published in two parts in Ibis (1973, 1977) and then produced in a separate, amended version (1977, reprinted 1980). Voous, irritated by the wide variation in species sequences in various bird books, published a 258 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 257-259 Obituary - Karel Voous C standard order, which for some time was widely accepted. Although this taxonomic list now tends to ‘break up’ as a result of increasing knowledge about species relationships obtained from DNA research, this in no way detracts from its importance in the context of the history of Holarctic ornithology. Karel Voous was also a fundamental figure in the early planning of the Handbook of the Birds of Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa: The Birds of the Western Palearctic (widely referred to simply as BWP). When he heard that Stanley Cramp wished to rewrite and expand Witherby et fl/.’s The Handbook of British Birds (1938-41), Karel arranged a meeting between Stanley and Urs Glutz von Blotzheim, the main author of the Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropas (the first volume of which had already appeared in 1966), in the hope that the two of them would co-operate and co-ordinate their efforts. Much to Voous’s regret, he did not succeed in per- suading them to reach agreement, with the result that two handbook series appeared at the same time. Having promised beforehand to help Stanley Cramp with taxonomy, Voous found himself back in the ‘Cramp camp’. Although the first stages in the planning for BWP were set in 1970, it took several years before agreement on its format could be reached (a delay which could have been overcome had the Glutz format been accepted), and Volume 1 did not appear until 1977. In this volume, 30% - and, for some sec- tions, nearly 50% — of the texts delivered by the authors had to be cut for reasons of space, and the sections that were consequently shortened did not always contain the least interesting information (Stanley, as chief editor, reduced the wealth of data available for the sections for which he was responsible, namely, ‘Distribution’ and ‘Population’, to very meagre entries). From the beginning, Voous took a fair part in the for- matting and editing of BWP, and, notwith- standing his poor health, he managed to edit parts of the text right up to the time when the final volume was completed in 1993. In his last few years, Voous managed to publish some popular accounts (in Dutch) on the speciation of ducks and swans (Anatidae) and a booklet about the former distribution and the human threats to survival of the Lion Panthera leo ( De Leeuw, 2000). When busy on a similar book on the Leopard P. pardus, his strength slowly deserted him, and he died peacefully after completing the last lines. During his very full life, Karel Voous held numerous ornithological posts in addition to those mentioned above; these include, as exam- ples, Honorary Secretary of the Nederlandse Ornithologische Vereniging 1946-56, Council Member of the Nederlandse Ornithologische Unie 1957-68, and Honorary President of the 12th International Conference of International Bird Census Committees and European Ornithological Atlas Committees in 1992. The importance of his work was widely acknow- ledged, and numerous honours, again in addi- tion to those already mentioned, were conferred upon him, such as Honorary Fellow of the American Ornithologists’ Union, and Honorary Member of many national ornithological societies. Professor Karel Voous was a man of great influence in twentieth-century ornithology. Yet his whole life was a struggle between poor health on the one hand and, on the other, the eagerness to discover as much about birds as possible and to disperse this knowledge among a wide audience. Because of his health, he often had to restrict his research to a few hours each day, but, thanks to his loving wife Henny, he survived for much longer than any of his inti- mates had expected him to. His death is a huge loss to ornithology, but his stimulating ideas will live on among his students and readers. C. S. (Kees) Roselaar British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 257-259 259 Martin Scott News and comment Compiled by Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches Opinions expressed in this feature are not necessarily those of British Birds Guardian Spirit of the East Bank Most readers of British Birds will be familiar with the name Richard Richardson. Many older readers will also have fond memories of happy hours spent in his company at the seaward end of the East Bank at Cley in Norfolk, either overlooking Arnold’s Marsh or seawatching with him from the shingle bank. Born at Blackheath, south London, in 1922, Richard moved to Norfolk when he joined The Royal Norfolk Regiment in 1940. He was billeted at Aylsham until embarkation for the Far East in 1943. He served with his reg- iment in India, Ceylon [now Sri Lanka] and Singapore, before returning to England after the war. In 1949, Richard moved to Cley, where he lived for the remainder of his life. He also had a particular fondness for Shetland, visiting Fair Isle on no less than 23 occasions, and he always considered the island to be his second home. As a self-taught artist, Richard had worked on his skills at bird illustra- tion since his teenage years. His prodigious talent was First recognised by the author and naturalist Richard Fitter in the late 1940s. Together, they worked on the highly successful Pocket Guide to British Birds and Pocket Guide to Nests and Eggs, both published by Collins in the 1950s. Richard’s illustrations subsequently appeared in over 20 books, as well as many annual bird reports. A biography of Richard’s life, entitled Guardian Spirit of the East Bank, has just been completed by Moss Taylor, and will be launched at an exhib- ition of Richard’s art and memorabilia to be held at the Cley Parish Church of St Margaret’s from Friday 9th to Sunday 1 1th August 2002. The launch itself will be held at a reception, for contributors and other invited guests, on the Friday evening. The exhibition will be open to the public on Sat- urday between 10 am and 6 pm, and on the Sunday between 1 1 am and 6 pm. Migration Watch highlights The beginning of May is traditionally the time to welcome back Common Swifts Apus apus to our towns and cities. These mysterious birds are usually the last summer migrants to arrive and the first to leave; rather like the best party guests. But the BTO’s Migration Watch recorded a very early sighting of a group in Devon on 23rd March, while another was in Cornwall on the same day. At least 15 Alpine Swifts Tachymarptis melba also arrived on the same southerly airstream, the majority in the south- west, while, completing the set, a Pallid Swift A. pallidus was seen on Scilly (plate 154). And you read it on the Migration Watch website www.bto.org/migwatch first, not in a letter to The Times : the first Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus was heard singing in Shrop- shire, on 21st March. Keep 154. Pallid Swift Apus pallidus, Bryher sending your migrant Scilly, March 2002. sightings to the BTO! Changes in Cambridgeshire (including recorder) At the ACM of the Cambridge Bird Club on 8th March, the members voted for a name change: the Cam- bridge Bird Club now becomes the Cambridgeshire Bird Club, reflecting the Club’s interest in the entire ‘new’ county of Cam- bridgeshire. Historically (the Club is 76 years old), the ties were with the university but the Club’s records now act as a repository for the entire county. At the same meeting, a new county recorder was confirmed in post. The new incumbent is John Oates, 7 Fassage Close, Lode, Cam- bridge CB5 9EH; tel: 01223 812546; e-mail: joates9151@aol.com. For further details, contact www.cam- bridgebirdclub.org.uk Migration Watch - for Lepidoptera Rarities on Scilly and Pordand, long dis- tance twitches, heartbreaking photos of the one that got away... No, not another birding website; this one is all about butterflies and moths. The website www.migrantmoth.com is to Lepidoptera what the BTO’s Migration Watch website is to birds. Steven Nash’s website has first and last dates for migrant moths and butterflies dating back to autumn 1999. The spring arrivals for 2002 include the first Painted Lady Vanessa cardui for the year on 26th March at Nanquidno, Corn- wall, which neatly coincided with a handsome male Black-eared Wheatear Oenanthe hispanica at the same locality. Excellent photographs include a spec- tacular Striped Hawk-moth Hylesliwr- nica on St Mary’s, Stilly, while Portland Bird Observatory warden Martin Cade gets a mention for his 1 lumming-hird I lawk moth Macmglosswn stellatarum on March 1 6th; and for his Bloxworth Snout Hypena ohsitalis. That’s a moth, apparently. . . 260 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 260-262 News and comment > Waldropp reintroduction An extraordinary project to reintroduce the Waldrapp (or Northern Bald Ibis) Geronticus eremita to Europe is underway in Austria. It will entail teaching captive-bred ibises to migrate south for the winter by using a microlight air- craft to show them the way. This has been successfully done in the USA where first Sandhill Cranes Grits canadensis and then critically endangered Whooping Cranes G. americana were taught to migrate south by their human ‘parents’. The Waldrapp is similarly endangered, with just one wild colony remaining in the world, in the Souss-Massa National Park in Morocco. There are approxi- mately 200 individuals left here (65 breeding pairs in 2001). The holiday company Club Med, however, has plans for an 8,000-bed resort adjacent to the Park at Tifnit, and these have cast doubt on the species surviving in its one remaining stronghold. Plans by the Konrad Lorenz Research Station, at Grunau in upper Austria, to reintroduce the Waldrapp to the Alps may be timely. It was at Grunau that Konrad Lorenz carried out his classic studies of bird behaviour with hand-reared wild-living Greylag Geese Anser anser. Today’s researchers have hand-reared a semi-captive colony of Waldrapps whose parents came from zoos and now intend to teach them how to migrate south to Italy for the winter. Historically, the Waldrapp was found right around the Mediterranean with birds nesting as far north as the Alps. But the migratory tradition has been lost among zoo-bred birds and the Austrian team will attempt to renew it by guiding a flock of 15-20 free- flying birds approximately 1,000 km to a suitable wintering site on the west coast of Italy. Of course, hunting was one of the causes of the Waldrapps extinction in Europe so Italian hunters will have to be encouraged not to blast the ibises - or their microlight leader! - from the skies. Find out more about this fascinating project on the website www.waldrapp-ibis.com The only other colony of Waldrapps is at Birecik in eastern Turkey. But the birds in this Asian outpost are no longer wild. The colony is free-flying in summer but local people take them back into captivity in the autumn to protect them from the rigours of winter. On a similar theme, after an absence of almost 100 years. Whooping Cranes were reintroduced to Wisconsin in 2001 and successfully completed their migration to Florida with microlight guidance last autumn. See more at www.bringbackthecranes.org Marine Wildlife Conservation Bill - Update The Marine Wildlife Conservation Bill (see Brit. Birds 94: 606) went through its report and third reading in the House of Commons on 15th March this year. This means it will now proceed to the House of Lords for further consideration. Although substantially amended by the Govern- ment, it will still provide considerably improved protection for the marine environment and its wildlife. The Randall Bill is supported by the RSPB, who believe that, despite the Government amendments, if it becomes law it will still fulfil the conserva- tion objectives which underpinned the original draft. The Bill will create a new designation to protect and manage nationally important wildlife sites in the marine environment. The scope of the Bill will cover territorial waters (i.e. those which extend out to 12 nautical miles from the coast) around England and Wales. The Bill will also allow English Nature and the Country- side Council for Wales to seek the assistance of competent marine authori- ties, such as HM Coastguard, the Environment Agency and Sea Fisheries Committees, which will be able to use their enforcement powers for nature conservation reasons. Sites which could benefit from protection under a Marine Wildlife Conservation Act include Lyme Bay on the Devon/Dorset border, the Cumbrian coast off St Bees (home to England’s only breeding colony of Black Guillemots Cepphus grylle), and The Skerries tidal rapids 3 km off Anglesey, which are feeding grounds for four species of terns Sterna. Teesside International Nature Reserve unveiled. . . again Surrounded by shipyards, an oil refinery, chemical works and a rubbish dump, the Teesside Inter- national Nature Reserve could become the Northeast’s equivalent of the London Wetland Centre. The announcement on 2nd April that a 270-ha mosaic of reedbed, wet grassland and open water will be created on redundant ICI farmland north of the River Tees, in the borough of Stockton, may sound familiar. That is because it was first unveiled in 1987 in the glossy brochure promoting the Teesside Development Corporation’s ‘flag- ship’ schemes for its ten-year lifespan. It was relaunched during the 1992 General Election cam- paign by the unlikely partnership of Conservative deputy prime min- ister Michael Heseltine and TV nat- uralist David Attenborough. But at the end of the Teesside Develop- ment Corporation’s life there was just one flagship project unfulfilled - the International Nature Reserve. Four years after the TDC expired, a new partnership of the Teesside Environmental Trust (TET) and the RSPB has announced that they have the funding and the expertise to create a superb new wetland in northeast England. The reserve will embrace the existing Saltholme Pools (which hosted a Long-toed Stint Calidris subminuta in August 1982) on both sides of the A178 Port Clarence to Seaton Carew road. The remainder of the reserve is old grazing land donated by ICI, which stretches west to Billingham. Earth- moving work starts in mid July. Work needs to be completed on site between July and October because the area is important for both breeding and wintering wild- fowl and waders. Funding will come from landfill tax credits paid by local waste-tip operators and will run into millions of pounds by the time the reserve is completed in five years’ time. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 260-262 261 News and comment Ospreys in Cumbria The successful nesting by a pair of Ospreys Pandion haliaetus in Cumbria last year created a great deal of interest from birdwatchers. The Lake District Osprey Project partnership (Forestry Commission, Lake District National Park Authority and RSPB) was delighted that so many people made the trek to the Osprey Viewpoint at Dodd Wood, near Keswick, where visitors could see the nest from a safe dis- tance and were also treated to views of the Ospreys fishing in Bassenthwaite Lake below. Unfortunately, some observers attempted to view the nest from other locations and there were par- ticular problems last year at Black- stock Point (on the shore of Bassenthwaite Lake), and at the Woodend layby on the A66. There is concern that excessive use of these areas by birdwatchers could have a detrimental impact on the success of the project and harm local rela- tions. If the Ospreys return to nest in 2002, we would appeal to birders to use only the viewpoint at Dodd Wood. This will be open during daylight hours, and will be manned from 10 am to 5 pm every day between mid April and the end of August. The viewpoint is situated on the east side of Bassenthwaite Lake, three miles north of Keswick off the A591; follow signposts to The Mirehouse from the A66. There are also plans to beam live pictures of the Ospreys from the nest to the Forestry Commission’s Whinlatter Visitor Centre, located northwest of Keswick off the B5292. For further details, please contact the Whinlatter Visitor Centre (tel: 017687 78469), or visit the website at www.ospreywatch.co.uk Ospreys also nested last year at Rutland Water, in central England, following the relocation of 64 young birds from nests in the Scottish FTigh- lands between 1996 and 2001. This year there will be no translocations and it is hoped that returning birds will once again nest on the reserve; the first Osprey of the spring was seen on 23rd March. Read more about this year’s plans at www.ospreys.org.uk > Offshore turbines could put the wind up Common Scoters Plans for offshore windfarms in the Irish Sea could have serious conse- quences for the important wintering population of Common Scoters Melanitta nigra. The specific concern is that their feeding grounds on the seabed may be disturbed by the construction of giant windmills, up to 100 m high. Much of the northern European population of Common Scoters winters off the Welsh and Lancashire coasts, so any disturbance could have a significant international impact. The Countryside Council for Wales has commissioned WWT to survey the ducks using a light aircraft. Students from the University of Wales will examine the areas where the ducks congregate to identify their favoured food. Dr Michel Kaiser of the University’s School of Ocean Sciences said: ‘Some of the proposed offshore windfarm sites could overlap with some of the greatest concentrations of scoters. It’s important for us to understand why the ducks are attracted to these areas so that we can predict what might happen to them if - or when - windfarm development is given the green light.’ The Common Scoter population in Carmarthen Bay was badly affected relatively recently when the Sea Empress oil tanker grounded outside Milford Haven in February 1996, and a total of 4,700 birds were oiled. Pizza company delivers new heathland reserve A farm on the Suffolk coast has been bought jointly by the RSPB and the National Trust. Funding came from the Heritage Lottery Fund (RSPB), with the extra topped up by Pizza Express (National Trust). Mount Pleasant Farm is the ‘missing link’ between Minsmere and Dunwich Heath, and about 100 ha of arable land will now be converted to heathland. Since it also adjoins Westleton Heath NNR, the acquisition provides a rare opportunity to unite fragmented areas of heathland into a larger, more viable ecological unit. The land was bought from British Energy (operators of the Sizewell nuclear power stations south of Minsmere) for £400,000, and the cost of restoration to heathland over five years is estimated at a further £100,000. British Energy acquired the site in 1990 for use as a trial heathland creation site using peat excavated from the proposed Sizewell C power station. But the moratorium on new nuclear power stations meant this was never built. In the short term, the land will be cropped to reduce soil fertility before its restoration to a mosaic of heathland and acid grassland. It is hoped the heath will attract Stone-curlews Burhinus oedicnenius and Wood Larks Lullula arborea, together with other creatures such as the Silver-studded Blue Plebeius argus. BWP - by Royal appointment In among the acres of obituaries penned after the death of HRH Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, was a charming vignette in The Guardian. When she reached her centenary in August 2000, one of the many institu- tions of which she was patron, the London Library, asked her what form of birthday tribute she favoured: a formal address or something more prac- tical? The reply was that nothing would please her more than an up-to-date bird book. So the London Library presented her with the two-volume Concise Birds of the Western Palearctic. It is not recorded whether she regarded BWP Concise as superior or inferior to the nine-volume magnum opus which preceded it. But those of us who spent in excess of £700 over a 20-year period loyally accumulating BWP, and who now see BWP Concise on offer at less than £50, can only admire the Queen Mum’s canny choice. 262 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 260-262 Rarities Committee news BBRC request records of Red-headed Buntings At the recent Annual General Meeting of the BBRC, held on 9th- 10th March at Slimbridge, Gloucestershire, we discussed a number of species whose records it might be appropriate for the Committee to consider. These included White Stork Ciconia ciconia, Snow Goose Anser caerulescens, Bluethroat Luscinia svecica of the white-spotted race cyanecula, and Red-headed Bunting Emberiza bruniceps. The Committee felt that, on statistical grounds alone, we should not consider White Stork. On average, there have been more than 22 records per year of this species during the last decade, and we are aware of numerous other sightings, of presumed escaped birds, which were not reported. There is also the sig- nificant problem of deciding which, if indeed any, had escaped from captivity. The situation with Snow Goose is even more complicated. There are significant numbers of free-flying Snow Geese in Britain, but, in general, the only ones that get reported are those which occur at ‘likely’ times of the year and at ‘suitable’ localities for natural vagrancy. Although, superficially, these Snow Geese may seem, in all probability, to be genuine vagrants, we do not have a clear picture of the occurrence pattern of this species at all times of the year and so we cannot be certain that these are indeed the most likely periods for the appear- ance of wild birds. BBRC has, therefore, decided to examine the patterns of occurrence and provenance of wildfowl in Britain in detail, starting with rare geese. We will shortly convene a working group, and will revisit the question of Snow Geese once this group has reported. If those Bluethroats which appear in Britain during March or April are considered most likely to be of the white-spotted form, then this taxon falls on the borderline of the criteria required for consideration of a species by BBRC. Since an unknown percentage of autumn records may also be of this race, then it is most probably a scarce migrant rather than a true rarity. Given that we are currently unable to identify the racial provenance of spring females or almost any autumn individual, this seems an inappropriate point at which to begin to consider this form. In previous decades, Red-headed Bunting was a common species imported into Britain as part of the cagebird trade; individuals turned up quite regularly in the wild, but they were usually considered to be escapes. Nonetheless, it seems probable that a small number were genuine vagrants. Consequently, the species has been placed in Category D of the British List. BBRC has always considered all submitted records of this species, and these are usually reported in Appendix 1 of the Annual Report. We are, however, aware that some sightings have gone unreported and consequently we do not have a clear picture of the species’ current occurrence. BBRC would like to review ALL Red-headed Bunting sightings in Britain since 1990. A BBRC form should, preferably, be used for written descriptions, which should include all the usual details and, if possible, a photo- graph. Submissions including attached photos in digital format will also be most welcome, and may be sent via e-mail to secretary.bbrc@dial.pipex.com. We are also keen to receive details of females/immatures where separation from Black-headed Bunting E. melanocephala was not possible. The role of BBRC in the review of records for county avifaunas BBRC has recently been asked, by a number of authors of county avifaunas, to review con- tentious records of species that are, or were at the time of the record, BBRC rarities. BBRC is happy to undertake this important role on behalf of county records committees (or the appropriate body), but with the following pro- visos: 1. Our priority must be to assess records from the current or previous year. This not only ensures prompt feedback for the observers who submit records, but also enables us to produce an annual report which is as com- plete as possible and assists those producing county bird reports with their task. This means that we can only undertake reviews © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 263-264 263 Rarities Committee news > during June to October, which is the least busy time for rarity assessment. Records to be reviewed will need to be with the BBRC Sec- retary by the end of April to ensure that the review is carried out during this period. 2. We simply do not have the resources to review all records. The relevant county com- mittee should undertake an initial screening exercise, and consult BBRC only on those records for which they suspect a change in decision may be necessary. 3. It is quite likely that we will not have know- ledge of some of the observers concerned, and therefore, any background information relating to this will help us undertake a review. It would also help if the respective committee could indicate why they think a review of a particular record is necessary. 4. At present we feel that it is only appropriate for us to review records from 1950 onwards. For reviews of records before this period, we would suggest that each county should reach its own decision, or discuss the matter with BOURC in the case of very important records (for example, a recent American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus in Essex which proved to be a second for Britain; see Brit. Birds 95: 93). 5. BBRC wishes to be kept informed of any decisions made by BOURC or the respective county body during these reviews so that we can update our statistics and the national archive. We hope that the authors of county avifaunas will understand this position, and we look forward to working closely with many of you in the future. ZEISS The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd. Chairman: Colin Bradshaw, 9 Tynemouth Place, Tynemouth, Tyne & Wear NE30 4BJ Secretary: M. J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Towednack, St Ives, Cornwall TR26 3AZ Monthly Marathon Given that the closing date for the first three stages of the twelfth ‘Marathon’ was extended to 30th April, the solution to the first two stages, photos 185 and 186, will appear in the June issue of British Birds. For a free brochure, write to SUNBIRD (MM), PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG 1 9 I DF. or telephone 0 1 767 682969 Sunhird The best of bird watching tours 1 55. 'Monthly Marathon', Photo no. 1 88. Fourth stage in twelfth 'Marathon'. Identify the species. Read the rules (see page 36), then send in your answer on a postcard to Monthly Marathon, do The Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge. East Sussex TN32 5JY, or by e-mail to editor@britishbirds.co.uk, to arrive by 30th June 2002. 264 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 263-264 Reviews PHEASANTS, PARTRIDGES AND GROUSE: A GUIDE TO THE PHEASANTS, PARTRIDGES, QUAILS, GROUSE, GUINEAFOWL, BUTTONQUAILS AND SANDGROUSE OF THE WORLD By Steve Madge and Phil McGowan, with Guy M. Kirwan. Illustrated by Norman Arlott, Robin Budden, Daniel Cole, John Cox, Carl D’Silva, Kim Franklin and David Mead. Christopher Helm, A & C Black, London, 2002. 488 pages; 72 colour plates; maps. ISBN 0-7136-3966-0. Hardback, £45.00. On our home ground at least, we British birders exhibit a curiously ambivalent attitude to some of the so-called ‘gamebirds’: Ptarmigan Lagopus mutus. Black Grouse Tetrao tetrix , Capercaillie T. uro- gallus and Common Quail Coturnix coturnix are real birds, while Red-legged Partridge Alec- toris rufa and Common Pheasant Phasianus colchicus are definitely not. Red Grouse L. lagopus and (because of their recent scarcity) Grey Partridge Perdix perdix fall somewhere between these extremes, but not too near the ‘real bird’ end of things. Overseas, all that changes, as we track down francolins Francolinus and quails, Himalayan Snowcocks Tetraogallus hitnalayensis and exotic pheas- ants.. . We really ought to see them all for the fascinating birds that they are, and this is exactly what the authors do in this impressive new book, the latest in the well-known Christopher Helm series. They have crossed the line beyond the Galliformes to include button- quails (Gruiformes), the Plains- wanderer (Charadriiformes) and sandgrouse (Pterocliformes), but I have no problem with that: it seems to me a perfectly natural and reasonable extension of the book’s coverage. The species texts follow the usual format in books of this kind, and, judging from the birds of which I have some first-hand knowledge, are informative, concise and accurate. Thirteen pages of bibliography (useful in themselves) attest to the degree of homework that has gone into each compilation. I particularly liked the extensive comments on status, where Phil McGowan’s specialist knowledge on the conservation of these birds in the wild comes into its own. It is a sobering thought that no fewer than 54 of the species described in this book are listed by BirdLife International as ‘threat- ened’ in some degree. Inevitably with a Christopher Helm book, the colour plates will come in for close scrutiny. There are many rather undistinguished- looking birds in these species groups; but also some real corkers. 1 do not much like the plates showing the Alectoris and Perdix partridges, but otherwise I feel the artists are to be congratulated on their highly commendable results. For the work of seven different illustrators to blend together so well must in itself be something of an achievement. All in all, this is a very good book; it certainly strikes me as an eye-opener to a rather neglected and, dare I say it, somewhat less than ‘popular’ assemblage of birds. It deserves to do well, but at £45 it might not. The price seems inordinately high when you con- sider that you can buy the raptors volume from the same series for only £4 more: it has almost twice as many pages and 40 more colour plates! Mike Everett HUMMINGBIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA: THE PHOTOGRAPHIC GUIDE By Steve N. G. Howell. Academic Press, San Diego, 2002. 219 pages; 24 species treated; over 200 colour photographs. ISBN 0-12-356955-9. Paperback, £19.95. Hummingbirds (Trochilidae) fasci- nate birders and non-birders alike: small and brightly coloured, they possess unique powers of flight and the endearing habit of visiting feeders. One character that is, however, not widely appreciated by birders, is the ease with which many individuals avoid specific identification. Some achieve this by high-speed perpetual motion, while others rely on our inability to distinguish between a number of similar species. For most of those in the latter category, we now have this guide, which covers the 14 species that regularly breed north of Mexico, and ten others which have been recorded in the USA. The splendid introduction deals authoritatively, yet in a clear and reader-friendly manner, with a myriad of topics, including plumage iridescence, albinism, the impact of environmental factors on appearance, flight, metabolism, torpidity, food, nests and eggs. The subjects treated most cornpre- © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 265-267 265 Reviews I lummingbirds of North America I hr I’hotWPhi' G.ifd. J hensively are, however, those which have a bearing on field identifica- tion: taxonomy, size, structure, topography, natural variation within a species, hybrids, voice, wing-noise, aerial displays, behav- iour, moult, wear, ageing and habitat. The introduction is illus- trated by colour photographs, accompanied by detailed explana- tory captions. The species accounts section contains summaries of the charac- teristics of the 14 genera, and of particularly problematical pairs and groups of species, in addition to the species texts and colour pho- tographs. Each species, on average, occupies about seven pages, including eight to nine illustra- tions. The text presents a wealth of identification data; in addition to overall length, bill length and notes on each species’ key features, there are extremely informative para- graphs headed ‘Structure’, ‘Similar species’, ‘Voice and Sounds’, and ‘Description’. Where appropriate, these cover each age and sex cate- gory and tackle the most difficult identification challenges head-on. Errors in the texts appear to be few, and trivial. Line drawings which illustrate structural differences between species are most useful. Over 3,000 colour photographs were considered before the final selection was made. The result is an impressive array of superb images, prominent amongst which are some amazing shots of adult males displaying breathtaking irides- cence. From an identification view- point, however, the photographs of adult females and immatures are far more instructive, especially when studied in combination with the discerning comments, which direct the reader’s eye to the critical features, in the often-lengthy cap- tions. Do not be misled by the sub- title: although the book is indeed generously decorated with high quality colour photographs, it is the author’s identification expertise and presentation of the results of his considerable field experience and desktop research that really bring it to life. If you plan to see hummingbirds in North America, then your identification strike rate will be far higher with this guide than without it. Peter Latisdown BIRD MIGRATION^ GENERAL SURVEY By Peter Berthold. 2nd edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001. 254 pages; maps; diagrams. ISBN 0-19-850786-0. Hardback, £50.00. This quite excellent book was first published in German in 1990, and Oxford LTniversity Press had the good sense to have it translated into English so that it could reach a wider audience. A German second edition was published in 1999, and this was subsequently translated into English (again by OUP) in 2001. So what has changed since the first edition? In my view, it remains the most authoritative review of the subject, and even more so now it has been brought up to date with over 200 additional references. The introductory chap- ters are broadly similar to those in the first edition, and detail the history and methods of studying bird migration. They have been expanded and updated a little, and form a valuable basis for what follows. The heart of the book comprises three large chapters on the phenomena, control and mech- anisms of migration. My own fasci- nation with bird movements involves the interaction between the genetic control of migration and the influence of natural selec- tion. It has long been known that many small passerines migrate alone and predominantly at night. Their migratory tendencies are governed by innate course and dis- tance components. Peter Berthold has been at the forefront of research in showing that both of these components are inherited, and that they are under strong selective control: get it wrong and you end up in the middle of an ocean or a desert, and very dead! These three chapters tell us the present state of knowledge of this, and in a style that I found both lucid and informative. The author discusses examples that will be of real interest to British readers. My generation of birders (the fifty-somethings!) will remember the days when you just didn’t see Blackcaps Sylvia atri- capilla in winter. Now, of course, they are relatively commonly encountered in the south and west. The origins and history of win- tering Blackcaps make for a fasci- nating read, and indicate how evolution can take place relatively rapidly when the conditions for natural selection are favourable. Rarity hunters will enjoy the dis- cussion of ‘Sibes’; the possibility that these often-glamorous vagrants are disoriented birds with a defective internal compass is dis- cussed. There is certainly evidence that some individuals deviate from the ‘normal’ direction of autumnal orientation, and, if Pallas’s Leaf Warblers Phylloscopus proregulus show as much variation in orienta- tion as do Blackcaps, it is certainly possible that species such as this turn up in northwest Europe as a result of ‘reverse migration’. Berthold suggests that these errors 266 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 265-267 Reviews C may, however, be due to anomalies in the earth’s magnetic field and discloses how this has been shown to be the case in Pied Flycatchers Fi.cedula hypoleuca. Key experi- ments to investigate this possibility further might be to trap such vagrants and measure their orien- tation direction. Small sample sizes will, however, be a difficult hurdle to overcome: one Thick-billed Warbler Acrocephalus aedon every 30 years will not advance know- ledge very rapidly. As if this were not enough, Berthold also discusses the threats to migrants, especially that of HYBRID DUCKS: THE 5th CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS AN INVENTORY By Eric and Barry Gillham. B. L. Gillham, Bury St Edmunds, 2002. 88 pages; 95 colour photographs. ISBN 0-9511556-6-0. Paperback, £18.30. This small book is the fifth in a series of inventories of hybrid ducks. Although it follows the format of the previous volume, published in 1996, the plumage descriptions given in the four pre- vious publications have not been repeated. This book contains a new set of brief descriptions, as well as photographs of first-generation hybrids which the authors investi- gated up to January 2001. It also includes notes on an additional 400 crosses, most of which are ’back- crosses, multiple hybrids and some hybrids which might be second- or third-generation hybrids’. Con- fused? Not as much as you will be once you start looking at the pho- tographs, some of which are truly bewildering. Try the Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula x King Eider Sotna- teria spectabilis (aged 18-20 years), the Chiloe Wigeon Anas sibilatrix x leucistic Laysan Teal A. laysanensis or the Coscoroba Swan Coscoroba coscoroba x Nene Branta sandvi- human predation, and those resulting from ‘global warming’ and climate change. His view that some of our familiar species are under real threat makes for a sobering conclusion to a highly readable and highly thought-pro- voking book. Congratulations to both the author and the publisher for a valuable contribution to the ornithological literature. This con- tinues to be a book that explains bird migration in an easy style, and it should be on every thinking birder’s bookshelf. David Parkin HYBRID DUCKS THE 5th CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS AN INVENTORY M ^ r m ERIC & BARRY GILLHAM censis. These three examples alone make it clear that birdwatchers have absolutely no chance of cor- rectly identifying some of these hybrids once they escape into the wild. So what does this and the other volumes in the series hold for the ordinary birdwatcher? Well, there are enough ‘natural’ hybrids covered, such as Eurasian Teal Anas crecca x Green-winged Teal A. caro- linensis, Canvasback Aythya val- isineria x Common Pochard A. ferina, and Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope x American Wigeon A. americana, to make it a very useful addition to any duck watcher’s library. Keith Vinicombe ) A FAREWELL TO GREENLAND’S WILDLIFE By Kjeld Hansen. BaereDygtighed 8c Gads Forlag, Copenhagen, 2002. 154 pages; black-and-white photographs. ISBN 87-89723-01-5. Paperback, £15.00. Today, Greenland is a modern society with a population which enjoys a standard of living compa- rable to that of other western coun- tries. Until relatively recently, however, it was based on a subsis- tence economy of hunting and fishing, and even in today’s cash- based economy a few thousand people still depend on hunting and small-scale fishing, although now equipped with fast boats and modern firearms. Hunting is also a favourite pastime for a large pro- portion of the male population. Small wonder, therefore, that several populations of game species (birds and mammals) are in trouble, and the same holds true for some fish and shrimp stocks targeted by the country’s modern fishing fleet. Kjeld Hansen’s book gives a well-documented and up-to-date description of this situation. The original Danish edition appeared a few weeks before the Landsting (the parliament of Greenland) dis- cussed and passed a new set of reg- ulations concerning bird hunting. Although they had been in prepa- ration long before the book came out, its publication and the ensuing debate perhaps helped the regula- tions through the process. Com- pared with hunting regulations in most other countries they are cer- tainly not very restrictive, but still considerably more so than those which they replaced. If followed up by adequate enforcement and public education they may, in fact, give hope for the remnant popula- tions of Common Eiders Somateria mollissima, Brtinnich’s Guillemots Uria lomvia and other species in Greenland. Kaj Kampp British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 265-267 267 George Reszeter Gary Bellingham Recent reports Compiled by Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan This summary of unchecked reports covers mid March to mid April 2002. White-billed Diver Gavia adamsii Near Gairloch (Highland), 18th March. Red-billed Tropicbird Phaethon aethereus One followed the MV Scil- lonian briefly, about 6 km north of St Mary’s (Scilly), 29th March. Little Bittern Ixobrychus minutus Exeter (Devon), 27th March, found moribund on 28th when taken into care but died the same day. Great White Egret Egretta alba Pagham Harbour (West Sussex), 17th March; long-stayer in Cheshire until 25th March. Lesser Scaup Aythya affinls Loch Insh (High- land), 29th-30th March. King Eider Somaterla spectabilis Two, Bluemull Sound (Shetland), 31st March; Dunbeg (Argyll), 6th- 11th April; long- stayer Holkham Bay (Norfolk), to 4th April at least. Gyr Falcon Falco rusticolus White-morph, Main- land (Orkney), from about 15th March to 24th March and again on 8th April; also a grey- morph on Mainland on 24th March; Sheskin- more Lough (Co. Donegal), 22nd March; St Kilda (Western Isles), 2nd-5th April; North Uist (Western Isles), 4th April. 1 56. Little Bittern Ixobrychus minutus, Exeter Devon, March 2002. 1 57. Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris, Oxford, April 2002. 268 © British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 268-270 George Reszeter Recent reports 1 58. Ross's Gull Rhodostethia rosea, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, March 2002. Little Bustard Tetrax tetrax St Agnes (Scilly), 22nd March. Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva South Uist (Western Isles), 7th- 11th April. Long-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus scolopaceus One still at Belfast Lough (Co. Down), to at least 14th April. Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes 1 59. Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybridus, Cotswold Water Park, Gloucestershire, April 2002. Frodsham Marsh (Cheshire), 17th March to 4th April. Bonaparte’s Gull Larus Philadelphia Pagham Harbour, 16th-26th March. Ross’s Gull Rho- dostethia rosea Scarborough (North Yorkshire), 16th March to 4th April; Blacktoft Sands, then Brough Haven (both East Yorkshire), 31st March. Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybridus Cotswold Water Park (Gloucestershire), 14th- 15th April. Great Spotted Cuckoo Clamator glandarius Praa Sands (Cornwall), 25th March; Carnsore Point (Co. Wexford), 6th-14th April. Eurasian Scops Owl Otus scops Woodborough (Wiltshire), 12th 1 60. Red-rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica, Hull, East Yorkshire, April 2002. British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 268-270 269 Mike Ashforth loin Leach lam Leach lain Leach Mike Malpass Recent reports 161. Alpine Accentor Prunella collaris, Minsmere, Suffolk, March 2002. 1 62. Great Grey Shrike Lanius excubitor, Farndon. Nottinghamshire, March 2002. 163. Lapland Longspur Calcarius lapponicus. Aldbrough. East Yorkshire, March 2002. March (and perhaps since 6th March), and again on 16th and 18th March; Porthgwarra (Cornwall), 25th-26th March. Alpine Swift Tachymarptis melba Ventnor (Isle of Wight), 22nd March; Baggy Point (Devon), two on 23rd March; St David’s (Dyfed), 23rd March and nearby on 25th; Skokholm (Dyfed), 24th March; Tresco and Brvher (Scilly), 23rd- 28th March and 4th April, and St Mary’s, lst-3rd and 7th April (all Scilly records presumed to refer to the same individual); Hull (East Yorkshire), 24th March; Co. Wexford, 24th March; Cork City (Co. Cork), five on March 24th, with three still there on 25th March; St Ives (Cornwall), 25th March; St Just (Cornwall), two on 26th March with one 27th March; Uwchynydd (Gwynedd), 25th March; Nanquidno (Cornwall), two on 26th March; near Dale (Dyfed), 26th March; Studland (Dorset), 1st April; St Mar- garet’s-at-Cliffe (Kent), 10th April. Pallid Swift Apus pallidus Bryher, 25th-26th March. Red-rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica Reighton (North Yorkshire), 31st March, presumed same at Hull, 2nd- 11th April; Southwold (Suffolk), 1 1th April. Alpine Accentor Prunella collaris Minsmere (Suffolk), 1 6th- 1 9th March. Black-eared Wheatear Oenanthe hispanica Nanquidno, 23rd March to 1st April. Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis Jersey (Channel Islands), 12th March, presumed same 4th April. Subalpine Warbler Sylvia cantillans North Ronaldsay (Orkney), 9th- 1 0th April. Sar- dinian Warbler Sylvia melanocephala Si Agnes (Scilly), 29th March to 1st April. Woodchat Shrike Lanius senator St Levan (Cornwall), 23rd March to 3rd April. European Serin Serinus serinus Winterton (Norfolk), 19th March; Thorpeness (Suffolk), 30th March and 4th April; Ventnor (Isle of Wight), 1st April; Nanji/al (Cornwall), 10th April. Arctic Redpoll Car duelis hornemanm Llanfairfechan (Conwy), two on 22nd-23rd March, with one there 25th-28th March. Little Bunting Emberiza pusilla St Mary's, 25th -26th March. a Rare Bird News supplies all its information free to British Birds. Call 09063 8881 I I for the latest, up-to-date news (28p/min cheap rate; ‘1 1 p/min other times: including VAT) Call 07626 923923 to report your sightings to the hotline 270 British Birds 95 • May 2002 • 268-270 Maximize your field skills with Atropos The magazine for butterfly, moth and dragonfly enthusiasts. Coming in the Spring issue: Identification of American Painted Lady Canal Damselfly and Southern Skimmer National Moth Night 2001 Large Tortoiseshell in Britain Clearwings in 2001 £18.00 annual subscription from: 36 Tinker Lane, Meltham, Holmfirth, West Yorkshire HD9 4EX ATROPOS BOOKS Key titles for insect enthusiasts. Online ordering at www.atroposuk.co.uk Catalogue available on request Rare Bird Alert New on the Internet Get the latest rare bird news on the Internet rarebirdalert.com Call NOW on: 01603 456789 EILAT & SOUTHERN ISRAEL (AUTUMN/WINTER/SPRING) ★ A better quality Israel birding experience assured. ★ Tours by a team of dedicated professionals. ★ Ground prices from 160 GB pounds sterling- 240 US dollars ★ Birds on your doorstep! Almost 300 species recorded at Lotan. ★ Northern Israel itineraries from 5-8 days. ★ Perfect for self-guided birders. ★ Customized itineraries for tour companies. ★ Full details on request at www.birdingisrael.com ★ Contact - James Smith/David Dolev at Kibbutz Lotan, Doar Na Chevel Eilot, 88855 ISRAEL. Fax: + 9728-6356-937. Tel: + 9728-6356-935. ★ Email: birdlotan@lotan.ardom.co.il Kaikoura, locateSJ - ? on the East Coast' of the spectacular South Island of New Zealand offers wonderful "opportunities for nature lovers t eniov a variety of marine wildlif A host of pelagic birds can be found just minutes offshore due to the close proximity of the deep Kaikoura Canyon. Enjoy close at hand an array of Albatross, Petrels, Shearwaters, Terns, Gulls and more. Trips 3 times daily. Duration 3 hours. Cost: Adult $60 - Child $35 Web: www.oceanwings.co.nz Email: info@oceanwings.co.nz Fax 0064-3319-6534 Get your bird books at discount prices (without paying extra for postage) Try our special online offers at: www.birdguides.com BULGARIA 2002-3 Over 25 years experience of special interest tours to Bulgaria Unbeatable prices (from £850 for 2 weeks!) Expert British and Bulgarian leaders on all tours Birdwatching tours in spring, autumn and winter Wild flower, natural history, folklore, textile, painting, photography and wine tours. Tailor-made itineraries also available. Dr. Annie Kay, BBFS Tours Organiser. Phone/Fax: 020 7237 7616. e-mail: dranniekay@aol.com Website: www.bbfs.org.uk Balkania Travel, 28 Hawgood Street, London E3 3R.U. Phone: 020 7538 8654. Fax: 020 75 1 5 568 1 . (ATOL 4465) Classified advertising RATES Text: 50p per word. Minimum cost: £10. Semi-display: Mono. £15 per see (width 40mm) or £32 per dec (width 85mm). Minimum 2cm. Series: 5% discount for 6, 10% discount for 12. (All rates exclude VAT at 17.5%) Payment for all classified advertisements must be made in advance by VISA, Mastercard or by cheque payable to British Birds. Copy deadline: 10th of the month. Contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd., 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N1 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2627. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BIRD EXPEDITIONS BOOKS OPTICAL EQUIPMENT SIBERIA AND RUSSIA - ROSS’S GULL AND many more tours April-October. Information and brochure. Tel: 00 31 620 400 003 Bird Expeditions BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS KIMBERLEY, AUSTRALIA - B1RDING tours. Experienced, knowledgeable ornithological guide - George Swann. Bushwalking, 4WD safaris, coastal cruises. Small groups. Charters available. Kimberley Birdwatching, PO Box 220, Broome, Western Australia 6725 Tel/Fax: +61 8 9192 1246. Email: kimbird@tpg.com.au Web Site: www4.tpg.com.au/users/kimbird MEXICO MICHAEL CARMODY Small group tours, and custom trips for private parties. Email: jigsaw@winstarmail.com Tel: (509) 624-1889 Fax: (509) 624-1885 USA based LEGACY TOURS, INC References from top world listers AUSTRALIA exclusive Birdwatching Tours Australia wide, private charter only Birdwatching Aficionados Jonny Schoenjahn Fax: +61 8 9192 7708 PO Box 5493, Broome WA 6726, Australia www. users, bigpond. com/jonnybird/ BOOKS BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD. Visit our website for our online catalogue Visit our shop and see our extensive collection. Hawkridge Books, The Cruck Barn, Cross St, Castleton, Derbyshire S30 2WH. Tel: 01433 621999. Fax: 01433 621862. Email: books@hawkridge.co.uk. Web: www.hawkridge.co.uk RARE AND OUT OF PRINT books on Ornithology. Isabelline Books. Tel: 01326 210412. Fax: 0870 051 6387. BACK NUMBERS OF ALL leading ornithological and natural history journals, reports, bulletins, newsletters, etc. bought and sold. Catalogue details: David Morgan, Whitmore, Umberleigh, Devon EX37 9HB or www.birdjournals.com The original BIRDWATCHER’S LOGBOOK The most concise way to record your observations. Monthly, annual and life columns for 762 species, plus 159 diary pages. Send £7.45 inclusive P/P to: Coxton Publications, Eastwood, Beverley Rd, Walkington, Beverley, HU17 8RP, 01482 881833 HAMPSHIRE BIRD REPORT 2000. £8 inc. p8:p. Cheques payable to H.O.S obtainable from Mrs. M. Boswell, 5 Clarence Road, Lvndhurst, Hampshire S043 7AL. HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION England Oyster Cottage B&B 20 High Street, Wells-Next-The-Sea, Norfolk NR23 1EP. Tel: 01328 711997 Ensuite facilities, large comfortable rooms, ideal birdwatching area Prices from £17.50 pppn RAC*** Scotland SPEYSIDE, NETHY BRIDGE cottages by river & forest. Private gardens, sleep 2-9 STB oks fulfilment is provided by NHBS Ltd in association with British Birds - each sale benefits the journal, so please take •ntage of our excellent selection. Ratites and Tinamous Stephen Davies Comprehensive monograph on the natural history and biology of the Ratites and Tinamous, including the ostriches, emus, cassowaries and kiwis. □ #105583 49.50 hbk Collins Field Guide: Birds of the West Indies James Bond Excellent field guide, originally published in 1985, now available again. Describes 429 species, with 341 of them illustrated. □ #128700 1 6.99 +999 hbk A Guide to the Birds of Fiji and Western Polynesia Dick Watling Completely revised and reformatted edition of the widely acclaimed Birds of Fiji, Tonga and Samoa written by the same author in 1982, and now out-of-print. It contains detailed species accounts for the 173 species with confirmed records in the region and notes on a further 22 species with unconfirmed records. □ #125340 22.50 hbk pie and Western Palearctic . in Counties - Ballance - #106513 89.00 hbk i ; of Europe - Jonsson - #49559 12.99 9599 pbk dwatching Guide to Eastern Spain - #108192 9.95 in oc pbk S 1 of Israel - Shirihai - #21254 78.95 hbk s , of the Western Palearctic - Concise 35.00 /in cn .j\j hbk • & Perrins - #50548 s , of the Western Palearctic - Complete (9 Vols) - #32807 ms Bird Guide - Svensson et al. - #113220 12.99 -ns Bird Guide: Large Format - #106883 22.99 s ; of the Western Palearctic - Complete (CD) 250.00 hbk -499 9 pbk -2999 hbk 116.33 CD r d & Perrins - #28660 (Complete Guide to the Birdlife of Britain 21.00 irirope - Hayman & Hume - #121164 C ; Atlas of European Breeding Birds - #53830 . , of Britain & Europe - Peterson et al. - #22327 Cb Guide to Birds of the Middle East 25.99 t r et al. - #45653 - ng Birds in Britain - Lee GR Evans - #123780 4 . New to Britain & Ireland - Palmer - #111106 _ cfbook of Bird Identification Beaman&Madge - #1706! 52.00 C 3 irical Atlas of Breeding birds in Britain 51 i nd - Holloway - #44008 - mndic Bird Guide - #120994 27.99 d it tification Guide to Non-passerines - Baker - #29342 C it tification Guide to European Passerines - Svensson - #889 i : irtant Bird Areas of Europe - Heath & Evans - #101969 p 1 Macmillan Birder's Guide to European and i t ; Eastern birds - #52543 1 Macmillan Field Guide to Bird Identification - #24237 J Atlas of Breeding Birds - Gibbons et al. - #20923 ; ! oik: A Birdwatcher's Site Guide - Benstead et al - #126833 4 : Birds of Britain and Europe - #128192 Z i re to Watch Birds Herefordshire, Shrops, Warwickshire, Worcs - Helm - #65059 E r re to Watch Birds in Thames Valley and the -2596 hbk 59 9 5 hbk 19.99 hbk 9+95 hbk 19.95 pbk 25.00 hbk -6596 hbk 31.95 hbk 9295 hbk 19.50 pbk 36.00 pbk 75.00 pbk 17.99 hbk 14.99 pbk 53.95 hbk 12.95 spr 16.99 pbk 12.99 pbk 14.99 pbk ( ! ns - Helm - #125993 I h i America l rider's Guide to Florida - #779 l cider's Guide to the Rio Grande Valley - #100616 I der's Guide to SE Arizona - #44527 I r ider's Guide to S. California - #86478 I Guide to the Birds of N. America - Nati Geographic - #88711 17.95 spr 24.50 spr 22.95 spr 24.50 spr 12.99 pbk BThe Lost World of the Moa TH Worthy & RN Holdaway A landmark work, a book that paleontologists, ornithologists, biogeographers and ecologists alike will use as a resource for some time to come.' James O Farlow □ #122238 57.00 hbk New Naturalist: Moths Michael Majerus A comprehensive account of the diverse natural history of moths, now on special offer! Examines all aspects of moths from their life histories to their role as pests. The reproduction, feeding, evolution, habitats, conservation and evolution of moths are all discussed. □ #126205 1 7.99 1 9 99 pbk New Naturalist: Nature Conservation Peter Marren The latest volume, providing a definitive review of British wildlife conservation over the last 30 years, covering aspects including climate, habitats, monitoring techniques & environmental policy. □ #127090 19-99 Pbk □ #127091 34 99 Pbk □ I/D Guide to N. American Birds Part 1 - Pyle - #75330 □ North American Bird Guide - Sibley - #106918 □ Peterson Guide to the Flummingbirds of N. America - #127149 □The Sibley Guide to Bird Life and Behaviour - #124065 South & Central America & Caribbean □Where to Watch Birds in Mexico - Howell - #85698 15.99 □The Birds of Ecuador vol 1 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #21379 44.00 □The Birds of Ecuador vol 2 - Ridgely & Greenfield - #117744 32.00 □The Birds of Ecuador, 2-volume set - #118677 64.00 □ Birds, Mammals & Reptiles of the Galapagos 13.99 -Swash & Still -#86419 □ Birds of the West Indies - Raffaele et al. - #69140 28.99 □ Birds of Southern S. America 14.99 - de la Pena & Rumboll - #66504 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Peru Clements etal #63442 36.99 □Guide to Birds of Costa Rica - Stiles et al. - #4386 32.00 □ Guide to Birds of Trinidad & Tobago - French - #14770 25.00 □ Lista de las Aves de Colombia /Checklist of the Birds of Colombia - #126076 29.99 pbk 25.00 pbk 2695 hbk 35.00 hbk 9999 pbk -5596 pbk -4696 pbk -8696 pbk 9695 pbk 9596 hbk 9999 pbk 4696 pbk 4696 pbk 9296 pbk 12.00 pbk Africa, Middle East & Indian Ocean Islands □The Birds of Africa vol 1 - Fry et al. - #571 □The Birds of Africa vol 2 - Fry et al. - #572 □The Birds of Africa vol 3 - Fry et al. - #2780 □The Birds of Africa vol 4 - Fry et al. - #10567 □The Birds of Africa vol 5 - Fry et al. - #19103 □The Birds of Africa vol 6 - Fry et al. - #19104 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - #40871 □ Birds of Madagascar: a Photographic Guide - #54245 □ Birds of Western Africa: An Identification Guide - #40675 □Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of Eastern Africa - #43706 16.99 □Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of S Africa - #86446 □ Birds of East Africa - Stevenson & Fanshawe - #22326 □ Birds of the Gambia & Senegal - Barlow et al - #31919 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - field guide - #127592 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Seychelles - #116115 □ Important Bird Areas in Africa and Assoc Islands - #120103 □ Important Bird Areas in Uganda - RSPB, Byaruhanga et al. - #124739 □ 5ASOL Birds of Prey of Africa 8 its islands - #85607 136. 130 130 115 120 115 40 28 55 99 19 29 28 16 25 55 16 19 00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk .00 hbk 99 pbk .99 pbk .95 hbk .00 hbk .99 pbk .00 pbk .00 hbk i.OO pbk .99 Dbk Asia & Pacific □Checklist of Birds of the Oriental Region - #54331 10.00 pbk □ Field Guide to Birds of Bhutan - #97388 16.99 pbk □ Birdwatching Guide to Oman - Eriksen et al. - #126092 20.00 pbk □Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands - *70343 □The Birds of Japan - *10075 22.00 JThe Birds of New Guinea - *1683 □Field Guide to the Birds of China - *101745 □ Field Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - *66407 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Korea - Woo-Shin et al - *119805 □Field Guide to the Birds of Nepal • *107846 □ Field Guide to the Birds of SE Asia - Robson - #126456 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka - *83310 □ Field Guide to Birds of W. Malaysia & Singapore • #83306 □Guide to the Birds of the Philippines - #101746 □Guide to the Birds of Thailand - #9945 □Guide to the Birds of Wallacea - #31250 □ Pocket Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #126854 □ Birdwatchers' Guide to India - #82704 □Threatened Birds of Asia (2 Volume Set) - Birdlife - #120107 □Threatened Birds of Asia CD-ROM - #125996 Australasia □Collins Field Guide to Birds of Australia - #88226 1 6.99 □ Field Guide to Australian Birds - Morcombe - #122064 □Field Guide to Birds of Australia - Simpson & Day - #107606 □ HANZAB vol 1 - Marchant & Higgins - #10556 □ H ANZAB vol 2 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10667 □ HANZAB vol 3 - Marchant & Higgins - #10668 □ HANZAB vol 4 - Marchant & Higgins - #10669 □ HANZAB vol 5 - Marchant & Higgins - #10670 □The Hand Guide to the Birds of New Zealand - #1 16574 World □ Birds of the World: a checklist - Clements - #101888 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 1 - #17555 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 2 - #17556 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 3 - #17557 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 4 - #17558 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 5 - #17559 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 6 - #17561 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 7 - #17562 □Threatened Birds of the World - BirdLife - #1 10198 □World Bird Species Checklist - Wells - #77401 Monographs □Albatrosses - Tickell - #101886 □The Atlantic Gannet - Nelson - #123245 □The Birds of Heaven - #127165 1 6.00 □ Buntings & Sparrows - 8yers et al - #21255 □The California Condor - Snyder 8 Snyder - #105565 □Crows & jays - Madge 8 Burn - #97387 □Cuckoos, Cowbirds & other cheats - Davies - #104272 □ Raptors of Europe, Middle East & N. Africa Clarksschmitt #54599 □ Finches & Sparrows - Clement et al. - #97396 □The Golden Eagle - Watson - #53818 □The Great Auk - Fuller - #101175 □Gulls: A guide to identification - Grant - #580 □ Swallows & Martins - Turner 8 Rose - #3929 17.99 pbk An nn MV.VV hbk 35.00 pbk 29.99 pbk 25.00 hbk 24.95 pbk 19.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 29.95 pbk 32 50 pbk 34.95 pbk 45.00 hbk 41.00 hbk 17.99 pbk 18.75 pbk 55.00 hbk 12.00 CD 4*99 pbk 23.95 pbk 24.99 pbk 155.00 hbk 75.00 hbk 75.00 hbk 145.00 hbk 135.00 hbk 19.50 pbk 35.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 70.00 hbk 29.50 hbk 40.00 hbk 24.50 hbk An cv.uU hbk 28.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 16.99 pbk 24.95 hbk 26.50 pbk 19.99 pbk 31.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 27.99 hbk □ The Hobby - Chapman - #103400 □ Munias and Mannikins - Restall - #54237 1 5.40 □The Mute Swan - Birkhead 8 Perrins - #1165 □ New World Blackbirds - Jaramillo 8 Burke - #82707 □ New World Warblers - Curson et al - #29510 □ Nightjars - Cleere - #65487 1 6.50 □ Nightjars & their Allies - Holyoak - #105584 □The Nuthatches - Matthysen 8 Quinn - #69079 □ Owls - Konig et al - #66408 □ Parrots - Juniper 8 Parr - #65486 □The Peregrine - Ratdiffe - #858 □ Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse - #66365 □ Pigeons & Doves - Gibbs et al. - #66403 □ Pittas, Broadbills and Asities - #29868 □ Rails - Taylor 8 van Perlo - #66402 □ Raptors of Europe and the Middle East - Forsman - #55844 23.95 □ Raptors of the World - Ferguson-Lees et al - #5601 □ The Red Kite - Carter - #115639 □Seabirds: An Identification Guide - Harrison - #851 □Seabirds of the Word: A photographic guide - Harrison - #63122 □Shorebirds - Hayman et al. - #554 □Shrikes - Lefranc 8 Worfolk - #54240 □Shrike & Bush-Shrikes - Harris 8 Franklin - #105227 □Skuas & Jaegers - Olsen 8 Larsen - #63425 13.20 □Starlings & Mynas - Feare 8 Craig - #82706 □Sunbirds & Flowerpeckers - Cheke 8 Mann - #66414 □ Swifts - Chantler 8 Driessens - #86417 □Sylvia Warblers - Shirihai etal. - #107849 □Thrushes - Clement et al - #107850 □Tits, Nuthatches & Treecreepers - Harrap 8 Quinn - #13707 □Toucans, Barbets and Honeyguides - Short 8 Horne - #101743 □Tundra Plovers - Byrkjedal 8 Thompson - #69080 □Warblers of Europe, Asia & N. Africa - Baker - #65060 □Wildfowl - Madge 8 Burn - #2621 □The World of the Hummingbird - Burton - #124511 □Wrens, Dippers & Thrashers - Brewer - #66416 Recordings & Videos □ African Bird Sounds, 2-Volume Set - Chappuis: North, West 8 Central Africa and Atlantic Islands - #119048 □ Bill Oddies's Video Guide to British Birds - #98805 □The Birds of Britain and Europe, 4-Video Set - #39466 □ Bird Songs and Calls of Britain and Europe (4 CD Set) - #63342 □ Eastern Rarities: The Birds of Beidaihe - #86435 □Video Guide to the Gulls of Europe, Asia and North America - Oddie 8 Doherty - #126592 JThe Raptors of Britain and Europe - video - #49316 □Sound Guide to Nightjars & related Nightbirds - #82371 8.28 □ A Sound Guide to the Owls of the World - #84226 □The Warblers of Britain and Europe - Video - #86434 Miscellaneous □ Birders - tales of a tribe - Cocker - #120708 □Who Killed the Great Auk? - Gaskell - #111124 22.50 hbk TQAn cO.UU hbk 15.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 27.99 hbk pfi nn jU.UU hbk 50.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 36.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 38.00 hbk 26.00 hbk 35.00 hbk -2995 hbk 49.00 hbk 22.50 hbk 29.99 hbk 15.99 pbk 29.99 hbk 25.00 hbk 35.00 hbk nn tA.UU hbk 32.00 hbk 37.00 hbk 28.00 hbk 60.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 29.99 hbk 60.00 hbk 29.95 hbk 32.00 hbk 29.99 hbk 27.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 159.95 CD 17.95 vid 49 94 vid 39.95 CD 17.95 vid 27.95 vid 17.95 vid -T4r99 CD 24.99 CD 17.95 vid 15.99 hbk 18.99 hbk BB binders are now available from British Birds, tel: 01580 882039 Prices quoted in £ (UK Sterling). All special offer prices are valid until 30 June 2002, other prices quoted are subject to any publishers increases and all sales subject to NHBS Ltd Terms & Conditions (available on request). VAT is included in the price of CDs, Videos etc as applicable. Make all cheques and POs payable to NHBS Ltd. Payment can also be made in US$ & C, please contact customer services for details. Orders are normally despatched promptly from stock, but please allow up to 21 days for delivery in the UK, longer if abroad. Name Address Postcode Subscriber No Email Please sign here Please debit my Visa/MastercarckSwitch/AMEX Telephone Goods total £ P&P total £ Total £ Expiry date _ Switch - Start Issue No AMEX - Start date / Code VISA Standard Service (books) postage 8, packing charges and delivery times Special overseas postage rates apply to sets & heavy items Video Maps/CDs Over In transit (Per (Per to find £5.00 including £10 00 £30.00 £45.00 £65.00 £100 £100 times (from despatch) item) item) United Kingdomfl.00 £2.00 £4.00 £4.50 £5.50 £7.50 £7.50 3 days £2.00 £1.25 Europe £1.50 £4.00 £5.00 £6.50 £8.50 £10.50 11% 5 days £2.50 £1.50 Rest of World £2.00 £4.50 £6.00 £7.00 £10.00 16% 16% 20 days £3.00 £2.00 These action-packed, long-haul birding tours - each led by an expert local ornithologist - offer excellent value for money, and outstanding birding. ETHIOPIA NAMIBIA 08-17 Feb 2002 18-27 Jan 2002 29 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 08-17 Feb 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 NEPAL ETHIOPIAN Departs every ENDEMICS Friday throughout 15-24 Feb 2002 Jan & Feb 05-14 Apr 2002 03-12 May 2002 22 Nov - 0 1 Dec 2002 17-26 May 2002 NEPAL - FLORIDA THE IBISBILL TREK 08-17 Feb 2002 10- 19 May 2002 24 May - 02 jun 2002 GAMBIA 25 Oct - 05 Nov 2002 SOUTH AFRICA 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 05- 14 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 INDIA 08-16 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 06 Apr 2002 15-23 Nov 2002 SOUTH AFRICA - CAPE BIRDING 23 Mar - 1 Apr 2002 23 Aug - 0 1 Sep 2002 KAZAKHSTAN 06-15 Sep 2002 16-24 May 2002 23-31 May 2002 SOUTHERN MOROCCO 15-24 Feb 2002 MALAWI 01 - 1 0 Mar 2002 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 08-17 Mar 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 Mb SRI LANKA 08-17 Feb 2002 15-24 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 15-24 Mar 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 THAILAND 08-17 Feb 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 UAE & OMAN 24 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 31 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 10- 17 Nov 2002 If you would like further details of a particular tour, please call us now! Or visit www.naturetrek.co.uk WASHINGTON STATE 1 3 - 2 1 Apr 2002 ZAMBIA 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 1 4 Apr 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 Naturetrek, Cheriton Mill, Cheriton, Alresford, Hampshire S024 ONG Tel: 0 1 962 73305 1 Fax: 0 1 962 736426 e-mail: info@naturetrek.co.uk web: www.naturetrek.co.uk DIGISCOPING? we can supply the complete packagd^^ Telephone 01962 866203 8X36 Sporter 1 £199 10X36 Sporter 1 £229 8x42 HC £779 10x42 HC £869 Dlascope65T‘ £725 23 or 30x £175 15 45x Zoom £240 8x20 Victory £299 10x25 Victory £329 tintl milch moil... ...Pltiini . •maitwlncnester lcegroup.co.uk SS C3 R1 B UK Mall Order Next Day Delivery Available Pottaot ft rnturanc* c« Mott items Available March Phone for latest Info. APO Televld * zoom £959 ,4- SWAROVSKI 8X20BC 8X20BCA 10X25BC 10X25BCA 8X32BN 10X32BN 7X42BN 8X42BN 10X42BN £249 £279 £279 £295 £619 £639 £699 £689 £699 APO Televld+32x £919 8X42 DBA £599 10x42 DBA £599 8X42 PCACN £429 10x42 PCACN £439 M.Midget2 ) 25x £179 M.MIdget2 Zoom £219 Imagic 65 + 25 £199 imagic 80+25 £299 Imagic 80 + Zoom £329 ES80+25X + Case £499 8.5X42EL 10X42EL £845 £880 Tubes available from £39.99. Phone for details or visit our website. www.diglscoplng.co.uk 15 The Square Winchester S023 9ES selection of our large stock Prices shown Include VAT @ 17.5% and are subject to change without notice. Nik°n LEICA 8X20B £279 10x258 £299 8X30 SLC £475 7X42 SLC £589 10x42 SLC £639 Nikon RAII + 20X £199 Nikon RAII + Zoom £249 Nikon EDIIIA Body £599 AT80HD + 30XW AT80HD+ZOOm ATS65HD 30xW ATS65HD + ZOOITI £979 £1029 £1049 £1129 London Camera Exchange Winchester NEW! DUOVID 8+12x42 Information correct @ 21/02/02 and is subject to change without notice E&OE www.digiscoping.co.uk ISSN 0007-0335 British Birds Established 1907, incorporating The Zoologist, established 1843 Published by BB 2000 Limited, trading as ‘British Birds’ Registered Office: 4 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London WC2E 8SF British Birds aims to be the leading journal for the modern birder in the Western Palearctic Its key objectives are to: provide a forum for contributions of interest to all birdwatchers in the region; ♦> publish material on behaviour, conservation, distribution, ecology, identification, movements, status and taxonomy; ♦> embrace new ideas and research; and ♦> maintain its position as the respected journal of record. British Birds Notes Panel Editor Roger Riddington Colin Bibby, Ian Dawson, Jim Flegg, Ian Newton FRS, Assistant Editors Caroline Dudley & Peter Kennerley Malcolm Ogilvie, Angela Turner (Co-ordinator) Editorial Board lan Carter, Richard Chandler, Martin Collinson, Robin Prytherch, Annual subscription rates Nigel Redman, Roger Riddington Libraries and agencies - £72.00 Art Consultants Robert Gillmor & Alan Harris Personal subscriptions UK and overseas surface mail — £56.50 Photographic Research Robin Chittenden Overseas airmail - £88.00 David Tipling Concessionary rates Design Mark Corliss (Available only to individual members of the RSPB, BTO, IWC, SOC, County Bird Clubs 8c Societies and other Rarities Committee National or Regional organisations) Chairman Colin Bradshaw UK - £42.00 Overseas surface mail — £46.00 Hon. Secretary Michael ). Rogers Overseas airmail - £69.50 Paul Harvey, )ohn McLoughlin, John Martin, Single back issues - £6.50 Doug Page, Adam Rowlands, Ken Shaw, Available from British Birds, The Banks, Mountfield, Brian Small, Jimmy Steele, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Reg Thorpe, Grahame Walbridge Rarities Issue - £10 (available as above) Archivist John Marchant Please make all cheques payable to British Birds Statistician Peter Fraser Guidelines for Contributors: see inside back cover Museum consultant Ian Lewington or visit the BB website. www.britishbirds.co.uk EDITORIAL CIRCULATION Chapel Cottage, & PRODUCTION Dunrossness, The Banks, Mountfield, Shetland ZE2 9JH Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY Tel 8c Fax: 01950 460080 Tel: 01580 882039 Papers, notes, letters, illustrations, etc. Fax: 01580 882038 Roger Riddington E-mail: editor@britishbirds.co.uk Subscriptions & Circulation Vivienne Hunter ‘News & comment’ information E-mail: subscriptions@britishbirds.co.uk Bob Scott 8c Adrian Pitches, 8 Woodlands, St Neots, Cambridgeshire PE 19 1UE Design & Production Tel: 01480 214904 Fax: 01480 473009 Philippa Leegood E-mail: abscott@tiscali.co.uk E-mail: design@britishbirds.co.uk Rarity descriptions Accounts & Administration M. J. Rogers, 2 Churchtown Cottages, Flazel Jenner Towednack, Cornwall TR26 3AZ E-mail: accounts@helm-information.co.uk ADVERTISING: for all advertising matters, please contact: Ian l.ycett, Solo Publishing Ltd, 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N 1 3QP Tel: 020 7704 9495 Fax: 020 7704 2767 E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk Front-cover photograph: Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, Morocco, February 1995. Chris Gomersatl )MCISC0PINC?1 we can supply ' tthe complete package! ■ ; London Camera Exchange Winchester NEW! DUOVID 8+12x42 ^ Available March Phone for latest info. TTubes available from £39.99. Phone for details or visit our website. ivww.dlglscoping.co.uk 115 The square Winchester S023 9ES umalliwlnehester lcegroup.co.uk Telephone 01962 366203 UK Mail Order (text Day Delivery Available Postage ft Insurance £6 Most Items //[ selection of our large stock Prices shown include VAT @ 17.5% and are subject to change without notice 8x20B £279 10X25B £299 8x30 SLC £475 7X42 SLC £589 10X42 SLC £639 LEICA 8X20BC 8X20BCA 10X25BC 10X25BCA 8X32BN 10X32BN 7X42BN 8X42BN 10X42BN APO Televid^ apo Televk^ 32x zoom £249 £279 £279 £295 £619 £639 £699 £689 £699 £919 £959 £ SWAROVSKI I 8.5X42EL 10X42EL £845 £880 AT80HD+30XW £979 AT80HD+Z00m £1029 ATS65HD+30XW £1049 ATS65HD + ZOOm £1129 Nikon 8x36 Sporter 1 £199 10x36 sporter 1 £229 8X42 HC £779 10x42 HC E869 *€» Nikon RAII + 20X £199 Nikon RAII + Zoom £249 Nikon EDIllA Body £599 8x42 DBA £599 10x42 DBA £599 8X42 PCACN £429 10X42 PCACN £439 M.Midget2+25x £179 M.Midget2 + zoom £219 imagic 65 + 25 £199 imaglc 80+25 £299 imagic 80+zoom £329 ES80+25X+Case £499 Diascope65T* 23 or 30x 15-45x Zoom 8x20 Victory 10x25 Victory £725 I £175 £240 £299 £329 information correct @ 21/02/02 and is and much man:. Phone. subject to change without notice E8.0E www.digiscoping.co.uk Don’t miss the opportunity to volunteer for the annual autumn northern valleys soaring bird survey in Israel. Between August and October hundreds of thousands of soaring birds cross Israel including 32 species of birds of prey, black and white storks and pelicans. The entire world population of Lesser-spotted eagles and Levant sparrowhawks cross this region as well as some 300,000 Honey buzzards. This is also an excellent opportunity to see mass migration of passerines and shorebirds. Volunteers are needed for the survey between August 1, 2002 through October 15, 2002 for a minimum of 4 weeks. Room and board will be provided for participating volunteers. For more details contact: Dan Alon, Director Israel Ornithological Center, SPNI Atidim Industrial Park PO. Box 58020 Tel Aviv 61580 Israel Tel: +972-3-6449622, Fax: +972-3-6449625 E-mail: ioc@netvision.net.il To apply send CV to above address. Raptor watches needed BIRDSEEKERS 1 HOLIDAYS FOR BIRDWATCHERS t J The Small Company with the Big following-' HOLIDAYS for BIRDWATCHERS (UK and Worldwide) We cater for beginners to experts with an emphasis on seeing birds and wildlife well WHALES , DOLPHINS and SEABIRDS Join us on the best value for money cruises from Plymouth to Spain aboard the huge very stable Val de Loire. At just £139.00 which includes twin berth cabin, exclusive rights to upper deck and £30.00 worth of food vouchers, our trips are half the price of anything similar! Dales throughout Aug-Sept 2002 Last year from Plymouth we sighted on one trip 50 plus whale sightings including 4 species of which 10 were Sperm Whales! We also saw 6 species of shearwater with excellent views of Little, Great and Cory’s. There are Sabines Gulls, Skuas and 3 species of Dolphin. Don’t miss out come with the experts! For a Free 2002 Brochure of these trips plus many throughout Britain, Europe and Worldwide contact: STEVE BIRD 19 Crabtree Close, Marshmills, Plymouth, Devon PL3 6EL. Tel/Fax: 01752 342001 Email: bird@birdseekers.freeserve.co.uk www.birdseekers.co.uk Agent for "Wildwings” ATOL holder No. 5429 Superb birding in the Caribbean Small groups with expert British and local leaders 9 November 2003 ( I 4 nights) I 5 January 2003 (8 nights) 4 February 2003 ( I 2 nights) 3 March 2003 (I 5 nights) Cuba with Andy Mitchell £1,995 sharing twin room Jamaica with Peter Roberts £1,625 sharing twin room Trinidad & Tobago with Peter Clement £2,375 sharing twin room Cuba & Jamaica with Andy Mitchell £2,185 sharing twin room For full information on this and other destinations worldwide call us on our ^3 freephone 0800 253534 Island Holidays, Drummond Street, 2725 Comrie, Perthshire PH6 2DS Tel: 01764 670107. Email: bw@islandholidays.net Visit our website: www.islandholidays.net WHERETO WATCH BIRDS New editions in this fabulous tried and tested series - for birders and walkers around the country EAST ANGLIA 4th edition Peter & Margaret Clarke 0 7136 5864 9 |une 2002 £14.99 THAMES VALLEY AND THE CHILTERNS 2nd edition Brian Clews & Paul Trodd 0 7136 5953 X April 2002 £14.99 Thames Valley X- The Chilterns Coming in August BRITAIN Simon Harrap & Nigel Redman 0 7136 4137 1 August 2002 £16.99 Available from good bookshops For more information, or to request a complete catalogue, please contact A&C Black Customer Services 1:01480 212666 f: 01480 405014 e: sales@acblack.com Visit our website: www.acblack.com Kaikoura, locate** on the East Coast of the spectacular South Island of c New Zealand offers wonderful opportunities for nature lovers tog enjoy a variety of marine wildlife including a large variety of seabirds. A host of pelagic birds can be found just minutes offshore due to the close proximity of the deep Kaikoura Canyon. Enjoy close at hand an array of Albatross, Petrels, Shearwaters, Terns, Gulls and more. Trips 3 times daily. Duration 3 hours. Cost: Adult $60 - Child $35 Web: www.oceanwings.co.nz Email: info@oceanwings.co.nz Fax 0064-3319-6534 ' CHR1STOPHE New Diascopes from Carl Zeiss New Carl Zeiss Diascopes T* FL • 65 mm and 85 mm Objectives • Straight and Angled bodies. • 2 fixed magnification eyepieces and 1 variable eyepiece • Fluoride glass • Waterproof, Nitrogen filled For details of your nearest Carl Zeiss Dealer. Please contact our helpline 01707 871350. ZEISS British Birds Volume 95 Number 6 June 2002 272 Slender-billed Curlew in Northumberland: new to Britain and Ireland Tim Cleeves 279 S3 From the Rarities Committee’s files: The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay, Northumberland, in 1998 Jimmy Steele and Didier Vangeluwe 300 Declining farmland birds: evidence from large-scale monitoring studies in the UK Dan Chamberlain and Juliet Vickery Regular features 278 Looking back 3 I I Letters What crisis in farmland birds? Michael Shrubb The conservation of farmland birds John Corkindale 3 I 3 Notes Red-throated Diver feeding young in November S. C. Barber Racial identification of Fair Isle Solitary Sandpiper R. Y. McGowan and D. N. Weir Ageing and moult in Common Terns Robin M. Ward 3 1 7 News and comment Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches 320 Reviews Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Vol. 5: Tyrant- Flycatchers to Chats by P. J. Higgins, J. M. Peter and W. K. Steele Nick Dymond Die Teichralle: Oder das Teichhuhn: Gallinula chloropus by H. Engler M. G. Wilson Extraordinary Pheasants by Stephen Green-Armytage Paul Harvey Birds of Brent Reservoir by Leo Batten, Roy Beddard, John Colmans and Andrew Self Tony Blake Wild Goose Winter: Observations of Geese in North Norfolk by James McCallum Mark Cocker 322 (§) Monthly Marathon Steve Rooke, David Fisher and Killian Mullarney 325 Recent reports Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan © British Birds 2002 Slender-billed Curlew in Northumberland: new to Britain and Ireland Tim Cleeves 1 64. Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris (centre foreground), with Eurasian Curlews N. arquata, Druridge Bay, Northumberland, May 1 998, Colin Bradshaw At approximately 17.50 hours on 4th May 1998, my wife Ann and 1 entered the Budge Hide at the Northumberland Wildlife Trust reserve at Druridge Bay, Northumberland. Shortly before, we had met another birder who told us there were some Eurasian Curlews Numenius arquata and a Whimbrel N. phaeopus visible from the hide. As we opened the hide shutters, a light aircraft flew over scaring the curlews, a Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa and a smaller, curlew-like wader, which I assumed was the Whimbrel. Switching from binoculars to my ’scope, I followed the unidentified bird back down and simply expected to see the stripey crown, darker chest and steeply curved bill of a classic Whimbrel. Not so; although superficially like a small curlew, the most striking features were its very pale wing-coverts, which contrasted sharply with dark-centred scapulars, and a fine, thin bill. I looked at it long and hard, but couldn’t work it out. Both puzzled and intrigued, I started to scribble some sketches and take field notes. Having watched it carefully for a while, I did not think it was a Eurasian Curlew. Admittedly, I had never seen an aberrant Eurasian Curlew, but this bird seemed distinctly different in many ways. As Ann and I sat there chewing over the possibilities, we did mention Slender-billed Curlew N. tenuirostris, but mainly in jest, and my money was still on some sort of aberrant Whim- brel. Nonetheless, some extra help seemed a sen- sible strategy, and I suggested to Ann that she should contact Tom Tams, Colin Bradshaw and Jimmy Steele from the nearest phone box. A little later, when only Tom arrived, Ann confessed that she had ‘bottled out’, and not contacted Colin or Jimmy! Clearly she thought my imagination was getting the better of me... Tom and I continued to watch the mystery bird, and increasingly (and amid growing excitement) we felt that it had fea- tures consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. Using Tom’s mobile phone, we summoned Colin and Jimmy and, once they had arrived, the tour of us plus Mary Carruthers watched it until 20.25 hours. The following description is based largely on my own field notes and sketches taken on 4th May, with some refinements added fol- lowing reference to photographs and video material, and notes from other observers. 272 © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 I'. mi 2002 t-D- c Slender-billed Curlew: new to Britain and Ireland > •• , ' - . i i Description'- Size & structure First seen in flight, with approximately 15 Eurasian Curlews and a single Black-tailed Godwit, when it appeared smaller than the accompanying Eurasian Curlews. This was subse- quently well illustrated by Gary Bellingham's photograph of it in flight with Eurasian Curlews on 7th May (plate 1 70, page 284). It also looked to have thinner wings in flight. As it landed, it was obviously a Numenius- type wader, but was clearly smaller than the Eurasian Curlews, and looked quite distinctly thinner-necked. Behaviour The Druridge bird appeared to walk more quickly than the Eurasian Curlews. It often adopted a nervous stance, and when it stopped feeding it would stretch its neck up and peer around. It seemed to prefer feeding in quite rank vegetation, mainly taller grasses and rushes Juncus, and once it waded thigh-deep in a shallow pool. Later in the week, a number of observers watched it flatten itself in the grass as a Eurasian Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus passed over, while the Eurasian Curlews took flight. When feeding, it probed deeply and vigorously. With rather quick movements and its distinctive, thinner-necked appearance, it recalled an Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda at times. Bare parts The bill was approximately one and a third times the length of the head, and was distinctly thinner (less deep) than that of any of the Eurasian Curlews nearby. Viewed head-on, the bill was obviously narrower than on Eurasian Curlew, too. The shape also differed from the latter species, being straighter along the basal two- thirds, before gently curving for the distal third. The shape of the bill tip in particular was notice- ably different, as it shelved to a very fine point and lacked the droop-tipped appearance, first pinched in then laterally expanded, characteristic of Eurasian Curlew. The bill was black, apart from a dark pink base to the lower mandible. Most of the time the legs were obscured by vegetation. When they could be seen, they looked shorter than those of Eurasian Curlew. In flight, the toes just protruded beyond the tail tip. Upperparts The extreme base of the forehead, adjacent to the bill, was off-white. This joined an off-white supercilium, which was widest just above and behind the eye, became thinner beyond that and faded above the rear ear-coverts.The crown was brown, finely streaked darker, and was darker and browner than the cheeks and nape, which were greyish buff with fine dark streaks. In dull, even light, the 'capped effect’ of the darker crown was quite noticeable, but in stronger light this was almost completely lost. At very close range, a thin buff median crown-stripe, which began at the forehead and faded towards the centre of the crown, could be seen. When a. Bill looked straight at base, then curved gently for final third. It looked thin and narrow, both in depth and width (i.e. head-on). Bill length approximately I A x head length. Black, with dark pink at base of lower mandible. b. Looked shorter-legged than Eurasian Curlew. y-Vd'A C. Pale supercilium most noticeable above and just behind eye. d. Neat rows of dark streaks on breast overlying buff background. e. Underparts: streaks and spotting arranged in lines. Sketch British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 273 Tim Cleeves Tim Cleeves Tim Cleeves Slender-billed Curlew: new to Britain and Ireland a. Often looked alert, stretched neck up, and walked quickly. b. Pale forehead, thin dark lateral crown-stripes above pale supercilium.Thin, off-white central crown-stipe, only just beyond forecrown, visible only during head- on views. Pale chin and throat. e. Spotting on flanks, set against very pale background. Spots roughly oval in shape, no arrow marks or cross- barring. C. At times, the crown looked darker than the cheeks. Little contrast in brighter light. %! d. Worn, almost silvery wing- coverts, contrasting strongly with darker mantle and scapulars. Tertials often drooped, or hung down at the rear f. Primary tips fell level with tail tip. Approx, three primary tips extended beyond the ‘drooping’ tertials. Sketch 3 g. Very white undertail-coverts, and tight feathering on thighs. viewed head-on, the pale supercilium was seen to be bordered by short, dark lateral crown- stripes for about half its length. Below the super- cilium, at the base of the bill and in front of the eye, was a dark blackish smudge or spot. A short and wispy, dark eye-stripe extended only just beyond the eye, and the bird showed an indis- tinct, narrow pale eye-ring. Below the pale nape, the mantle was very dark, almost black, and this formed an isolated and conspicuous dark triangular area. The upper scapulars were blackish-brown with narrow creamy-buff edges; and the lower scapulars were similarly coloured, with narrow buff edges. The tertials were long and pointed, with dark brown centres, and edges patterned with triangular dark brown and pale whitish-buff indentations. The wing-coverts were obviously worn and faded, being very pale with small, inconspicuous dark subterminal tips. At times, the wing-coverts looked almost silvery, contrasting boldly with the dark mantle and scapulars. This contrast con- 274 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 -T Slender-billed Curlew: new to Britain and Ireland a. Pale wing-coverts, contrasting with dark primaries. b. White on leading primary, probably white feather shaft. C. Missing or regrowing primaries. Wings narrower than on Eurasian Curlew. d. Long, white 'V': uppertail-coverts, rump and back. , e. Very white-looking tail, with four or five narrow greyish bars. / x^foes just extended -^beyond tip of tail in flight. Sketch 4 Vc' \ • % Jv . a. Note gap - missing inner primary. Very white underwing-coverts and flight feathers. W E firmed the age of the bird as a first summer.The primary projection was relatively short, with approximately three dark primary tips extending beyond the tertials; the primary tips just reached the tail tip. During preening, the rump and undertail-coverts looked pure white. Compared with Eurasian Curlew, the tail always looked whiter (see below) with narrower, greyer tail bars, and much more white than dark. 275 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 Tim Cleeves Slender-billed Curlew: new to Britain and Ireland Underparts The chin and throat were white. The neck and breast were pale buff, quite warm and streaked with blackish-brown lines. These longitudinal, par- allel streaks ended abruptly on the lower breast, which gave the impression of a pectoral band when viewed head-on. Below this, there was an irregular patterning of spotting on the flanks, above the thighs and below the folded carpal joint. Because the bird spent much of its time in dense, long grass, it was hard to determine the exact shape of the spotting on the first evening. In better light, on 5th May, Tom Tams reported on the shape of some of the breast spots, which were: 'isolated dark brown or blackish-brown spots, roughly oval in shape, and, at least on the left side of the bird, three spots had slight indents at the front and were tapered towards the rear At least one of these spots had a tiny extension from the indent back up the feather shaft.’ The underparts did not show any conspic- uous cross-barring or anchor-shaped barring typical of Eurasian Curlew. The thighs were neat, compact and pure white. The lower belly, vent and undertail-coverts were white. Flight pattern In flight, the upperwing pattern was quite striking. The outer four or five primaries looked very dark (blackish) and contrasted with the paler, browner inner primaries.The outermost primary showed a conspicuous white shaft. The primary coverts looked black, but the very worn wing- coverts contrasted markedly with the dark outer primaries. Later in the week, at least two observers commented on a very narrow pale trailing edge along some of the flight feathers (Brett Richards and Robin Ward, verbally). On both wings, the bird had apparently dropped the innermost primary (Robin Ward, verbally). On 4th May, when the bird took a short flight, Tom Tams and I noticed that it raised its wings as it landed, almost like a Common Redshank Tringa totanus. The entire underwing-coverts and axil- laries were white. In flight, the rump looked white and extended well up the back in a pronounced 'V'. The tail looked very white too, with four or five well-defined, thin bars, these being much nar- rower than the areas of white in between. The toes extended just beyond the tail tip. On the evening of 4th May, I had to return to work and inland confinement in Bedfordshire, so was unable to visit Druridge again while the bird was still present. It remained until 7th May, and caused enormous debate among birders throughout Britain, and beyond. The record was widely discussed in many of the birding magazines, and the Internet birding sites were buzzing with conjecture. Strong arguments were put forward about the bird’s identity, some supporting Slender-billed Curlew, others not; many of the most forceful opinions came from people who had not seen the bird in question, which is interesting since it is all too easy to undermine the credibility of such a record from a distance. Later the same month, I visited the Natural History Museum at Tring and examined the collection of 21 Slender-billed Curlew skins there, as well as a number of Eurasian Curlew skins. By that time, I had also been given two videos of the Druridge bird, taken by Peter Colston and Trevor Charlton, and I was able to watch these on the same day as looking at the skins. Most of the Slender-billed Curlew skins at Tring are of birds obtained in the Mediter- ranean in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (between 1857 and 1918). There are 12 males and 9 females, and six of the skins appeared to be of first-years, which looked more streaked than spotted below. Just one skin (ref. 1939.12.9.3666 BMNH) appears to be of a first-summer, a male from Siellbar, near Gotha, Germany, which is dated 12th May (there is dispute about the year it was obtained, but it was before 1864). This specimen looks most like the Druridge bird because it has worn wing- coverts contrasting with dark scapulars. It is also interesting that it was found in northwest Europe in May. Virtually all illustrations of Slender-billed Curlews, in field guides, in BWP and in other reference books, show only adults and/or juven- iles, and I could not find an illustration of a first-summer. Eventually, 1 did find a painting by Christopher Schimdt, which was produced in 1992 and used by the Wildlife Management Department, Forestry Service and the Ministry of Agriculture in Greece to help local fishermen and others recognise and report this globally threatened species at Greek coastal sites. This illustration of a juvenile/first-winter Slender- billed Curlew is, in fact, quite similar to the Druridge bird, but instead of spotting on the 276 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 Slender-billed Curlew: new to Britain and Ireland 1 65. Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, Druridge Bay, Northumberland, May 1 998. breast and flank sides it shows the typical streaks of a juvenile. In summary, my research confirmed my belief that the Druridge bird showed the key identification features of Slender-billed Curlew. Most importantly, it had a noticeably fine bill, which was thinner in both depth and width compared with Eurasian Curlew. The bill tip in particular was very fine, and lacked any expan- sion laterally near the tip. The sides of the breast and flanks were spotted, and lacked any cross- barring or arrow-shaped markings, unlike Eurasian Curlew. The tail was strikingly pale- looking, with large areas of white between the neat grey tailbars. This feature may not always be diagnostic of Slender-billed Curlew, but is a useful supplementary feature (see, for example, the line-drawings and description in Glutz et al. 1977, Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropus) . The bird did not show the very fine flank streaking associated with the eastern race of Eurasian Curlew N. a. orientalis , which is, on average, paler and larger than nominate arquata, and thus much larger than even the largest female Slender-billed Curlew. Additional pointers in support of Slender-billed Curlew were the overall size of the bird, and the pattern of the upperparts, with the bleached, worn wing- coverts contrasting strongly with the dark mantle and scapulars. Each individual aspect of the identification of the Druridge bird is covered more thoroughly in Jimmy Steele’s report (pages 279-299), with detailed reference to skins and to field descriptions of Slender- billed Curlew. Acknowledgments A large number of people contributed to the identification process and helped in a wide variety of ways, and I should like to thank them all: Mark R Adams, Arnoud van den Berg, Colin Bradshaw, Ian Broadbent, Justin Carr Trevor Charlton, Peter Colston, Tom Francis, Michael Frankis, Steve Gantlett, Adam Gretton, Ron Johns, Tim Melling, Terry Murfitt.John O'Sullivan, Brett Richards, Jimmy Steele, Tom Tams, DidierVangeluwe, Robin Ward, Alan Wheeldon, and staff at the Natural History Museum (Tring) and the Hancock Museum (Newcastle-upon- Tyne). Tim Cleeves 111 Huddersfield Road, Shelley, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire HD8 SHF Postscript Now that the Druridge Bay Slender-billed Curlew has been accepted by both BBRC and the BOURC, there is time to reflect a little on the storm that this amazing record created. The passions and opinions which flashed across the British birding scene during 4th-7th May 1998, together with the reverberations afterwards, British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 277 Gary Bellingham c Slender-billed Curlew: new to Britain and Ireland would probably keep psychology students in case histories for a lifetime! Some of the disquiet was undoubtedly due to the fact that some birders did not see it, partly as a result of mixed messages coming out on pager and telephone information services, a number of which reported it as a Slender-billed Curlew, while others reported it as simply an odd (Eurasian) curlew. The people who run the information services could hardly be blamed for the inconsistency, which simply reflected the views of observers watching the bird. In addi- tion, this was no run-of-the-mill rarity; the combination of a potential first for Britain and a species which was globally threatened meant that the stakes were very high indeed. As such, do we simply expect too much from our pagers? One simple, but crucial fact is that some birds are very difficult to identify in the field, and a very few are perhaps impossible. Perhaps too many birders want instant and 100% accurate news. Perhaps they reflect the attitudes of a western consumer-orientated society, which wants it all and wants it now. Such demands are simply not always realistic. I do not really mind if a bird which I travel to see has not been con- clusively identified when I get there, or if it takes all day (or several days) to sort it out. If a mistake is made (and we have to face the fact that we ALL make mistakes occasionally), the positive approach would be to try and learn from that mistake. Perhaps there are now too many observers who rely simply on peer pres- sure and the opinion of the masses, rather than what their eyes tell them and what is in their notebooks. If you are interested in bird identification and seeing rarities, it may be as well not to accept the word of the majority as gospel, and not to worry too much about what the pager or the birdline tells you. The individuals who run these services are undoubtedly under pressure to produce instant, reliable news and, in most cases, the opinion of the majority is the safest option; in their shoes, we would all do the same. My advice is to worry about just one thing... can you get there in good light today! Looking back Seventy-five years ago: 'WOOD-PIGEON WITH CLUTCH OF THREE. On April 12th, 1927, we found a nest of the Wood-Pigeon ( Columba palumbus) about twenty feet from the ground in a Douglas fir, near Dumfries. It contained two eggs as well as one newly-hatched bird. W. & A. B. Duncan. ‘[About half a dozen cases are on record of three eggs or young in the nest of the Wood-Pigeon (cf. Brit. Birds 4: 155; Field, 19, xi., 1904; Viet. Hist, of Rutland, etc.); while cases of four eggs or young have been recorded about three times (cf. Zool, 1889, p. 436; Brit. Birds, loc. cit., etc.), but the latter are probably either first and second layings of one hen in the same nest or the produce of two hens. — F. C. R. JOURDAIN.]’ WOOD-PIGEON DIPTHERIA IN PERTHSHIRE. Hearing that many Wood-Pigeons ( Columba palumbus) were dying at Moncreiffe, Bridge-of-Earn, in February and March, 1927, I collected several, and brought them to Perth Museum. The tongues and throats proved to be septic and greatly inflamed; in some cases inflammation had practically closed the throat, which agrees with the keepers’ accounts of seeing Pigeons sitting gasping in trees, then falling dead, apparently from suffocation. A swab of the throats, when submitted to the diptheria test at the local infirmary, gave a positive reaction; this of course, would not mean that the bacillus was the same as human diptheria, but merely of a similar nature. Scone.’ ( Brit. Birds 21: 19-20, June 1927) Twenty-five years ago: ‘Pheasants swimming With reference to the note on a Pheasant [Phasianus colchicus] swimming (Brit. Birds 70; 120), I should like to draw attention to one of the late Professor M. F. M. Meiklejohn’s happy notes in the Edinburgh Bird Bulletin (3: 12). I quote this in full and believe that British Birds readers will relish the authentic MFMM flavour of the final sentence: “pheasant at sea On 5th October 1952, about two miles south of Dunbar, I noticed a hen Pheasant sitting out at sea on a small isolated rock which was half awash. Between it and the shore were about a quarter of a mile of rock and rock pools, as well as 20 yards of open water. Presently a wave washed it into the sea and, after floating for a second or two, it took off from the surface and flew successfully to land. This is probably the only known case of a Pheasant doing something interesting.” Dougal G. Andrew’ 278 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 272-278 From the Rarities Committee’s files: The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay, Northumberland, in 1998 ZEISS The record of a Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, at Druridge Bay, Northumberland, on 4th-7th May 1998 was probably the most controversial and extra- ordinary that BBRC has ever dealt with. For these reasons it was also one of the most time- consuming and carefully vetted. Following the discovery of the bird by Tim Cleeves in May 1998, and the subsequent fallout, it took some time for the various com- ponents of the record to be assembled. In addi- tion to Tim’s description and field sketches, seven descriptions were formally submitted, along with related correspondence, three videos, a set of photographs and some video- stills. This constituted the submitted evidence, but there were also a number of related articles in birding journals to be attached, while a sub- stantial literature review was clearly also neces- sary. The level of argument and discussion about the record was such that BBRC had, as its first priority, to try to assume total objectivity in the assessment. This was not easy, given a sit- uation where almost every birder in the land had an opinion which they were eager to express. Nothing was simple about this record. Even circulating and assimilating the information was fraught with difficulty, and the original documentation arrived in three bulging pack- ages. Without some distillation, this would have taken an age for each member to assess. A number of initial steps to organise the data were necessary if we were to make any sense of the volume of material. These were: 1. To abstract the detail for each individual feature from each description, and then look for consensus and inconsistencies between the descriptions. This would allow each feature to be assessed systematically, and then linked with the photographic evidence. 2. To examine each feature in turn and compare it with the known (published) vari- ation of Slender-billed Curlew. 279 © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay 3. To examine each feature in turn and compare it with the known (published) vari- ation of Eurasian Curlew N. arquata, in all its geographical forms. 4. To look at the possibilities and precedents for abnormalities such as unknown races, hybrids and aberrant birds which might explain the appearance of the Druridge bird. The record was sent to Jimmy Steele (JGS), the first assessor, in autumn 1998, and the prepara- tory analysis took until early in 1999 to com- plete. It was very laborious work but, fortunately, discrepancies among the descrip- tions, and also between the descriptions and the photographic evidence (including videos), were mercifully few, so that it was possible to draw together a composite, consistent and almost complete detailed picture. Some pieces of sup- porting information took a little longer to obtain, such as a clear picture of the ‘third race’ of Eurasian Curlew N. a. sushkini (see below). All material (descriptions, photographs, corres- pondence etc.) was circulated at this stage, in addition to the 17-page appraisal of every feature. By the summer of 1999, the record had almost completed its first circulation, in time for it to be discussed at BBRC’s summer meeting. Three members had voted to accept it, while the remainder voted the record as pending, until further details had been obtained. There were a number of issues to be cleared up. These included the reason for the large pale and worn wing-covert patch, and whether this could be demonstrated on existing skins; the identity of a second rather small curlew in the group; and a number of detailed queries about plumage and moult. The con- sensus of the Committee was that it was impor- tant that all such queries should be dealt with. In order to do that, access to a great deal more primary source material was necessary, and some help was needed to interpret the new material. JGS had already been in contact with a number of ornithologists in Europe involved in Slender-billed Curlew conservation projects. One of them, Didier Vangeluwe (DV), has a special interest in identification of Slender- billed Curlew. DV has a collection of slides of most of the skins of the species currently held in Europe, and a complete database of the age and source of all skins in major collections. DV also has field experience of the species over and above those individuals at the well-known Moroccan site (Merja Zerga) in the 1990s. JGS and DV met in late 1999 to examine skins, to allow JGS to copy relevant slides of European skins, and to clarify details of moult and indi- vidual variation. This process was very helpful and enabled all of the queries about plumage that had been raised in the first circulation to be answered. Of course, this process did not deal with the issue of the ‘second bird’. This apparently small, and perhaps pale, individual appears very briefly on one video clip. After a number of abortive attempts to obtain the relevant video- stills, we were eventually able to do this in late 2000. This was, in itself, a time-consuming process, as there was only a very short sequence when the ‘second bird’ was visible. An appeal in the birding press failed to produce any addi- tional information on its plumage or structure. We were entirely dependent on some rather poor-quality video and photographic images to help us try and identify this bird definitively; if indeed this was actually necessary. In spite of the lack of any information on rump, tail and underwing on the images, the bill length and structure, and the flank pattern shown on the video-stills, showed this to be a smallish, but not atypical, Eurasian Curlew, presumably a male. Although its presence did not affect the ability to identify the Slender-billed Curlew cor- rectly, the resolution of this issue was part of the overall process of exploring every avenue. Evidence for variability in Slender-billed Curlew The Moroccan birds of the early 1990s were so well observed, described and photographed that they dictated common perceptions of the appearance of Slender-billed Curlew. They were all believed to be males (except for one pre- sumed female seen in the late 1980s), and were all in adult-winter plumage during the period when they were well observed and pho- tographed. The only other high-quality pub- lished image is of the stunning French bird in 1968 (see Brit. Birds 77: 583-585; plates 249, 251 & 253), which is presumably also a winter male. Nevertheless, the museum skins and related descriptions (for example BWP ), and recent observations in Italy, all paint a rather different picture, with adults resembling the Moroccan birds being only part of a much wider spectrum of plumage variability and appearance. 280 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay Certain important features cannot be judged from museum specimens with complete confi- dence (including jizz, eye-ring and perhaps bare-part colours). The most useful field refer- ence in the context of this record is that describing the claim of up to 19 Slender-billed Curlews in Italy in 1995 (Serra et al. 1995). On the basis of all the available data, the most vari- able features are: size, bill length, tone of under- parts (the extent and colour of the wash on the upper breast), tertial pattern, and possibly head- and-face pattern. These are discussed fully below. Variability in Eurasian Curlew The Eurasian Curlew is quite a variable species. Like Slender-billed Curlew, size, bill length, face pattern, underwing pattern, the underparts, tail and tertial patterns are all variable; in the case of size, probably even more so than in Slender- billed. Add to this the complication of addi- tional races to deal with and the picture is not straightforward. There are, however, parameters within which the species varies. Flank spotting occurs in the European race of Eurasian Curlew N. a. arquata, but bars, streaks and chevrons also seem to occur universally. Bill size and shape may vary but generally do so about a common structure (see notes under bill struc- ture). Size varies enormously but there are recorded minima and maxima. Tail pattern, underwing pattern and face pattern are all subject to variation, but again there are recorded limits. Only a minority of west Euro- pean arquata show white ground colour to the tail, and probably even fewer show unmarked axillaries or pale underparts, whereas all Slender-billed Curlews show all of these fea- tures. In addition, there is the eastern form of Eurasian Curlew N. a. orientalis, which prob- ably shows a clinal intergradation with N. a. arquata. On certain plumage features, ‘classic' orientalis are similar to Slender-billed Curlew, but on several specifics they are totally different. They are also very large with enormously long bills and very long legs (bill length and leg length increase as you move east; BWP). Fur- thermore, there is a little-known and rarely described form, N. a. sushkini , which is appar- ently similar to orientalis, but smaller in size. This breeds (or has bred, because there is no evidence of its current status) very close to the range of Slender-billed Curlew, and is fully dis- cussed below. The Analysis What follows here is a synopsis of the analysis document included with the second circulation. In the interests of readability and space it has been condensed a little and there are some minor updates, but great care has been taken to avoid any change of emphasis or meaning from the original. This is itself an updated version of the first circulation document, with the results of skin analysis included. Each feature was rated as either objective and reliable, or as subjective (and, therefore, open to interpretation, though still potentially useful). The objective features should, therefore, carry more weight than the subjective ones. The relevance of each feature for the separation of Slender-billed Curlew from Eurasian Curlew is also evaluated. Some objective features are not relevant, some subjec- tive ones are very relevant. Consequently, the best evidence is both objective and relevant. The analysis started with the Druridge bird’s age and moult as this was likely to be of huge significance in evaluating the relevance of various plumage features. Every other feature is then covered in detail. Moult and ageing (Objective, but not relevant for identification) Descriptions & photographic evidence • The Druridge bird was clearly moulting and replacing the innermost primaries (plate 187). The wing-coverts were very worn, but with a few (very few) inner upperwing- coverts apparently replaced. The scapulars of Slender-billed Curlew are extensively replaced through the spring, so these could have been either old or new. The replace- ment of tertials is highly variable, so these are not helpful for ageing. • The primary moult and the very bleached condition of the (presumably juvenile) wing-coverts (plate 165) confirm that this was almost certainly a first-summer bird. • The relatively large size suggests that it may have been a female, although the bill was, in fact, relatively short. While the balance of evidence points towards this being a female, this is not proven. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew The pattern of very worn and bleached wing- coverts with a very few replaced (evident in several pictures), and fresher scapulars, would be entirely consistent with the moult strategy of British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 281 Didier Vangeluwe The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay 1 66. First-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris. Obtained I Oth March 1914, Italy. Slender-billed Curlew, which replaces very few of the upperwing-coverts until the first ‘post- breeding’ moult ( BWP\ evidence from skin studies; see plate 166). Primaries are not moulted in adults until the first post-breeding moult, in late summer. Starting primary moult in spring is, however, normal for first-spring Slender-billed Curlew ( BWP\ evidence from skin studies). >- State of moult was consistent with first- summer Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew First-summer Eurasian Curlew of the western race arquata would typically start moulting flight feathers in early June (RWP). This timing is highly variable, but normally this species would not be expected to be moulting primaries in early May. Other aspects of the moult of Eurasian Curlew are similar to what is known for Slender-billed Curlew, but perhaps the former would have moulted a few more wing-coverts by this stage. Non-breeding orientalis can start ‘post-breeding’ moult as early as February. >■ State of moult was not completely consistent with normal N. a. arquata moult, but was consistent with that of N. a. orientalis. 2* Moult strategy is very variable in curlews, so nothing should be ruled out on moult. Size (Objective, highly relevant) Descriptions • There was complete consensus that the Druridge bird was at least as small as (one observer), or smaller than (seven observers), the smallest of the 15 or so accompanying Eurasian Curlews. • Most estimates described it as about 20-25% smaller than an ‘average’ Eurasian Curlew, although some said that it was even smaller, while one observer felt that 20% was an exaggeration. Nevertheless, there was rea- sonable consensus with the 20-25% compar- ison, but this referred to the ‘average’ Eurasian present, and not the smallest. Nobody made clear precisely what they meant when describing size (total length, body length, bulk or something else). • There was a reasonable consensus that it was ‘dwarfed’ by the biggest female (although one observer felt that this was an exaggera- tion). • There was a consensus that it was not neces- sarily easy to pick up on size alone (except possibly in flight). • Many observers on 7th May (the fourth and final day of its stay) saw it with a Whimbrel N. phaeopus and described the two as being of similar size. Unfortunately, the best descriptions came mostly from the first three days of its stay, when there were no Whim- brels present, so not all of the descriptions included such a comparison. Photographic evidence There is nothing in the photographic evidence that contradicts any of the size descriptions given. Most of the time, when there are adjacent birds, the Druridge bird looks distinctly small, but there is one point in the video footage when there are two birds together briefly (and fuzzily) and it is impossible to tell which is which. This involved the ‘second bird’ (mentioned above). Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew There is no doubt that the Druridge bird was small, but consistency with Slender-billed Curlew is difficult to establish owing to the paucity of information for this species (for example, there are no reliable weights available). The different proportions of the bill (a compo- nent of total body length), when compared with Eurasian Curlew, make interpretation of total length difficult, and published total length mea- surements are likely to be ‘guestimates’ (Hayman et al. 1986), being derived from skins. The ‘20- 25% smaller than average’ comparison would encompass an individual towards the larger end of the range of Slender-billed Curlew. Flight photographs and descriptions suggest a rather sleek bird. Many measurements for Slender- billed Curlew are very similar to those for Whimbrel (though Slender-billed Curlew aver- ages a little smaller), but all reliable measure- 282 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 Jimmy Steele C The Slender-billed Curlew at Drurldge Bay ments except bill (e.g. tarsus, wing, tail) also overlap, or almost overlap, with those of the smallest Eurasian Curlew ( BWP ). It may be sig- nificant that when Tim Cleeves first saw the Druridge bird, he thought he was going to be looking at a Whimbrel. The size of all the Euro- pean curlews can be highly variable, and is dependent on gender. A female Slender-billed Curlew can certainly be quite a lot larger than a male Whimbrel, approaching Eurasian Curlew in size; equally, a male can be similar to Whim- brel in size or even smaller. Plate 167 shows three skins: a smallish (but not the smallest) Eurasian Curlew, a biggish Slender-billed Curlew (mounted, so that it looks even bigger), and a smallish (but not the smallest) Whimbrel. Plate 168 also shows three skins: the same Whimbrel and Eurasian Curlew, and a typical Slender-billed Curlew. Skins are unreliable for measuring size, but the differences, particularly in body length (excluding head), give an indica- tion of the range. »- Of all the important features, this is the one for which it is most difficult to get clear, objective evidence. >■ If the bird was a Slender-billed Curlew it was towards the upper end of the (known) size range, but its size appears consistent with that of Slender-billed Curlew. There is nothing to suggest that it was abnormally large. Consistency of size with Eurasian Curlew As the smallest bird in the group, and being 20- 25% smaller than the average member, the 1 67. Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquato (top), Whimbrel N. phaeopus (centre) and Slender-billed Curlew N. tenuirostris (bottom), Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium.This photograph shows relatively small examples of Eurasian Curlew and Whimbrel, but a fairly large Slender-billed Curlew. Druridge bird would have to have been an aber- rantly small Eurasian Curlew; but small exam- ples of every species can occur. Other structural and jizz features (Subjective, of uncertain relevance) Descriptions Structural differences are, of course, danger- ously open to interpretation. The following were consistently reported: • There was reasonable consensus that the neck was slimmer, sometimes described as pinched at the throat, although one observer said it was Thick necked’. • There was partial consensus that it had a smaller and neater head; one observer com- mented that the head shape was different, with a squarer rear crown. • There was also widespread consensus that the legs were proportionately shorter (one observer was confident enough to say that it was the tibia and not the tarsus that was shorter). • The bird did appear to adopt an upright stance fairly frequently, and many experi- enced observers drew comparison with Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda and Little Curlew N. minutus. • There was some consensus that the tip of the folded primaries fell about level with the tail, with about three primary tips visible beyond the tertials. • In flight, the tips of the feet extended beyond the tail. 1 68. Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata (top), Whimbrel N. phaeopus (centre) and Slender-billed Curlew N. tenuirostris (bottom), Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium.This photograph shows the same Eurasian Curlew and Whimbrel as in plate 1 67, but a more typical Slender-billed Curlew. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 283 Jimmy Steele Gary Bellingham Gary Bellingham The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay ) Photographic evidence • One of the photos does illustrate a certain elegance (plate 169), with a thick-based neck rapidly tapering towards the head, and appearing rather ‘pinched-in’ under the chin. Subsequent video-stills also showed this clearly. • The flattish crown with a fairly angular corner to the nape (noted by one observer) is consistently demonstrated in both stills and video-stills. • Some video-stills indicate a very narrow bill base, and a steep crown. The forehead pro- files of Slender-billed Curlew and Eurasian Curlew have been likened to those of (respectively) Ross’s Goose Anser rossii and Snow Goose A. caerulescens and this shows well in some of the photographs of the Moroccan birds. • The flight shot (plate 170) suggests very narrow wings, also picked up in Tim Cleeves’s description. 1 69. Slender-billed Curlew Numeniu s tenuirostris (right), with Eurasian Curlew N. arquata, Druridge Bay, Northumberland. May 1 998. • The flight shots also confirm the short pro- jection of toe tips beyond the tail. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew There is not much about jizz and structure in the existing descriptions of live birds that is not dis- cussed here under size, bill features or behaviour. The Italians (Serra et al. 1995) describe an ‘elegant look’ and a tendency to hold the head high, which would accord with the Druridge bird, but perhaps not too much weight should be placed on this description. The posture and head shape of the Druridge bird are similar to some of the existing photographs. >■ The presented material is consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew The eastern form orientalis shows legs which are so long that the entire foot extends beyond the tail tip in flight, which would be obvious in the field and in photographs. Assuming this to be an accurate and consistent feature, orientalis would be quite inconsistent with the Druridge bird. »• With this exception, structure and jizz are ‘soft’ features and cannot be used reliably or with certainty to rule out Eurasian Curlew. Behaviour (Subjective, of uncertain relevance) Descriptions • When a Eurasian Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus flew through, the Druridge bird did not flush with the Eurasian Curlews, but crouched in the grass. • In several descriptions it was reported to have walked quickly, at times running for some distance. 1 70. Slender-billed Curlew Numenlus tenuirostris in flight (centre top), with Eurasian Curlews N. arquata, Druridge Bay, Northumberland, May 1998. 284 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 c The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay Photographic evidence • The bird does at one point run quickly, with dainty steps, over some distance. • It does appear to walk quickly and rather jauntily. • It occasionally stretches up in the video footage, but perhaps not as dramatically as described in written accounts. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew BWP reports that Slender-billed Curlews are recorded as 'running very fast’, while other ref- erences note a tendency to stand upright, both of which were noted for the Druridge bird. Serra et al. (1995), who have unique experience of a group of claimed Slender-billed Curlews over a long period of time, reported very similar behaviour. Although we should be careful about over-interpretation, the different response to a passing raptor is an interesting observation, although of uncertain signifi- cance. Serra et al. (1995) reported the same behaviour of Slender-billed Curlew compared with Eurasian Curlew in response to passing raptors (i.e. crouching and not flying, while all other species flew off). »- The documented observations are consistent with behaviour previously reported for Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew »- These are all subjective features, none of which can be used reliably to rule out Eurasian Curlew, although they have not been reported specifically for Eurasian Curlew as far as we know. Bill length (Objective, highly relevant) Descriptions • There was complete consensus that this was the most striking feature. • There was a reasonable consensus on the ratio of bill length:head length, that being about 1.25-1.50. One description suggested 1.50-2.00. Photographic evidence • This confirms that bill length was clearly and consistently about 1.25 to 1.5 times head length (maximum; plate 169). Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew If anything, the bill is towards the shorter end of what might be expected. Although the Druridge bird may have been relatively large- bodied, it was rather short-billed. Many of the skins examined at Tring and elsewhere show larger ratios (of bill length:head length) than the Druridge bird (i.e. more than 1.5), but this is variable (for example, see plate 177). Skin studies demonstrate that large-bodied females can show bill length virtually identical to small- bodied males; in other words, bill length and body size are not necessarily closely correlated. Skin studies also show that bill length is quite variable. »■ This is consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew The bill of the Druridge bird was clearly not damaged (one video shows it opening its bill and showing two perfect mandibles). Evidently, Eurasian Curlews with abnormally short bills may occur. One museum specimen examined showed a bill only a couple of centimetres longer than that of a long-billed Slender-billed Curlew in the same collection. Nevertheless, the Druridge bird was relatively short-billed and it is difficult to imagine anything other than an extremely abnormal Eurasian Curlew with a bill as short as this. 2^ This is inconsistent with the normal range for Eurasian Curlew. Bill structure (Objective, highly relevant) Descriptions • There was a consensus that the bill of the Druridge bird was thin, particularly towards the tip. One observer described it has having a rather thick base, but all descriptions noted the tapered shape and fine tip. • Some observers specifically noted the lack of any lateral expansion at the tip. • Several observers noted that the bill was thin laterally as well as vertically. • There was less agreement among the observers about curvature; most believed that it was straight for the basal two-thirds or more, curving only in the distal portion; but two observers described it as curved from the base. • Some observers commented on how straight-billed it looked, and comparisons were made with juvenile Eurasian Curlew in late summer. • The descriptions of bill structure tended to be unclear about specific terminology. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 285 Gordon Langsbury The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay Photographic evidence This is an area where the photos are particularly instructive. Plate 169, showing the Slender- billed Curlew standing next to a Eurasian Curlew, illustrates the bill structure perfectly, while several of the other photos and the videos also illustrate this aspect of the bird’s appear- ance well. • The bill is, unquestionably, strikingly fine, as shown by all good images. • There is no sign at all of any expansion (lateral or vertical) at the tip. • The bill is not particularly deep-based (although the Eurasian Curlew for compar- ison in plate 169 is presumably a large female). • The bill clearly begins to curve about halfway along the culmen (much earlier than most observers thought). • Just about all of the structural taper is in the basal half of the mandibles, which makes the lower mandible look rather evenly curved along its lower edge, the curve being smooth and continuous from base to tip. • Although clearly apparent, the curvature of 171. Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata, Shetland, June 1999. the bill is relatively slight, so that compared to Eurasian Curlew and Whimbrel, it appears rather straight-billed. • Viewed from any angle other than one that was absolutely perpendicular, the bill prob- ably appeared even more straight than it actually was. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew Existing photographs of the Moroccan birds show a very similar bill structure to that of the Druridge bird. Serra et al. (1995) noted that some of the Italian Slender-billed Curlews looked rather straight-billed. The bill shape described in BWP fits the Druridge bird, as it depicts a less curved bill for Slender-billed than for Eurasian Curlew, while the detailed descrip- tions of structure in BWP accord with the pho- tographs (but less well with the descriptions) of the Druridge bird. »• All this is consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew A lack of expansion at the bill tip would rule out Eurasian Curlew, but this is very difficult to see in the field and even on skins it is not obvious; the absence of bill tip expansion could not be used to exclude Eurasian Curlew reliably in the fiel^- The tapering form is, however, strongly against Eurasian Curlew. The bill of Eurasian Curlew appears almost parallel-sided in the middle third, and shows relatively little taper, even in the basal third (compared with the bill of Slender-billed Curlew, which tapers strongly across the entire basal half). Pho- tographs and field observations support this. The pattern of curvature also points away from Eurasian Curlew. >- Bill structure is inconsistent with Eurasian Curlew. 1 72. First-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris. Date obtained unknown, Italy. 286 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 Didier Vangeluv/e Jimmy Steele The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay Plumage: facelhead pattern (Objective, probably relevant) Descriptions • There was agreement that the bird had a dis- tinct pale supercilium, and that this was widest above or around the eye. Similarly, it was agreed that there was a dark loral line from the bill to the eye, with a wider spot or blob in front of the eye. • There was consensus that a ‘capped’ pattern was highly variable, being dependent on the light conditions: in dull light the bird could look very ‘capped’; while in strong light the cap sometimes disappeared completely. • There was also some evidence that the pattern of the ci'own was not uniform, but that the crown-sides, particularly to the rear, were darker, contrasting with the super- cilium; and there was fairly general agree- ment on the presence of a faint, pale central crown-stripe, particularly towards the bill. • There was general agreement that there was a thin eye-ring and, where comparison was made (two observers), it was described as less obvious than on Eurasian Curlew (‘less spectacled’ in one description). Photographic evidence Once again, this was highly instructive. • Photographs taken in bright light show no sign of a ‘capped effect’ and little evidence of a supercilium (plate 165). • Video-grabs taken in dull light clearly show a supercilium and cap, somewhat similar to a Wood Sandpiper Tringa glareola. • The video-stills also show the darker crown- sides above the rear supercilium. • One photograph and most of the video-stills 173. Adult and first-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium. also show a rather clean loral line, with the better video-stills showing this widening to form a spot in front of the eye. • Some of the video-stills make the bird look distinctly stripey-headed. • At least one video-still and one photograph show a neat, thin pale eye-ring. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew The capped appearance and strong supercilium, when seen at their most contrasting, are per- fectly in line with published texts on Slender- billed Curlew. The loral pattern of the Druridge bird seemed to be rather clearly and distinctly marked, both in the descriptions and the video- stills. This is also consistent with field descrip- tions of Slender-billed Curlew. There was little mention of paler cheeks in the descriptions, a character that is mentioned infrequently in existing identification texts. The photographs and video-stills do, however, show pale cheeks. The description of the eye-ring as being less prominent than on Eurasian Curlew (or at least some of those in the accompanying group) is not consistent with field descriptions of the Moroccan birds. The Slender-billed Curlews in Italy were described as having one of two quite 1 74 First-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris. Date obtained unknown, Italy. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 287 Didier Vangeluwe The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay distinct face patterns: either with a capped appearance and strong supercilium, or with a rather bland facial pattern (Serra et al. 1995). Serra et al. tentatively associated the head pattern type with bill length (capped birds all being short-billed and possibly males). The Druridge bird showed both these patterns, however, which is apparent from the pho- tographs/video-stills, and these patterns may, in fact, be light dependent. The information on the head pattern of the Druridge bird is more detailed than in any pre- vious descriptions of Slender-billed Curlew. The only possible point of inconsistency is the prominence of the eye-ring, so this was exam- ined carefully on skins. This feature is variable on skins, and must certainly be affected by preparation, but some birds showed a very faint eye-ring, while it was much more obvious on other individuals (plates 173 & 174). The vari- ability may be linked to the time of year, appar- ently being much more marked in winter, and perhaps also to the age of the bird. The eye-ring of Eurasian Curlew can also be extremely prominent, particularly in winter. In spring/summer, the eye-ring is variable, but often very reduced compared to winter. This is probably not a reliable separation feature at all, and almost certainly varies more with individ- uals and with season than with species. In summary, what is described and illus- trated appears to be consistent with Slender- billed Curlew. The nature of the eye-ring does not conform to published field descrip- tions, which mention the eye-ring as a feature of Slender-billed (specifically, the Moroccan birds), but studies of skins suggest that this is a variable feature. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew This is rather difficult to evaluate. The Druridge bird does look more ‘stripey-headed’ than most Eurasian Curlews, lacking the rather blank facial pattern of that species, with a stronger, clearer loral line and supercilium. The head pattern of Eurasian Curlew is, however, also highly variable, particularly the degree to which they are ‘capped’. Eurasian Curlews can show darker crown-sides and a paler central crown area. >■ Eurasian Curlew cannot be ruled out on what is described for head pattern, but it does not fit the evidence particularly well, except possibly for the eye-ring. 175. Juvenile Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium. if-y .yr-w-ZiV* , 1 76. Adult Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris. Obtained 5th December 1 856, Velserdijk bij Spaarndam, the Netherlands. Museum collection, Leiden. 1 77. First-summer Slender-billed Curlews Numenius tenuirostris, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium. Plumage: Upperparts at rest - nape, mantle, scapulars, coverts, tertials and primaries (Objective, of uncertain relevance) Descriptions • There were no significant inconsistencies in the descriptions, all of which noted the obvi- ously dark mantle and scapulars, contrasting with the pale nape/hindneck and the strik- ingly pale and worn wing-coverts. 288 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 Jimmy Steele Didier Vangeluwe Jimmy Steele The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay • Mantle ‘braces’ were noted by several observers. • The scapulars were very dark-centred, with narrow pale fringes. There was genuine uncertainty about whether the pale fringes notched the dark centres, or whether there were any darker bars extending to the edge. Those who had the best views felt that there probably were notches on some scapulars. • The tertials were well described, with pale ‘saw edges’ (toothed), about seven or eight dark bars and showed some gingery tones near the dark centres. • The wing-coverts were contrastingly pale and worn, forming a noticeable pale patch. Only two observers noted any pattern to these feathers (with pale fringes and slight subterminal marks). Photographic evidence This does not add much to the written descrip- tions, except: • At certain points in the video footage, the pale braces can be seen. • In at least one of the photographs there appears to be evidence of a little barring on the inner webs of two or three of the rear scapulars. • Some of the video-stills suggest that there may be very slight notching of the dark scapular centres, but this is far from clear. • There appear to be a few new, much darker- centred, inner-wing-coverts (perhaps median coverts). • The tertials appear to have less than seven or eight bars, perhaps only six. • One of the tertials appears as though it is about to be shed. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew The mantle, even though very dark, seems con- sistent with published evidence. The patterning of the wing-coverts is in line with state of wear and moult, and strongly suggests that the Druridge bird was a first-summer. The very small number of new coverts is absolutely con- sistent with first-summer Slender-billed Curlew {BWP). The contrast between the dark mantle and scapulars, and faded wing-coverts was specifically noted on the Italian birds (Serra et al. 1995, and pers. comm.). A pattern of barring on the rear scapulars, but not on the rest, is consistent with skin studies. Some scapulars may be replaced very early in the year, and would typically seem to be replaced before the wing-covert moult begins. The Druridge bird may have retained its juvenile scapulars, but it seems more likely (given the bleached coverts) that they are mostly new. The darkness of the scapulars is variable, but they can be very dark indeed. This is the case in at least some first- spring birds (e.g. plate 175). Interestingly, most full adults show rather browner centres and broader pale fringes to the scapulars (plate 176), giving a brown and stripey look. Compare plate 177 with plate 178 of the Druridge bird. Once the ‘tattiness’ of the museum specimen is taken into account, the similarity in contrast is evident. Some skins also show a very similar tertial pattern to that shown by the Druridge bird. Tertials can be in almost any state of wear and may be extensively replaced by spring. Some warm buffy fringes are seen commonly on skins. There are no points of inconsistency with Slender-billed Curlew. 1 78. Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, Druridge Bay. Northumberland, May 1 998. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 289 Gary Bellingham The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay Consistency with Eurasian Curlew The mantle pattern is consistent with N. a. arquata, as is the scapular pattern. The tertials are broadly similar too, and the pattern shown by the Druridge bird could be consistent with arquata. In comparison, N. a. orientalis (based on a small number of specimens) shows a dif- ferent mantle and scapular pattern. There are very broad, pale sandy-grey fringes on mantle and scapulars (the fringes are almost as wide as the dark centre), but these are restricted to the sides of the feathers, with the dark centre almost reaching the tip. They appear rather stripey, but also look very pale with no real con- trast between the mantle and scapulars and the coverts. The effect of age is difficult to evaluate for orientalis, but there is no evidence that this pattern is affected by the age of the bird. There were no Eurasian Curlews at Druridge Bay with similarly worn wing-coverts. The moult strategy of Eurasian Curlew is broadly similar to that of Slender-billed, but (at least for the wing-coverts) apparently not identical. A first-year Eurasian should show many new upperwing-coverts in spring ( BWP ). The Druridge bird shows very few new wing- coverts, but this does not completely rule out Eurasian Curlew. >■ What is described is probably consistent for at least some Eurasian Curlews, although the strength of the wing-covert contrast would be unusual. Plumage: Underparts (Objective, highly relevant) As one of the most critical features, this is something to which observers paid a great deal of attention. The consensus on the pattern of the underparts is generally good. The descrip- tions are quite detailed but the photographs are not particularly helpful, although the video- stills are better. Descriptions There was a consensus that the general pattern of the underparts was of a whitish throat, dark streaks on a huffish wash across the breast, and dark spots on a white background below this. The boldest marks were on the flanks, with the central/lower belly being clean white, as perhaps were the rear flanks (although some evidence suggests the presence of a few large spots obscured by the closed wing). Relevant detail and variation are as follows: • There was agreement that the chin and throat were white or off-white and that the neck and breast were not white, but washed with buff or brown. • There was, however, substantial variation as to how this colour was described, one observer saying it was ‘brownish’, others describing it as buff, whitish-buff, cold buff, pale cold buff, pale buff (quite warm), and even warm (but not buff). A ‘pale, buffish wash’ perhaps comes closest to some sort of agreement, but maybe the colour range simply reflects the variability among observers in the way they describe subtle colour shades. • There was consensus that the marks on this washed area were fine, dark streaks and also that these streaks ended rather abruptly, as did the underlying wash (and at virtually the same point). Several observers noted this resemblance to a weak pectoral band. • The observers agreed that, below the streaked area, the ground colour of the underparts was white, and that the marks were spots. • The white ground colour extended across the entire flanks, the belly and the undertail region. One observer noted a pale buffy wash on the extreme fore flanks (adjacent to the wing-bend), but this was probably just part of the background wash of the breast. • The spots were largest and most clearly marked on the flanks, and extended from the wing-bend to the level of the thighs. One observer noted one or two spots behind the thighs. • There was some support for the spots being ‘organised’ into irregular rows rather than being randomly spaced. One observer com- mented that the spots looked as if they fused together into rows. • There was very strong support for the com- plete absence of any significant cross-barring or chevron-type marks on the underparts. • The dark spots were largest on the flanks, one observer specifically noting ‘about half a dozen spots larger than the rest’, another noting two rows of spots on the flanks. • Where colour was described, the spots were said to be blackish or black/dark brown. • The spots were quite striking from some angles, particularly head-on, being described as ‘like a Dalmatian' or even ‘like the holes sapsuckcrs | Sphyrapicus] make in trees’. 290 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay ) • The description of the precise shape of the spots varies a little, probably depending on how well they were seen. At the least specific they are simply oval, while more precise descriptions record some as having indents at the front edge (i.e. ‘heart-shaped’), and two note slight shaft-streaks or even wide ‘spade’ shapes. • Two observers noted a ‘U’ of small spots around the undertail-coverts, a feature that would be difficult to see, and which was not recorded by others. Photographic evidence • Plates 165 & 178 show the spots reasonably well, but add nothing to the written descriptions. • A couple of video-stills hint at the shape and form of the spots, certainly making them look evenly proportioned and oval. They are at least as long as they are broad. • In some video footage there is a suggestion of some rather large spots at or behind the thighs. These spots are obscured by the folded wing most of the time, but are occa- sionally visible. • There is a clear suggestion of the pectoral band noted by some observers. • The one additional point added by the pho- tographic material is that the ground colour of the spotted areas of the underparts does not look pure white, but very slightly off- white. • In a number of images, some Eurasian Curlews looked whiter-bellied than the Slender-billed Curlew, but it was the contrast between breast and belly that was most striking in the Eurasians, while the Slender- billed tended to look more uniformly pale below. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew The Druridge bird shows underparts with a ground colour consistent with Slender-billed Curlew in pattern and tone. The pectoral band is a feature of Slender-billed Curlew and can be seen on some skins, particularly when viewed from the side. The buffy-brown wash is less clear when viewed from in front, but can be marked from the side. Plates 179 & 180 show a quite marked brown wash, and plate 181 shows some variation. Seen from the front, the under- parts of the birds in plates 174 & 182 are rather white. The most dramatic breast colouring is on the adult in plate 176, and it is useful to 1 79. First-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostr/s. Obtained 12th March 1936, Italy. 180. First-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris. Obtained 6th April 1917, Italy. 181. Slender-billed Curlews Numenius tenuirostris, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 291 Jimmy Steele Didier Vangeluwe Didier Vangeluwe Jimmy Steele Jimmy Steele Didier Vangeluwe The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay 1 82. First-summer Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostrls. Obtained I Oth March 1914, Italy. 1 83. Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostrls, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium. 1 84. Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostrls, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Belgium. compare that with the adults in Morocco. The distribution of underpart spotting is also quite variable on the skins examined, but some show a pattern identical to that described for the Druridge bird (e.g. plates 166 & 181). The dis- tribution, shape and colour of spots and streaks on the Druridge bird are consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. The shape of the spots on some museum specimens was virtually iden- tical to those shown by the Druridge bird (plates 183 & 184). The apparent presence of some particularly large spots, partially obscured by the folded wing, is absolutely consistent with skins, while the pectoral band was specifically noted by the observers in southern Italy in 1995 (Serra et al. 1995). The presence of undertail spots is also consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. >■ The Druridge bird is more clearly marked than many of the skins examined, but there are no points of inconsistency. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew Eurasian Curlew of the western race arquata can show ‘blobs’ on the flank feathers, but would also show at least some feathers with transverse bars or some chevron-type markings as well as additional spots or flecks. In other words, the presence of spots or blobs does not rule out arquata , but the absence of transverse bars or chevron-type markings on at least some feathers is inconsistent with this race. All skins examined have shown at least some feathers with very wide bars or chevrons. On the basis of skins and field observations, then, even Eurasian Curlews that have some spots never seem to show anything resembling the ‘sap- sucker holes’ pattern shown by the Druridge bird. The ground colour of the breast is perhaps a little paler than may be expected for Eurasian Curlew. The eastern race orientalis would, in terms of ground colour tone, be similar to the Druridge bird but, unlike N. a. arquata, should not show any blobs or spots, just fine and rather pale streaks on the flanks. The two races of Eurasian Curlew do intergrade, but no combi- nation of flank features would give an entirely spotted appearance like that described and shown by the Druridge bird. »■ The flank pattern described and shown is inconsistent with N. a. arquata because of the complete lack of any transverse bars or chevrons or streaks on the flank feathers. >- The flank pattern is inconsistent with what 292 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay would be expected of N. a. orientalis , which should show fine streaks. 2^ No intergrade between the two races would show a pattern consistent with the Druridge bird. Plumage: Rump and tail (Objective, probably relevant) Descriptions The tail is described in some detail by a number of observers and the consistency is excellent. • The tail appeared generally very white, with dark barring that was both limited and narrow (narrower than the white in between). • Two observers described a limited area of warmer background wash mixed with the white and restricted to the tips of the central tail feathers. This must have been subtle, since it was not noted by most observers, despite good descriptions of the tail. • Two observers noted that the dark tail bars did not extend to the outer webs of the outer feathers. • The rump was white, and a long white ‘V’ extended up the back. Photographic evidence • One photo shows the white tail reasonably well, and depicts about four greyish bars but no brown tones. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew The fact that the white bars were wider than the grey bars is in line with all museum specimens; the white background was also absolutely correct. The restricted area of warm wash on the central feathers is consistent with freshly moulted feathers (BWP), and was noted on skins. The extent of white in the tail is specifi- cally mentioned as a feature of Slender-billed Curlew in Glutz et al. (1977). The tail pattern, as described, is consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. »- The pattern of the rump is also consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew The width of the tail bars is probably too narrow for N. a. arquata, but probably consis- tent with N. a. orientalis. The ground colour would be unusual for arquata, which usually shows a distinctly grey/brown central tail region, but is probably consistent with some orientalis. A few arquata certainly have rather white tails with dark bars, perhaps similar to that described for the Druridge bird. 2* The tail pattern is not typical of Eurasian Curlew, but may not be inconsistent with some. Plumage: Upperwing in flight (Moderately objective, of medium relevance) Descriptions • There is consensus that the upperwing pattern was very well marked and con- trasting. • The outer four or five primaries were very dark brown or blackish. • The whitish shaft on the outermost primary formed a white line along the leading edge. • The primary coverts were blackish, and formed a dark oval. • The inner primaries appeared contrastingly pale owing to the presence of large whitish spots. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 293 Gary Bellingham Brian Clasper The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay • The secondaries and wing-coverts were also very pale and rather greyish-looking, with darker barring on the secondaries. • As a result, there was a dark wedge on the leading edge of the outer wing that con- trasted with pale inner primaries and inner wing. Photographic evidence Several photographs and video-stills illustrate the general pattern well, specifically the degree of contrast. The level of detail is limited on the photos, but they bear out what is described without any significant contradiction (plate 185 on page 293). Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew Specific points were raised during the first cir- culation about the extent of barring visible on the outer primaries in one of the video-stills. The barring present on P6 or P7 was shown to be consistent with almost all Slender-billed Curlews during the subsequent analysis of skins. All other points are consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. >■ The wing pattern described and illustrated for the Druridge bird is consistent with existing descriptions and photographs of Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew There is no individual component or specific field mark that rules out Eurasian Curlew, and the upperwing pattern is a wholly unreliable separation feature. The basic pattern described is also found on Eurasian Curlew, of both races ( arquata and orientalis). The level of contrast is probably greater than one would expect for Eurasian Curlew, but it is doubtful whether this is a safe identification feature. >■ Upperwing pattern is consistent with at least some Eurasian Curlews. Plumage: Underwing (Moderately objective, relevant) Descriptions • There was agreement that the underwing was white, more-or-less unmarked, and several descriptions implied that this was a quite striking feature. • There was some minor discrepancy among observers about the extent of dark markings on the underside of the primaries. Clearly, any such markings were very limited; some observers described the whole underwing as white, one described a darker wedge, similar to that on the upperwing, while another reported seeing some dark barring. • At least two observers independently noted a pale trailing edge to some flight feathers when the bird stretched its wings, but it is not really clear whether this was on the underwing or the upperwing. Photographic evidence • The underwing and, particularly, the axil- laries were clearly very clean and white, with no trace of barring at all on the latter (plate 186). • Most of the photographs of the underwing/ axillaries confirm the existence of a ‘dark wedge’ on the underside of the primaries, 186. Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, Druridge Bay, Northumberland, May 1998. 294 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay although it looks as though this is largely a result of the corresponding dark area on the upperwing. • The photographs suggest that the underside of the secondaries were slightly dusky. • There was clearly a pale, translucent wedge on the trailing edge of the underwing, cov- ering the inner primaries and the outer sec- ondaries (plate 187). • There was also a tiny triangular dark mark on the underside of each tertial tip, high- lighted on the video-stills, but also clearly visible on one of the flight photographs showing the underwing. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew Direct comparison of photographs reveals that the pale translucent wedge and tertial marks are consistent with at least some Slender-billed Curlews. The descriptions and photographs are insufficiently detailed to reveal the precise pattern of marking on the primaries. »- There are no points of inconsistency. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew Nominate arquata usually shows some barring on the axillaries, which would be evident on the photographs, but some can have unmarked white underwings and axillaries ( BWP suggests that about one in ten Eurasian Curlews from western populations have unbarred axillaries; see plate 188). Eastern orientalis may show an underwing pattern very similar to that described. »- The pattern shown is consistent with N. a. orientalis and consistent with a small pro- portion of N. a. arquata. Bare parts colouration (Objective, probably not relevant) Descriptions • There was a consensus that the legs were dark grey; one observer reported that they were darker than those of Eurasian Curlew, but others stated that this was explicitly not the case. • The bill was dark grey or blackish, with a paler base to the lower mandible variously described as pinkish, dark pink, dull fleshy pink or, in one case, fleshy orange. • There was agreement that the pale base to the lower mandible extended to between one quarter and one third of the total bill length. • One observer felt the pale colour extended just on to the upper mandible; others stated that it was restricted to the lower mandible. Photographic evidence This adds little to the descriptions, except to illustrate that the pale bill base was actually quite difficult to see. Consistency with Slender-billed Curlew The issue of a genuine difference in leg colour between the species is unproven. >- What is described is, therefore, consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. Consistency with Eurasian Curlew »- What is described is also consistent with Eurasian Curlew. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 295 Gary Bellingham Ian Fisher The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay 188. Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata, Bardsey, Gwynedd, October 1985, Note the unmarked white axillaries of this individual, and also the prominent pale eye-ring. Call Although there were rumours that at least one observer had heard the Druridge bird call, and described a higher-pitched call (than Eurasian Curlew), no written evidence was received to this effect. Other possibilities: I. Aberrant Eurasian Curlew The term ‘aberrant’ is convenient, and may often be used inappropriately. It should be restricted to a relatively small range of features that result from some abnormality, presumably in an individual gene, or a group of genes that lie close to each other on the chromosome, or which act in a specific developmental pathway. This appears to be borne out by general field experience. Birds that are unusually large or small, short- or long-billed, albino, leucistic, melanistic or lacking in certain pigments all occur. These are abnormalities of one single feature, and for the most part this is what aber- rance refers to in relation to birds. Minor genetic mutations of this sort are the driving force of evolution. In medicine, there are exam- ples of abnormalities affecting more than one feature. This occurs where a genetic mutation straddles several genes, or where a genetic abnormality manifests in a number of unusual features related to the same gene. These syn- dromes (there are many, and they are all rare) should be exceptionally rare in nature because organisms that exhibit them will have reduced viability and will simply not survive. Such ‘syn- dromes’ are likely to be even rarer in Eurasian Curlew than Slender- billed Curlew is in the world. Furthermore, and more critically in rela- tion to the Druridge bird, the series of abnor- malities you would expect should be random or linked to a specific developmental path. In other words, such an individual, even if it survived, would be very unlikely to show characters identical in every detail to another species. If the Druridge bird had shown one abnormal feature (e.g. a slender bill), that would be easily explained by aber- rance. Two unrelated features (e.g. a slender bill and small size) would constitute a syndrome, which is very unlikely to occur (a fine bill and no feet, or a short bill and white wings would, perhaps, be just as likely). The probability of ‘aberrance’ running to three features that, by chance, are all perfect for Slender-billed Curlew is infinitely small. The Druridge bird had at least four features that would be normal for Slender-billed Curlew, but unusual (though not unrecorded) for each race of Eurasian Curlew. Add to that at least three separate features that do not occur at all in typical Eurasian Curlews (i.e. bill length and structure, and the pattern of the underparts), and the odds that the bird was an aberrant Eurasian Curlew become impos- sibly small. Apart from occasional albinos or leucistic birds, we found documented evidence of two ‘aberrant’ Eurasian Curlews: 1. An individual in south Wales in 1983, which either had an obvious abnormality of pigment of some sort or was extrinsically stained (the former seems the most likely explanation). The presence of only one aber- rant feature, in this case a probable abnor- mality in pigment, would comply with the theoretical considerations above. 2. One at Camperduin in the Netherlands in 1968. Arnoud van den Berg was kindly able to translate directly some aspects of the description. This individual sounds superfi- 296 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay dally quite like Slender-billed Curlew. The written description does not, however, reflect completely what is in the photograph. The image seems to show a pretty typical Eurasian Curlew, but with an abnormal bill that appears to have only one mandible. This may be the correct explanation or there may be a photographic distortion. Even if the bill was not damaged, this individual shows only a single abnormal feature, complying with the theoretical criteria for aberrance described above. There is no objective evi- dence for any more than one abnormality on this bird and the precise circumstances of the observation remain uncertain. In summary, the aberrance argument had, of course, to be taken seriously. There is, however, no theoretical explanation why one species (Eurasian Curlew) should, by virtue of ‘aber- rance’ appear identical to another (Slender- billed Curlew) in every detail of plumage and structure. Furthermore, there is no precedent among Eurasian Curlews for abnormality of more than a single feature. Other possibilities: 2. Hybrid Hybrid parentage was also a possibility to explain the appearance of the Druridge bird, but for it to have been a hybrid a Slender-billed Curlew would have to have been involved in the pairing. Hybrids may occur more frequently when species exist at low densities. If, however, the rate of hybridisation in populations of other species is taken into account, along with the lower survival rate that may be expected from a hybrid, a hybrid should, in fact, be very much less likely to occur than the real thing. Never- theless, it is a possibility to be considered very seriously. To qualify as a hybrid, unequivocally clear and unambiguous features exclusive to both species would need to be present. This was not the case with the Druridge bird. Although the size of the bird (for the sake of argument) was probably in the top quartile of the range for Slender-billed, it would still be aberrantly small for Eurasian. There are no pro-Eurasian and anti-Slender-billed Curlew features shown by the Druridge bird. All other features are exclu- sive to Slender-billed Curlew, typical for Slender-billed but atypical (though possible) for Eurasian, or may be found in both. One can probably never rule out a hybrid or a back cross somewhere in the bird’s history, but there was nothing to suggest it. Other possibilities: 3. Eurasian Curlew of the form N. a. sushkini A form of Eurasian Curlew N. a. sushkini is known from a handful of specimens; it breeds in the steppes of Kazakhstan, although the type- specimen is from Senegal. According to BWP, the ‘bill of Kazakhstan birds [is] perhaps rela- tively short, but in view of gradual variation, subspecific recognition (as sushkini) [is] not advisable’. Attached to the circulated file for this record was a copy of a chapter from Engelmoer & Roselaar (1998), which used measurements from over 4,000 skins to establish morphometric population differences in a range of Holarctic wader species. The results are based on statistical analysis of measurements from skins, including all forms of Eurasian Curlew. There is good evi- dence from this that N. a. sushkini really exists as a distinct population. It seems, however, to be very scarce, or superficially indistinguishable from orientalis. The data presented are based on just a few specimens and there was no sugges- tion of any significant plumage differences from orientalis, with which it was lumped by BWP. The key feature of sushkini is the lack of sexual dimorphism. On most measurements they are somewhere between arquata, and orientalis, but with males large, closer to orientalis males, and females small, closer to arquata females. Males are relatively long-billed, between arquata and orientalis. Females are relatively short-billed, but still have longer bills than the average male. They are typically much longer-billed than the males of any western populations, and are, in fact, similar in bill length to male orientalis. Finally, sushkini is not a small curlew. Measure- ments such as tarsus length and wing length follow a similar pattern, with females being similar to arquata and males being closer to ori- entalis. The following summarises the main points relating to the Druridge bird and sushkini: 1. In some ways, sushkini, although much too large and long-billed, might be the race that looks superficially closest to Slender-billed Curlew, being generally pale, like orientalis, and certainly with white axillaries, but not as long-billed as female orientalis. 2. In the field, the smallest (male) sushkini may appear in plumage like orientalis , being pale, British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 297 ( The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay but would look closer in overall size and bill length to an average/large male (or even a small female) arquata. 3. There is no reason to expect that bill struc- ture is different, or that there is flank spot- ting or any other distinguishing plumage character to separate it from orientalis. 4. It seems likely that sushkini is either very rare, or overlooked because it is so like orien- talis in every respect, apart from size. 5. The Druridge bird was inconsistent with sushkini on the basis of: • Bill length: the Druridge bird had a bill that was much shorter than that of all accom- panying arquata and, by implication, any sushkini. • Size: since all other measurements put sushkini somewhere between arquata and orientalis , on average. • All those aspects of its plumage by which it was also inconsistent with orientalis. • (Presumably) bill structure: although there is no information on this character for sushkini , there is no reason to suggest that it differs from orientalis. Summary In normal circumstances, this record would have been straightforward to accept. The level of detail was considerably greater than usual, even for the best-described rarity, and was also supported by photographs and videos. Further- more, the evidence was highly consistent among individual observers, and between observers and photographs, which in turn was consistent with Slender-billed Curlew. But these were clearly not normal circum- stances. Slender-billed Curlew is threatened with imminent extinction, and had never been reliably recorded before in the UK. Every minor detail had to be checked and cross-referenced, every avenue explored. As we delved into the lit- erature and gathered evidence from skins, the evidence grew stronger, not weaker. Features that had raised eyebrows initially, turned out to be important features supporting Slender-billed Curlew. For example, if the Druridge bird had been aged as a first-summer on moult, but had not shown a pale covert patch, then we might ultimately have found it more difficult to accept. The level of detail and argument pre- sented in this analysis may seem to be excessive, and the sheer volume of the evidence can be quite perplexing, but despite assertions that this was a straightforward identification, we felt it was essential to make a decision based on a thorough analysis. There are a number of interesting points on which to reflect. First of all, an open mind is always useful. If Slender-billed Curlew can turn up in Northumberland, almost any migratory bird can turn up virtually anywhere. Having said that, Slender-billed Curlew has a remark- able capacity for vagrancy, as the historic spread of records in western Europe will testify, and this record is perhaps not quite as astonishing as it may at first seem. Second, while published evidence based on individual birds is useful, the range of variation for almost any species is greater than we often appreciate until we start to look closely. The ‘case reports’ based on indi- vidual Slender-billed Curlews in Morocco and France were, in this instance, quite misleading for a time, while older and more comprehensive texts based on careful examination of skins gave a much fuller impression of the variability of the species. Third, field notes and detailed descriptions were utterly pivotal in this record. The availability of high-quality photographic and video equipment has done a very great deal to help rarity assessment and identification, not least for this record, but there is still a place for very careful observation and field notes. Acknowledgments A number of people with expertise in this field were very helpful indeed, particularly Arnoud van den Berg, Adam Gretton, Nicola Baccetti and Marco Zenatello, who provided very important additional data. Eight observers sent in comprehensive descriptions of their observations, several others took photographs or video footage, while Chris McCarthy took the time to produce and submit some good quality video-stills, which were essential to the assessment process. In addition to finding the bird, Tim Cleeves also researched the literature. The chairman and members of BBRC each spent many hours assessing the record and the huge volume of material fairly and objectively. Bibliography Cramp S., & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.) 1 983. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.Vol. 3. Oxford. Engelmoet: M., & Roselaar, C. S. 1998 Geographical Variation in Waders . Kluwer Academic Press. Glutz U. N„ Bauer K. M„ & Bezzel, E. 1 977 Handbuch der Vogel Mitteleuropus.Vol. 7. Wiesbaden Hayman, R, Marchant, J. H„ & Prater, A. J. 1 986. Shorebirds. London. Marchant, J. H. 1984. Identification of Slender-billed Curlew, Brit. Birds 77: 1 35- 1 40. Odin, N. 1 985. Aberrant Curlew in Gwent and South Glamorgan. Brit. Birds 78: 44-45. Porter: R. F. 1984, Mystery Photographs. Brit Birds 77: 581 - 586. 298 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 The Slender-billed Curlew at Druridge Bay } Prater; A. J., Marchant J. H„ & Vuorinen J. 1 977. Guide to the identification and ageing of Holarctic waders. Tring. Serra, L., Baccetti, N., & Zenatello, M. 1995. Slender-billed Curlews wintering in Italy in 1 995. Birding World 8: 295- 299. van den Berg, A. B. 1988. Identification of Slender-billed Curlew and its occurrence in Morocco in winter of 1987/88. Dutch Birding 10: 45-53. Vangeluwe, D., Handrinos, G., & Bulteau.V. 1998. Le point sun le courlis a bee grele Numenius tenuirostris ou I'observer; comment le identifier? Ornithos 5: 22-35. Dr Jimmy Steele, 16 Oaklands, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE2 4BW Didier Vangeluwe, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Brussels, Belgium Colin Bradshaw, Chairman of BBRC, has com- mented as follows: ‘This is certainly the most difficult record we have had to assess during the 12 years that I have been involved with the Committee. Not only was it for a species with which none of us was familiar, in a plumage that was not properly recorded, but our deci- sion may have had far-reaching consequences regarding the survival of the species. We were fortunate in having a plethora of information, including descriptions from Tim Cleeves (the finder), plus Colin Bradshaw, Tony Broome, Peter Kennerley, Chris McCarthy, Brett Richards, Stuart Sexton and Alan Wheeldon; videos from Justin Carr, Trevor Charlton and Peter Colston; and photographs from Gary Bellingham, Colin Bradshaw, John Harriman and Jim Pattison. Some of the descriptions were extremely detailed and just described the bird without trying to push the identification, while others concentrated on why it was a Slender- billed Curlew; nonetheless, all the details were remarkably consistent. ‘Despite the fact that Jimmy Steele produced a digest on Slender-billed Curlew identification for the first circulation, members were stunned both by the amount of information and the inherent improbability of the record. Further discussions were delayed, pending clarification of various specific points, including the identifi- cation of the mystery second bird. Jimmy then took over the Flerculean task of cross-re fei- encing all our material and, where we did not have the necessary information, seeking out new sources to answer the questions posed in the first round. A synopsis of that information is presented here. We also felt that we had settled the question of the second bird with the help of a series of video-stills. On the second circulation the record was unanimously accepted. BBRC would like to thank everyone who contributed to the identification, but par- ticularly Jimmy Steele for his enormous input to this record.’ Eric Meek, Chairman of BOURC, has com- mented as follows: ‘Following the necessarily lengthy deliberations of BBRC, the file on the Slender-billed Curlew record reached the BOURC in time for its meeting in December 2001. By this stage, the file was so large and con- tained so much valuable information that it was becoming restrictively costly to circulate. BOURC members were, therefore, given a 34- page summary (!) of the file’s contents prior to that meeting, and were able to review the video and photographic evidence at the meeting itself. ‘As well as reviewing identification decisions of potential British ‘firsts’, BOURC is charged with assessing the likelihood of such species having escaped from captivity. In the case of the Druridge Slender-billed Curlew, there is no evi- dence of this species ever having been kept in captivity and, consequently, following discus- sion at the December meeting and a short period of reflection, members of the Com- mittee voted unanimously for acceptance of Slender-billed Curlew on to Category A of the British List. This decision was announced in January 2002. ‘Undoubtedly, this is one of the most (if not the most) outstanding records ever to come before BOURC. Not only has it rewritten the identification criteria for this species, it has also shown that somewhere, in 1997, a pair was still able to rear young, giving some faint hope that the species may be able to cling to existence. ‘We wish to congratulate all those concerned with the identification and ratification of the Druridge bird, especially those whose papers precede these comments. Tim Cleeves, the finder, had the confidence in his outstanding identification skills to stick to his guns throughout, while Jimmy Steele undertook a daunting amount of research in order to cor- roborate the record. We are immensely grateful to them both, and to all those who contributed to the debate which led to the final acceptance.’ The British Birds Rarities Committee is sponsored by Carl Zeiss Ltd 299 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 279-299 Declining farmland birds: evidence from large-scale monitoring studies in the UK Dan Chamberlain and Juliet Vickery ABSTRACT Several farmland bird species have undergone serious population declines during the past 30 years. Evidence from national monitoring schemes co-ordinated by the British Trust for Ornithology indicates that agricultural intensification has been responsible for these losses. A range of factors, including a decrease in the acreage of spring cereals, the loss of rough grazing, an increase in intensively managed silage and in livestock density, and the overall lack of crop diversity, have coincided with population declines of several species. Owing to the wide range of species affected and the multiple factors underlying the declines, it is difficult to identify those individual aspects of farm management which are of most importance to the recovery of farmland bird populations. We suggest that a general extensification of agriculture, affecting a range of management practices, rather than implementation of management prescriptions for individual species, will be most likely to benefit farmland bird communities. This could be achieved through agri-environment schemes in conjunction with widespread initiatives to reduce the intensity of farm management over large areas. 300 © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 Declining farmland birds During the past three decades, the British farmland bird community has under- gone great changes. From the early 1970s onwards, there were large declines in already scarce species such as Corn Crake Crex crex. Stone-curlew Burhinus oedicnemus and Cirl Bunting Emberiza cirlus (although all of these have benefited from recent intensive con- servation efforts; see Aebischer et al. 2000). At the same time, there was a marked contraction in the range of several formerly common species, such as Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur and Corn Bunting Miliaria calandra, which are now mostly restricted to southeast Britain. Perhaps most worrying of all, however, was the decline of formerly abundant farmland species. Although the Sky Lark Alauda arvensis is still one of Britain’s most common farmland birds, the population has halved in numbers over the past 30 years and similar trends have been observed in other common species such as Song Thrush Turdus philomelos, Linnet Carduelis cannabina. Common Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula and Yellowhammer E. citrinella (Siri- wardena et al. 1998). Even two former ‘pest’ species, Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris and House Sparrow Passer domesticus, are nowhere near the levels of abundance of 30 years ago. Monitoring the changes Detection of these population declines, particu- larly for the commoner species, was made pos- sible largely by the efforts of volunteer ornithologists who carry out regular moni- toring surveys co-ordinated by the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO). These include annual surveys of breeding birds (e.g. Noble et al. 2000), studies of species’ range across the UK (Gibbons et al. 1993), and one-off or irregular surveys designed to consider particular habitats (e.g. the Winter Farmland Bird Survey) or indi- vidual species (e.g. Lapwing Survey, Wilson et al. 2001). The scheme that has been largely responsible for detecting farmland biid declines, however, is the Common Birds Census or CBC (Marchant et al. 1990). To date, 599 farmland CBC sites have been surveyed since the survey’s inception in 1961, involving over 40,000 hours of fieldwork. The CBC allowed us to measure the relative change in populations by gathering population data from a range ot sites around the country, each surveyed annu- ally, thus allowing the percentage change in breeding populations to be estimated. 4 he CBC has now been replaced by the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS), which continues to monitor a range of bird species across Britain, but has the advantages of requiring less time and effort from surveyors, giving more complete geo- graphical coverage, and covering a wider range of species (Noble et al. 2000). CBC data have shown that farmland bird communities have undergone far greater declines than those in other habitats. In addi- tion, farmland bird specialists are more likely to have declined than those species which breed on farmland but which also use a range of habi- tats (table 1). Clearly, some factor(s) unique to farmland habitat are implicated, but can we gain any idea of what they might be from national monitoring data gathered by volun- teers? In this paper, we assess the evidence for the effect of farming practices on bird popula- tions using data from broad-scale BTO datasets. We demonstrate the value of these data for identifying likely impacts on bird populations, and how they may be used to make conserva- tion recommendations or direct more intensive research. Why have farmland birds declined ? The factors responsible must either be specific to farmland, or for some reason have a greater impact on farmland than in other habitats. Two possibilities are disease (including parasites) and climate change, both of which may affect the population ecology of birds (e.g. Crick et al. 1997; Tompkins et al. 2000). It is, however, not dear why either should be specific to farmland species or habitats. A third possibility is that increasing predation may have driven farmland bird declines. Although a number of predators have increased on farmland in recent years, for example corvids (table 1), a close examination of population data reveals that for most declining farmland birds the main period of decrease was between the mid 1970s and early 1980s. The population size of most avian preda- tors increased sometime after that. At the popu- lation level, there is no evidence that avian predators have caused population declines (Thomson et al. 1998). We know little about population trends of mammalian predators, but few are really farmland specialists, so again their effect is unlikely to be specific to farmland. Although predation alone is perhaps unlikely to have had a significant impact on farmland bird populations, habitat changes may have made British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 301 Declining farmland birds C Table I. The percentage change in the breeding populations of 32 species on farmland between 1973 and 1998', derived from the Common Birds Census, except where indicated (*). Farmland specialists are those which preferentially nest on farmland and find most of their food there (defined according to Fuller et al. 1995). When considering the numbers of increasing or decreasing species, it is apparent that 1 5 farmland specialists have declined ( 1 2 by more than 30%), while only six have increased. For the other species, which occur across a range of habitats, the number of gains and losses are evenly split, with six in each category. If this type of analysis is extended to other habitats, a far greater proportion of birds are found to be declining on farmland compared with any other habitat (Fuller et al. 1 995). Farmland specialists Generalists Species % change Species % change Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus -26 Wren Troglodytes troglodytes -13 Grey Partridge Perdix perdix -57 Hedge Accentor Prunella modularis -45 Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellus -44 Robin Erithacus rubecula +3 Stock Dove Columba oenas +96 Blackbird Turdus merula -38 Wood Pigeon Columba palumbus + 101 Song Thrush Turdus philomelos -69 Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur -79 Blue Tit Parus caeruleus + 18 Barn Owl Tyto alba -43* Great Tit Parus major +27 Sky Lark Alauda arvensis -53 Magpie Pica pica +57 Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava -25 Carrion Crow Corvus corone +45 Common Whitethroat Sylvia communis +100 Common Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs +25 Eurasian Jackdaw Corvus monedula +55 Common Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula -70 Rook Corvus frugilegus +40* Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris -51 House Sparrow Passer domesticus -51 Tree Sparrow Passer montanus -93 Greenfinch Carduelis chloris +7 Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis -5 Linnet Carduelis cannabina -47 Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella -45 Reed Bunting Emberiza schoeniclus -57 Corn Bunting Miliaria calandra -86 1 Up-to-date population changes for a large number of species are available on the BTO website at: www.bto.org/birdtrends prey species more vulnerable or predators more efficient. Teasing apart the effects of predation and changes in farm management is difficult, and is likely to require an experimental approach. Research is currently being under- taken at the Game Conservancy Trust’s experi- mental farm at Loddington, in Leicestershire, to address this issue (Stoate 2001). Agricultural intensification There is, in fact, overwhelming evidence that changes in farm management have been the major factor underlying farmland bird declines. Change in agriculture (‘intensification’) during the past 40 years, brought on by technological and economic developments, has been substan- tial and has affected every aspect of farming, including the crops grown, the amount and type of pesticide and fertiliser applied, the man- agement of grassland, the density of livestock and the number of mixed farms (farms tend nowadays to be specialised into either arable or grass). A number of these changes are illus- trated in fig. 1. A common feature of these trends is that the periods of most rapid change often occurred at about the same time, in the 1970s. Birds and agricultural management The effects of agricultural management on bird abundance have been addressed by examining bird and habitat data collected in a range of BTO surveys for a whole suite of farmland species. The importance of such large-scale data in providing vital clues about the causes of the decline of individual species is illustrated here by three specific examples: two passerines - Sky Lark (a widespread species which nests and feeds within the cropped habitat) and Reed Bunting E. schoeniclus (a less widespread species which may feed within the crop but nests in semi -natural vegetation at field boundaries); and a wader - Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellus. 302 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 Declining farmland birds Sky Lark Although Sky Larks are still widespread, their numbers have more than halved during the past 30 years with populations decreasing not only on farmland, but also in upland and coastal areas. In common with many declining species, the population trend of the Sky Lark closely matches changes in several key agricultural variables, with a particularly steep decline in the early 1980s. The 1997 Breeding Skylark Survey (Browne et al. 2000) provided detailed informa- tion on the habitat preferences of Sky Larks on farmland. The highest densities of Sky Larks occurred on spring-sown cereals and they usually avoided oilseed rape, silage fields and grazed pasture. The preference for spring cereals may be important since they have largely been replaced by winter-sown cereals (fig. 1). The latter are occupied by Sky Larks at a lower density than are spring cereals, especially later in the breeding season (from June onwards), when densities of territory-holding birds in winter cereals decline markedly, while those in spring-sown crops remain high. The cause of Fig. I . Trends in selected agricultural management variables between 1 962 and 1 995, in England and Wales.The figures are adapted from Chamberlain et al. (2000), and include some interpolated data. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 303 Declining farmland birds 1 89. Sky Lark Alauda arvensis, Norfolk, February 1 994. this difference appears to be the growth stage of the crop vegetation. Sky Larks nest in crops which are less than about 30 cm tall, but rarely attempt to nest in taller crops. Crop density increases with crop height and this is also important because Sky Larks prefer to nest in more open crops. Winter cereals reach a height of 30 cm about a month earlier than spring cereals and Sky Larks are forced to abandon their territory before a second breeding attempt. Again, this may be associated with intensification. Modern farms have much larger fields and fewer crop types than they did three decades ago, so the opportunities for re-nesting are fewer. The evidence, therefore, points to a reduction in the length of the breeding season (as a result of the switch from spring to autumn sowing of cereals), as one of the main factors to have caused the Sky Lark decline on farmland. 190. Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellu s, Norfolk, October 1993. 304 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-310 Declining farmland birds c ) Northern Lapwing The decline of the Northern Lapwing has perhaps been more noticeable to people who have been birding since the 1970s because it is now absent from many areas in southwest England and Wales. A national breeding survey in 1998 revealed a decline of almost 50% in just 1 1 years. On farmland, the highest densities of Northern Lapwings were on spring cereals that were adjacent to grass fields (Wilson et al. 2001). Grass fields seem to be a favourite feeding habitat for young Northern Lapwing chicks, whereas the species prefers to nest in cereals with relatively low vegetation (Galbraith 1988). Changes in the sowing times of cereals may have affected the population (nests in spring cereals, now a scarce habitat, tend to be more productive), but what may be more important is that the proportion of mixed farmland has declined and arable farms are now less likely to have grass fields than in the 1960s. In regions dominated by pasture, Northern Lapwings show a different habitat preference, preferring rough unimproved grassland and avoiding silage and heavily grazed grassland (Wilson et al. 2001 ). The intensification of grassland manage- ment in these areas, with the consequent reduction in rough grazing, is likely to have had a detrimental effect on the Northern Lapwing population. Reed Bunting In the two previous cases, species-spe- cific survey data have been used in con- junction with more general knowledge about these species’ ecology to make inferences about the likely mechanisms underpinning population declines. For most species, such detailed survey data are not available, but we can still gain a valuable insight into the possible cause of population changes by considering trends and habitat associations from regular long-term monitoring schemes. The Reed Bunting has declined by more than 50% on farmland since the early 1970s. Its range has also contracted, with local extinctions reported in a number of northern and western regions of Britain. In the breeding season, Reed Buntings prefer farmland with an arable component so that, like the Northern Lapwing, declines in western Britain may be associated with the loss of mixed farming. A number of other species have also shown an association with arable ‘pockets’ in pastoral landscapes (Robinson et al 2001). There is no other evidence to suggest that the population size of Reed Buntings is being affected by factors operating during the breeding season. Rather, changes in both adult and juvenile survival between years, calculated from ring-recovery data, can explain the popu- lation decline (Peach et al. 1999). Outside the breeding season, Reed Buntings, in common with most granivorous passerines, prefer to feed on weed-rich stubbles. Stubble fields are largely associated with spring-sown crops, whereas winter cereals are preceded by only a short period of stubble, or perhaps none at all. The decline of spring-sown cereals in many areas has, therefore, also meant a decline in a key for- aging habitat. Furthermore, herbicides are used with much greater frequency and efficiency in cereals, so the abundance of weeds in crops has declined, leading to fewer seeds available in 191. Reed Bunting Emberiza schoeniclus, location unknown, 2000. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 305 Eddie Dunne Declining farmland birds 306 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 Declining farmland birds ) 1 92. Rape stubble, Colworth Park, Bedfordshire, April 200 1 . Stubbles such as this, which remain over winter provide a good foraging habitat for a range of farmland species. those stubbles which do occur. A final factor may be that less grain is spilt due to increased harvesting efficiency. Loss of good feeding habi- tats may therefore have decreased overwinter survival in this species. This loss of winter feeding habitat may be important for a number of other granivorous species, as shown by lower survival rates (Siriwardena et al. 1999) and a preference for cereal stubbles (e.g. Gillings & Fuller 2001). Discussion The three examples discussed here do not cover all the potential factors underlying population declines in these species, but they illustrate how we can use the BTO’s long-term national datasets to ‘home in’ on the problem. Such analyses have been undertaken for a wide range of species, and several of these have shown pop- ulation declines which closely match certain changes in agricultural practices (table 2). There is strong evidence for the probable underlying causes of decline in several species. The decrease in spring-sown cereals and conse- quent replacement by winter cereals has caused the loss of high-quality nesting habitat (affecting Sky Lark and Northern Lapwing), and the loss of important feeding habitat outside the breeding season (granivoies), the increasing use of fertiliser has increased ciop growth rates and so made crop structure less suitable for Sky Lark; the decline in rough grazing has also had effects on nesting habitat (Northern Lapwing) and removed invertebrate- rich habitats (Song Thrush) when it has been replaced with intensively managed grassland; the increase in livestock density has affected ground-nesting species (Northern Lapwing and Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava ); and reductions in crop diversity and mixed farming have led to a decrease in suitable breeding habitat for Northern Lapwing, Sky Lark, Tree Sparrow Passer montanus, Corn Bunting, Reed Bunting and Yellowhammer (the last four species in pas- toral landscapes). It is important to note that a close correlation between two variables does not necessarily mean that they are causally linked, but for some of these species (e.g. Sky Lark, Northern Lapwing, Corn Bunting) many of these associations have been supported by small-scale intensive studies, while research is ongoing for a number of others (e.g. Linnet, Tree Sparrow, Yellowhammer). An important message from table 2 is that a range of different factors may be affecting bird populations in different ways, so that, rather than targeting specific management practices, a more general extensification of agriculture, where a suite of appropriate practices are implemented, may be the best way to benefit a British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 307 Ian Henderson Declining farmland birds range of farmland birds. There are a number of ways in which our farmed land may be made more ‘bird friendly’. These range from creating small open patches within arable fields to man- aging whole fields (e.g. stubble management) or even whole farms (e.g. rotation management) in environmentally sensitive ways, and may be achieved within agri-environment schemes or as part of novel farming techniques such as Integrated Crop Management (table 3). Apart from management practices tailored to the requirements of individual species, there is little evidence that any of these have influenced pop- ulation trends in isolation, but a combination of measures that affect both cropped and non- cropped areas may be more beneficial to the whole farmland bird community, at least on a local scale (Stoate 2001). Table 3. Agri-environment schemes and management techniques which have the potential to increase bird populations. Note that caveats involving economic constraints are not dealt with in this table. Organic Farming Scale. Whole farm. Characteristics: Specific features include rotations incorporating grass leys and legumes, reliance on animal and green manures rather than synthetic fertilisers, with no use of synthetic pesticides. Potential benefits: There is evidence that a range of species occur at higher densities on organic farm- land, mostly in autumn and winter. Caveats: Despite recent government incentives and an increasing organic market, this is likely to remain a minority farming technique in the UK. Key reference. Chamberlain et al. (1999). Integrated Crop Management (ICM) Scale Whole farm. Characteristics: A combination of farming practices which are designed to balance the economic pro- duction of crops, through the application of rota- tions, cultivations, choice of seed variety and judicious use of crop production inputs, with mea- sures to preserve and protect the environment (i.e. minimising pesticide and energy inputs). Potential benefits: Lowered pesticide inputs and the use of traditional rotations have potential benefits for several species. Caveats: There are no clear-cut definitions of ICM and so the spectrum of farm types is broad. To date, there is no field research on the value of ICM to farmland birds. Key reference. LEAF (1995). Conservation headlands Scale. Field margin. Characteristics: A wide margin in arable crops which is left pesticide-free. Potential benefits: Increased reproductive success of Grey Partridge Perdix perdix. Benefits to non-game birds are also likely. Key reference. Potts (1986). Game cover strips Scale Field margin. Characteristics: Strips planted with mixtures of seed-rich plants (e.g. sunflowers, quinoa, millet) to encourage gamebirds. Potential benefits: Provides important foraging habitat for a range of species in winter. Key reference: Flenderson & Vickery (2001). Countryside/Arable Stewardship Scale Field margin/field. Characteristics: Margin management includes: grass margins (grass-only strips, grass/wildflower strips); naturally regenerated set-aside margins; uncropped wildlife strips; game cover crops; and conservation headlands. Some options may be taken up at a whole- or part- field level. Potential benefits: Likely to have similar benefits to those of conservation headlands and game cover strips. Caveats: A new scheme, the benefits of which are unlikely to be detected for several years. Key reference MAFF (1998; 1999). Set-aside Scale Field. Characteristics: Arable land left fallow, either as a stubble (rotational set-aside) or grass (non-rota- tional set-aside). Potential benefits: Preference for set-aside (especially rotational) shown by several species in both summer and winter. Caveats: Little evidence for an effect on population trends (may have slowed the population decline of some species) despite widespread and relatively long-term introduction. Key reference Henderson et al. (2000). Species-specific management Scale. Variable, but usually field/margin. Characteristics: Management is tailored to the needs of individual species. Examples include the provi- sion of overwinter stubble for Cirl Buntings Emberiza cirlus, adopting mowing regimes to min- imise Corn Crake Crex crex mortality, and creating bare patches in winter cereals for nesting Sky Larks Alauda arvensis. Potential benefits: Uses detailed knowledge of species ecology to improve habitats and has shown impressive results for Cirl Bunting, Corn Crake and Stone-curlew Burhinus oedienetnus. Caveats: Species-specific, so may not benefit whole farmland bird community. Has mostly been used for rare species. Key reference Aebischer et al. (2000). 308 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 Declining farmland birds > The Future While a consideration of historical changes in agricultural management has been useful in understanding more about the factors affecting bird populations, it is not necessarily the best premise on which to base current conservation practice. Times have changed, and a widespread reversion to farming practices of 40 years ago is not a realistic, nor necessarily desirable, option. Furthermore, there is no reason to suspect that those factors which originally caused popula- tions to decline are those which are currently affecting population trends the most. What is needed now is the testing of solutions through novel management techniques. There is also a need to focus on those aspects of bird species’ life-cycles which are less well understood, for example post-fledging survival, length of breeding season, overwinter survival. In this respect, targeted studies are needed in relation to experimental management techniques. We are currently at a crucial stage for farm- land birds in Britain. It is quite clear that agri- cultural intensification has been a major factor in the decline of so many species, but it has only been in the last few years that any steps have been taken to remedy the situation. There is good news in the fact that the Government is taking these changes seriously and that funding for agri-environment schemes has been sub- stantially increased. In 2000, the Government made an important commitment to the conser- vation of farmland birds by adopting a Public Service Agreement (PSA) target to reverse the long-term decline in the Farmland Bird Index (the population trends of 20 farmland special- ists shown in table 1, with the exception of House Sparrow) by the year 2020 (statistical reseach is currently being undertaken to estab- lish the precise magnitude of population increase which will constitute this target). This PSA should mark an important turning point in the fortunes of many declining farmland birds. It is an ambitious target given the scale of the declines and the widespread distribution ot many of the species involved. But how realistic is this target? For some of our rarest farmland birds (Corn Crake, Stone-curlew, Cirl Bunting), great progress has undoubtedly been made (Aebischer et al. 2000). For tackling the wide- spread declines of Farmland Bird Index species, however, the situation is less hopeful. Many species continue to decline (e.g. Grey Partridge Perdix perdix, Turtle Dove, Sky Laik, Coin Bunting, Reed Bunting, Yellowhammer) despite the increase in environmental schemes and the introduction of set-aside. The latter is particu- larly interesting because set-aside was intro- duced on a large scale and is clearly a preferred habitat for several declining species, yet popula- tion declines do not appear to have been halted, merely slowed. If even set-aside could not reverse the declines, then we are likely to need major changes in the way farmland is managed on a large scale if we want to increase biodiver- sity. A range of conservation measures (table 3), incorporating not only agri-environment schemes but also widespread initiatives to reduce the intensity of farm management on a large scale, may achieve this. Acknowledgments We are most grateful to the many volunteer ornithologists who have contributed immeasurably to bird conservation by taking part in monitoring surveys. Many people have been involved in the work cited in this paper and we would like to thank all staff at the BTO who have in some way contributed. We would also like to thank Dr Jeremy Greenwood and Dr Ian Henderson for some valuable comments on an early draft of the manuscript. References Aebischer; N.J., Green, R. E., & Evans, A. D. 2000. From science to recovery: four case studies of how research has been translated into conservation action in the UK. In: Aebischer, N. J„ Evans, A. D., Grice, RV. & Vickery, J. A. (eds.) The Ecology and Conservation of Lowland Farmland Birds, Tring. Browne, S.J., Vickery, J. A., & Chamberlain, D. E. 2000. Densities and population estimates of breeding Skylarks ( Alauda arvensis) in Britain in 1 997. Bird Study 47: 52-65. Chamberlain, D. E„ Wilson, J. D„ & Fuller R. J. 1 999. A comparison of bird populations on organic and conventional farmland in southern Britain. Biol. Conserv. 88: 307-320. — , Fuller: R.J., Bunce, R. G. H„ Duckworth, J. C., & Shrubb, M. 2000. Changes in the abundance of farmland birds in relation to the timing of agricultural intensification in England and Wales. J.Appl. Ecol. 37:771-788. Crick, H. Q. R. Dudley, C., Glue, D. E., & Thomson, D. L. 1998. UK birds are laying eggs earlier Nature 388: 527. Fuller R. J., Gregory, R. D., Gibbons, D.W., Marchant.J. H„ Wilson, J. D„ Baillie, S. R., & Carter N. 1995. Population declines and range contractions among lowland farmland birds in Britain. Conserv. Biol. 9: 1 425- 1441. Galbraith, H. 1988. Effects of agriculture on the breeding ecology of Lapwings Vanellus vanellus. J.Appl. Ecol. 25: 487-503. Gibbons, D.W., Reid.J. B„ & Chapman, R. A. 1993. The New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland: 1 988-199 1 . London. Gillings, S., & Fuller R. J. 200 1 . Habitat preferences of Skylarks Alauda arvensis wintering in Britain in 1997/98. Bird Study 48: 293-307. Henderson, I. G., Cooper J., Fuller FI J., & Vickery, J. A. 2000. The relative abundance of birds on set-aside and neighbouring fields in summer J.Appl. Ecol. 37: 335-347. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-3 1 0 309 Robin Chittenden Declining farmland birds c 1 93. Northern Lapwings Vanellus vanellus, Norfolk, October 1 993. — , & Vickery, J. A. 200 1 .The relative abundance of birds on farmland in relation to game-cover and winter bird crops. Report to the Game Conservancy Trust for the Department of Environment Farming and Rural Affairs. Thetford. LEAF. 1 995. Guidelines for Integrated Crop Management. Stoneleigh. MAFF. 1 998. Arable Stewardship. Information and how to apply. London. - 1 999. The Countryside Stewardship Scheme. Information and how to apply. London. Marchant, J. Ft., Hudson, R., Carter S. R. & Whittington, R A. 1990. Population Trends in British Breeding Birds. Thetford. Noble, D., Bashford, R. I., & Baillie, S. R. 2000.The Breeding Bird Survey 1999. BTO Research Report 247.Thetford. Peach, W. J., Siriwardena, G. M„ & Gregory, R. D. 1999. Long-term changes in overwinter survival rates explain the decline of Reed Buntings in Britain./ App/. Ecol. 36: — , — , & Wilson, J. D. 1 999. Temporal variation in the annual survival rates of six granivorous birds with contrasting population trends. Ibis 1 4 1 : 62 1 -636. Stoate, C. 200 1 . Reversing the declines of farmland birds: a practical demonstration. Brit. Birds 94: 302-309. Thomson. D. L., Green, R. E„ Gregory, R. D„ & Baillie, S. R. !997.The widespread declines of songbirds in Britain do not correlate with the spread of avian predators. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 265: 2057-2062. Tompkins, D. M„ Greenman, J.V., Robertson, R A., & Hudson, RJ. 2000. The role of shared parasites in the exclusion of wildlife hosts: Heterakis gallinarum in the Ring-necked Pheasant and the Grey Partridge./ Amm. Ecol. 69: 829-840. Wilson, A. M„ Vickery, J. A., & Browne, S. J. 200 1 .The numbers and distribution of Lapwings Vanellus vanellus breeding in England and Wales in 1998. Bird Study 48: 2-17. 798-811. Potts, G. R. 1986. The Partridge: Pesticides. Predation and Conservation. London. Robinson, R. A.. Wilson, J. D„ & Crick, H. Q. R 2001. The importance of arable habitat for farmland birds in grassland landscapes./ Appl. Ecol. 38: 1059-1069. Siriwardena, G. M„ Baillie, S. R., Buckland, S.T., Fewster R. M„ Marchant, J. H„ & Wilson, J. D. 1 998. Trends in the abundance of farmland birds: a quantitative comparison of smoothed Common Birds Census indices. J.Appl. Ecol. 35: 24-43. Dr Dan Chamberlain and Dr Juliet Vickery British Trust Jar Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU 310 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 300-310 Letters What crisis in farmland birds? F. M. Gauntlett’s view of history (Brit. Birds 95: 146) is inadequate. He states: ‘That a few species “never had it so good” for a few decades cannot be a valid reason for trying to perpetuate that situation.’ If it were true that this period of abundance was limited to just a few decades, then his concern over turning the clock back might be justified. But it is not true. If one traces the history of our common farmland birds back to the early nineteenth century, about as far as one can convincingly go, what emerges is a marked underlying pattern of long-term population stability, not that they just did rather well in the 1930s (Shrubb, in press). This pattern of long-term stability held until the early 1970s, despite marked habitat changes, because farming methods were both favourable and extremely efficient in the nine- teenth century. What we are seeing today is not just devia- tion from some ‘ideal’ population size in birds, Michael Shrubb Hillcrest, Llanwrtyd Wells, Powys LD5 4TL but a dramatic loss of common farmland birds as both a symptom and a result of a major col- lapse in the diversity of the countryside caused by modern changes in farming methods. Mammals and, to an even greater degree, plants (arable weeds) and insects are also affected. Since farmland comprises 75-80% of our coun- tryside, we need to restore some of that diver- sity or inhabit an ecological desert. We are not likely to achieve greater diversity by giving con- sideration to ‘providing organic, pre-mechani- sation farmland reserves for those species under threat’, in other words ‘zoos’. Sound conserva- tion depends on maintaining diversity over as wide an area as possible. That some species are widespread and numerous in the world is irrele- vant. So was the Corn Crake Crex crex once. Reference Shrubb, M. In press. Birds, scythes and combines; a history of birds and agricultural change since 1 750. Cambridge. The conservation of farmland birds F. M. Gauntlett’s letter on the conservation of farmland birds (Brit. Birds 95: 146) raises inter- esting questions which should not be allowed to pass without comment. The population decline of species must be attributed to natural causes, to the activities of humans, or to some combi- nation of the two. The problem for conserva- tion policy is that it is often unclear precisely which factors are at work in any particular case. The conservation response, therefore, has to be designed in the face of scientific uncertainty. This particular problem has been recognised for some considerable time in the adoption by gov- ernment of the so-called ‘precautionary prin- ciple’. For example, ever since the publication of the 1990 Environment White Paper, the British Government has been committed to a piecau- tionary approach in an attempt to limit the use of potentially dangerous materials or the spiead of potentially dangerous pollutants. Even wheie scientific knowledge is not conclusive, action will be taken if the balance of likely costs and benefits to the environment and human health justifies it. In reality, of course, the precau- tionary principle is just a way of saying that we should consider the case for taking out some sort of insurance against unpleasant events or for making investments designed to prevent unpleasant events taking place (Beckerman 1995). The events we are concerned about in relation to farmland birds are their decline and ultimate extinction. The conservation measures that we might take should be assessed against at least three criteria: How desirable are the objec- tives? To what extent are they likely to succeed? How cost-effective are they? I discuss each of these in turn, below. First, the desirability of conservation objec- tives has little to do with notions ot an ‘ideal’ population size in any general sense. The deci- sions to allocate resources to reintroducing White-tailed Eagles Haliaeetus albicilla in the west of Scotland, and the Red Kite Milvus milvus in England and Scotland have not been taken on these grounds. On the contrary, they have been taken largely on the basis of the © British Birds 95 • June 2002 •311-312 311 Letters enjoyment people might derive from the opportunity of seeing these species in areas where they had not been seen for decades or even longer. The decision to recompense farmers in the Hebrides for modifying their hay and silage cropping to benefit the Corn Crake Crex crex would have been driven by a concern to prevent this species being lost as a breeding bird in the UK. In all three cases, what is being sought is a relatively marginal increase in the numbers of these species rather than some ‘ideal’ total population, the judgement having been made that the likely benefits of such changes would justify the costs involved. Of course, where such species are threatened with global extinction, the conservation priority would be higher. It would, however, be wrong to think that conservation measures can be justi- fied only for species which are globally threat- ened. Second, there is the question of how far con- servation measures are likely to succeed in their objectives. Not all conservation measures are successful: witness the failed attempts to rein- troduce the Great Bustard Otis tarda as a breeding species on Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire. To avoid wasting scarce conservation resources on unsuccessful programmes is largely a matter of good scientific and economic research. The decision to introduce measures to conserve the Corn Crake was preceded by a good deal of eco- logical research designed to determine the con- ditions needed for breeding success. More generally, the investment by the RSPB in Hope Farm in East Anglia has the objective of trying to determine which farming techniques and methods are likely to be the most beneficial to particular species of farmland birds. In addi- tion, the project will involve research into how far such farming methods can be promoted in the farming industry, given their likely impact on gross margins in agricultural production. Third, there is the question of the cost- John Corkindale 55 Poplar Grove, New Malden, Surrey KT3 3DN effectiveness of conservation measures. Mr Gauntlett is obviously right to draw attention to agricultural price support as a major cause of the decline in farmland bird populations. The argument against such agricultural price support is not, however, solely to do with the losses of farmland birds, but also involves those economic losses which accompany a reduction in bird populations. The protection of British agriculture against cheap imports from abroad can be dated from 1931 when a series of mea- sures were introduced on a commodity by com- modity basis (Tracy 1989). Once introduced, such measures proved remarkably resilient, no doubt largely as a result of the political pressure exerted by farming interests. After the War, nationwide agricultural subsidies were eventu- ally replaced by the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) regime. One consequence of this agricultural protectionism has been a long- running and cumulative impact on farmland bird populations. Another has been the huge cost to the taxpayer and the consumer in terms of domestic food prices, which have been con- sistently higher than if cheap imports from non-EU countries had been allowed onto our market. Protectionism also makes farmland bird conservation more expensive (and there- fore less cost-effective) than it would otherwise be. Conservation measures have to contend with artificial price incentives which encourage agricultural production techniques to be even more intensive than may be justified on purely economic grounds. And it is a short, but prag- matic, step from this conclusion to arguing for the switch of those financial resources currently devoted to the protection of agriculture in favour of environmental conservation. References Beckerman, W. 1 995. Small is stupid: blowing the whistle on the Greens. London. Tracy, M. 1989. Government and agriculture in Western Europe 1 880-1 988. New York. 312 British Birds 95 • June 2002 •311-312 Notes Red-throated Diver feeding young in November The observations of Red-throated Divers Gavia stellata feeding young in October (Brit. Birds 91: 231 and 95: 23), prompt the following. At Ros- therne Mere, Cheshire, between 30th October and 7th November 1993, an adult Red-throated Diver, still showing vestiges of breeding plumage, was accompanied by a juvenile. Ros- therne Mere is about 50 km away from the nearest coast. The divers were seen by many observers, according to entries in the logbook kept in the A. W. Boyd Observatory. On the morning of 30th October, my wife, my son and I observed the juvenile continually begging from the adult, which eventually fed it twice with fish brought to the surface. Later that day, an entry in the logbook by ). R and L. Dawson noted ‘two birds [the divers], one inciting feeding by the other’, while on 3rd November, N. S. Rowbotham noted ‘adult feeding young small fish’. Red-throated Divers occur inland less than annually in Cheshire, with records in just four of the Cheshire & Wirral Bird Reports between 1990 and 2000 inclusive. This is the eighth record of Red-throated Diver on Rostherne Mere since the first in 1952, and is believed to be the only inland Cheshire record of more than one individual. S. C. Barber 14 Thornfield Road, Cheadle Hulme, Stockport SK8 6AZ Racial identification of Fair Isle Solitary Sandpiper Details of the third Scottish record of Solitary Sandpiper Tringa solitaria, a juvenile on Fair Isle, Shetland, in September 1992 (Brit. Birds 86: 484; plate 194), were published in Scottish Birds (Riddington 1993), but with an editorial-com- mittee announcement that full descriptions were henceforth to be omitted from accounts of such records in that journal. Coincidentally or not, the discursive published record omitted to mention the subspecies concerned, which is evident from the accompanying photograph. Two subspecies of Solitary Sandpiper are recognised (del Hoyo et al. 1996). The western race, T. s. cinnamomea, was so named because, on young birds, ‘the light spots on the back, scapulars, and wing-coverts [are] brownish cin- namon instead of [as in eastern solitaria ] white or buffy whitish’ (Brewster 1890). In the skin collection of the National Museums of Scot- land, the difference between a juvenile from Alaska (i.e. western) and four from Ontario and two from the Caribbean (eastern) confirms this diagnosis precisely. This difference between subspecies is sufficiently clear-cut to be deter- mined in the field. Descriptive notes on the Fair Isle juvenile refer to pale buftish spots and its spangled appearance, features which are evident from the photograph in Scottish Birds and, in particular, that in Birding World (5: 329). On this basis, it can be concluded that the Fair Isle individual belonged to the nominate subspecies solitaria. The extent of speckling, as well as streaking on the head, mentioned in the field notes of the finders and indicated by the photographs, matches that exhibited by four juvenile speci- mens collected in July-August, and contrasts with the appearance of two first-years collected in October. This suggests that the Fair Isle indi- vidual had not yet undergone the partial moult 1 94. Juvenile Solitary Sandpiper Tringa solitaria, Fair Isle, Shetland, September 1992. © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 313-316 313 Paul Harvey Notes to first-winter plumage (Gabrielson 8c Lincoln 1959). The migration routes of solitaria follow mainly the Atlantic seaboard and those of cin- namomea mainly the Pacific (Gabrielson 8c Lincoln 1959; Cramp 8c Simmons 1983). Autumn records of Solitary Sandpiper in Britain 8c Ireland and in France have occurred between July and October, an arrival pattern which is in accordance with the timing of the species’ Nearctic passage (Cramp 8c Simmons 1983). That the Fair Isle bird was a juvenile of the nominate race is perhaps to be expected. The most recent BOU Checklist (Knox 1992) states for this species ‘race undetermined’. Evaluation of published photographs (and perhaps descriptions) may allow the racial iden- tification of other juvenile Solitary Sandpipers recorded in Britain to be determined, even though it is likely that most would be con- firmed as being of the nominate race. We thank Paul Flarvey and Roger Riddington for making their full notes available to us. References Brewster; W. 1890. A new subspecies of the Solitary Sandpiper. Auk 7: 377-379. Cramp, S., & Simmons, K. E. L. (eds.) 1983. The Birds of the Western Palearctic.V ol. 3. Oxford, del Hoyo, J„ Elliott, A., & Sargatal, j. (eds.) 1 996. Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 3. Barcelona. Gabrielson, I. C„ & Lincoln, F. C. 1 959. Birds of Alaska. Pennsylvania. Knox, A. G. 1 992. Checklist of Birds of Britain and Ireland. 6th edn. BOU.Tring. Riddington, R. 1993. Solitary Sandpiper on Fair Isle: a third Scottish record. Scot. Birds 17: 62-63. R. Y. McGowan and the late D. N. Weir National Museums of Scotland, Chambers Street, Edinburgh EH1 1JF Ageing and moult in Common Terns The recent paper on the difficulties of ageing Common Terns Sterna hirundo in the field (White 8c Kehoe 2001) provided a valuable addition to the material in the major identifica- tion texts and handbooks (e.g. Cramp 1985; Mailing Olsen 8c Larsson 1995). This note takes White 8c Kehoe’s observations one step further, setting them in the context of what is already known about moult and ageing, using material from the scientific literature and some previ- ously unpublished findings. White & Kehoe concluded that no full- grown Common Terns, except juveniles and those first-summers which retain juvenile fea- tures, can be aged safely. Underhill 8c Prys-Jones ( 1986) raised doubts about the ageing of second-calendar-year terns when still on their wintering grounds in southern Africa, and these were supported by Wood 8c Ward (1996) at Teesmouth, Cleveland. After handling 216 non- juvenile Common Terns during late summer, Wood 8c Ward found that plumage criteria given by Baker (1993), notably wing-covert contrast, would have classified all these as second-summers (third calendar-years). This was clearly not the case and it was, therefore, recommended that terns in late summer, other than juveniles or first-summers, be aged as two or more years old (Euring code 6). No certain differentiation, whether of colour, moult or wear, was observed between known second- summers and any other age group among our catches at Teesmouth, other than juveniles, which displayed great variation in plumage. White 8c Kehoe stated that it seems highly likely that the vast majority, if not all, second- summer Common Terns return to the breeding grounds at some time. This has been confirmed by marked individuals, with most returning to prospect in their second summer (Llaymes 8c Blokpoel 1978; Becker 8c Wendeln 1997) prior to recruitment into the breeding population the following year (Becker et al. 2001). Several authors have considered whether second- summer Common Terns in northern Europe have a greater number of twice-moulted inner primaries than adults, producing a narrower dark wedge on the outer primaries. Studies of known-age breeding birds in the Netherlands (Koopman 1996) and western Scotland (Craik 1994) showed no significant correlation between the average number of twice-moulted primaries with age. There were some second- summer birds within both of these samples of breeders. Among those terns present during the breeding season at Seaforth, Merseyside, White 8c Kehoe noted a strong tendency for second- summers to have more twice-moulted inner primaries than adults (note that for over 19% of those individuals considered, the inner I 4 pri- maries are likely to have been moulted a third time (Ward 2000), which is only evident in the 314 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 3 1 3-3 1 6 c Notes > hand). The same result was found among the late summer population at Teesmouth, using a sample of second-summer, third-summer and adult Common Terns, with the adults having significantly more once- moulted (dark) outer primaries (table 1). The samples in Teesmouth and Seaforth can be regarded as comprising the same population, since the existence of a trans- Pennine migratory pathway between Teesmouth and Merseyside has been identified (Ward 2000). The degree of overlap found among age classes does, however, prevent the number of dark outer primaries being used as anything other than a supporting ageing criter- ion, as confirmed by White & Kehoe (2001). This comment also applies to a significant dif- ference found in primary moult score amongst the same three age-group samples (Ward & Tees Ringing Group unpubl.; Kruskal-Wallis one- way ANOVA, n = 52, chi-square p-value <0.001, df 2). It could be argued that the differences in the pattern of primary moult observed at Teesmouth were simply related to between-year variation in the numbers of twice-moulted inner primaries. Indeed, Craik (1994) found significant differences in the extent of moult in two different years in western Scotland, while White & Kehoe also stated that patterns vary significantly between years but gave no sup- porting reference. Both Koopman (1996) and unpublished data from Teesmouth (table 2) suggest that there is, however, no significant dif- ference between years, for all year classes com- bined. In contradiction to Mailing Olsen & Larsson (1995), White & Kehoe found that second- summers were less likely to show contrast Table I. Dark outer primaries in second-summer, third-summer and adult Common Terns Sterna hirundo, Teesmouth, Cleveland. Number of once-moulted (dark) outer primaries Number of individuals Second-summers Third-summers Adults 7 1 0 1 6 1 3 9 5 9 6 6 4 11 0 2 3 3 0 0 Total number of birds 25 9 18 Mean number of dark outer primaries 4.4 5.3 5.5 (Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA, n = 52, chi-square p-value <0.001, df = 2) Data source: R. M. Ward & Tees Ringing Group, birds mist netted between July and September, 1995-2001. Table 2. Annual distribution of the numbers of dark outer primaries in Common Terns Sterna hirundo, Teesmouth, Cleveland. Number of once-moulted (dark) Number of individuals outer primaries 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 10 0 3 0 10 4 28 5 6 21 35 5 60 13 18 36 50 58 10 18 33 32 7 7 0 1 2 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 Total number of birds 165 28 47 92 129 Mean number of dark outer primaries 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.2 4.V (Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA, chi-square p- Data source: R. M. Ward & Tees Ringing Group, value = 0.029, df = 4) birds mist netted between July and September, 1995-1999. British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 313-316 315 Steve Young/Birdwatch Notes 1 95. Common Terns Sterna hirundo, Seaforth, Merseyside, 200 1 . between the inner and outer primaries than adults. Despite the caution which White & Kehoe exercised when interpreting this result, it is exactly what might be expected from infor- mation in the literature on the timing of primary moult. Adults may complete their moult of the outer primaries in January, up to six months before second-summers do so, while the twice-moulted inner primaries may be com- plete as much as three months earlier than on second-summers (Underhill & Prys- Jones 1986; Baker 1993; Craik 1994). Consequently, second- summers can be expected to show less abrasion of the greyish bloom which conceals the under- lying dark-pigmented outer primaries (Ullmann 1989; Craik 1994). Furthermore, less contrast between the inner and outer primaries can also be expected in second-summers given that the age difference between the two primary series may be up to two months in second- summers, but up to four months in adults. In the USA, Wilds (1993) also recorded that the outer primaries of second-summers can be rela- tively fresher and paler than on adults. Those individuals with darker outer primaries com- pared to adults, and aged as second-summers by Mailing Olsen & Larsson ( 1995), are, in fact, more likely to have been first-summers once moult patterns (Baker 1993; Craik 1994) and the observations of White & Kehoe are taken into account. Without doubt, the appeal for further infor- mation to clarify moult and ageing of Common Terns (Underhill & Prys-Jones 1986) remains valid, particularly given recent data suggesting a cline in moult strategies across north European breeding populations (Ward 2000). The inte- gration of ringing and observation studies across the Northeast Atlantic flyway, like that of White & Kehoe, is most welcome, and is neces- sary for improved understanding of ageing and moult in Common Terns. As well as providing a suitable challenge to field ornithologists, further studies may enable conservation bodies to quantify, through the integration of moult and count data (Ward 2000), the importance of those populations utilising particular migratory staging sites in northwest Europe. References Baker K. 1 993. Identification Guide to European Non- Passerines. BTO Guide 24. Becker; R H., & Wendeln, H. 1 997. A new application for transponders in population ecology of the Common Tern. Condor 99: 534-538. — , — , & Gonzalez-Solis, J. 200 1 . Population dynamics, recruitment, individual quality and reproductive strategies in Common Terns Sterna hirundo marked with transponders. Ardea 89: 24 1 -252. Craik, J. C. A. 1 994. Aspects of wing moult in the Common Tern Sterna hirundo. Ring. & Migr. 1 5: 27-32. Cramp, S. (ed.) 1 985. The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. 4. Oxford. Haymes, G.T, & Blokpoel, H. 1978. Seasonal distribution and site tenacity of the Great Lakes Common Tern. Bird Banding 49: 1 42- 151. Koopman, K. l996.The partial pre-breeding primary moult in Common Terns Sterna hirundo. Ring. & Migr. 17: I 1-14. Mailing Olsen, K. M„ & Larsson, H. 1 995. Terns of Europe and North America. London. Ullmann, M. 1 989. Wing patterns of Common and Arctic Terns. Brit. Birds 82: 414-41 6. Underhill, L. G„ & Prys-Jones, R. R 1 986. The primary moult of the Common Tern in the southwestern Cape; a recording system, observed patterns, and an appeal for information. Safring News 15: 44-49. Ward, R. M. 2000. Migration patterns and moult of Common Terns Sterna hirundo and Sandwich Terns Sterna sandvicensis using Teesmouth in late summer. Ring. & Migr. 20: 19-28. White, S. J., & Kehoe, C.V. 200 1 . Difficulties in determining the age of Common Terns in the field. Bnt Biids 94: 268-277. Wilds, C. 1 993. The identification and ageing of Forster's and Common Terns. Birding 20: 94- 1 08. Wood, E, & Ward, R. M. 1 996. Ageing and moult in Common Terns. Ring. Bull. 9: 38. Robin M. Ward T he Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, Slimbridge, Gloucestershire GL2 7BT 316 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 313-316 News and comment Compiled by Bob Scott and Adrian Pitches Opinions expressed in this feature are not necessarily those of British Birds Controversial Icelandic hydro scheme halted Plans by the Norwegian multinational company Norsk Hydro for a huge aluminium smelter in Iceland have been shelved: this means that the giant hydroelectric scheme needed to fuel the plant has also been abandoned. It would have been the largest hydro scheme in Iceland and in one of the most ecologically sensitive areas. Through the construction of dams, reser- voirs, ditches, channels and roads, the 700 megawatt Karahnukar hydropower plant would have had a significant impact on the largest remaining wilderness area in western Europe: 1,000 km2 of blanket bog north of the Vatnajokull glacier. Particularly at risk were globally important populations of Pink-footed Geese Anser brachyrhynchus and Red-necked Phalaropes Phalaropus lobatus (see Brit. Birds 94: 608). Norsk Hydro claim that the postponement of the smelter is due to a re- evaluation of investment plans. It had hoped to make a final decision on the viability of the project by 1st September 2002, but this decision has now been delayed indefinitely. Samantha Smith, director of WWF’s Arctic Pro- gramme, said: ‘One project cannot exist without the other: Norsk Hydro’s decision means the hydropower project will now once again come under scrutiny, and rightly so. Both projects are ill-conceived and will have irreparable consequences for the Icelandic environment.’ For further infor- mation, see the Proact website at www.proactnow.org/lceland/id20.html Cranes migrate without assistance Following last month’s revelation (Brit. Birds 95: 261) that Austrian ornithologists are attempting to reintroduce the Waldrapp Geronticus eremita to Europe, and will guide the birds by microlight on their first migration south, there is heartening news from the USA on the prototype for such a scheme. Whooping Cranes Grus americana, guided by human pilots from Wis- consin to Florida last autumn, have successfully retraced their steps unaided. Five of the original eight-strong flock have made the trip from the Chassahowitzka Refuge in Florida to the swampy Necedah Wildlife Refuge, taking 1 1 days to complete the journey. The goal of the project, Operation Migration, is to establish a second wild flock of these highly endangered birds in the eastern half of the USA. A flock of 140 Whooping Cranes cur- rently migrates between the Gulf coast of Texas and Canada, but conserva- tionists want to expand the population. Indiscriminate hunting and habitat loss reduced the global population of these majestic creatures to just 15 individuals in the 1940s. As many as 20 juvenile cranes, hatched at a government farm in Maryland, will be trained in the coming months to join the initial flock established in Wis- consin. Two out of the original eight cranes in the experiment were killed by Bobcats Felis rufus on their Florida wintering grounds. Another was electrocuted by powerlines on the initial migration to Florida. 1 he five which have successfully migrated back to Wisconsin all completed the journey south following microlight aircraft flown by pilots in fancy diess. they were costumed as adult Whooping Cranes. If successful, the re-establishment of an eastern population of ‘Whoopers’ raises the intriguing, if remote, possibility that a wind-blown Whooping Crane could make landfall in the UK, like the Sandhill Cranes G. canadensis that arrived in Shetland in 1981 and 1991. More on raptors and powerlines in Kazakhstan A recent paper by C. van Orden and N. V. Paklina ( De Takkeling 9: 227-34) describes observations made during visits to Kazakhstan on the abundant use of feathers of owls, mostly Eagle Owls Bubo bubo, either as tufts in hats during festi- vals and ceremonial gatherings or as objects placed in strategic places, such as on cradles or in bedrooms. The tufts are usually taken from the bird’s breast or mantle. In the absence of owl feathers, feathers of birds of prey are used. These feathers are thought to be reincar- nations of guardian spirits with sacred powers. The use of such feathers is described as ‘massive’ and has resulted in the widespread elimination of Eagle Owls in large parts of Kazakhstan. In recent years, however, local tribes have taken to exploring anti- quated powerlines, where large numbers of birds of prey and owls are being electrocuted, thus pro- viding easy access to feathers. In the village of Orlovka, in eastern Kazakhstan, the chief showed the authors a collection of 14 Steppe Eagles Aquila nipalensis, 4 Eastern Imperial Eagles A. heliaca, 3 Golden Eagles A. chrysaetos, 6 Steppe Buzzards Buteo b. vulpinus, 5 Upland Buzzards B. hemilasius, 2 Saker Falcons Falco cherrug and 4 Eagle Owls, all found beneath pow- erlines between Orlovka and Ust- Kamenogorsk. This selection is probably just the tip of the iceberg as similar powerlines are in use all over southern Central Asia. Elec- trocuted birds are nowadays the main source of feathers used for traditional wear and amulets. For further details, contact the Russian Academy of Sciences, Aviamotoraia 15, kv 2, 111020 Moscow, Russia; or e-mail: paklina@hotmail.com (see also Brit. Birds 94: 206-207). © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 3 1 7-3 1 9 317 News and comment Golden Jubilee celebrations... for a Manx Shearwater As the UK celebrates Queen Eliza- beth’s 50 years on the throne, another golden jubilee is being marked on Bardsey Island, in North Wales. A Manx Shearwater Puffinus puffinus , first ringed on the island on 22nd May 1957, was retrapped on 4th April this year. As the shear- waters on Bardsey are not normally ringed until they are five years old - when they first return to breed - then this individual is likely to have hatched in 1952. This makes it the oldest known bird in the world at the moment - and it made head- lines across the world when the BTO publicised the'Manxie’s’ age. As Manx Shearwaters are such long-distance migrants, summering in the north Atlantic and wintering in the south Atlantic, off Brazil, it has been calculated that this partic- ular individual has flown around five million miles (eight million kilometres) during its 50 years. And this is probably more air miles than Her Majesty has clocked up during her 50 years of service. The BTO’s ringing records show that the shearwater has been retrapped twice between its first ringing date and this spring: on 8th July 1961 and 16th April 1977. Peter Howlett, Secretary of the Bird Observatories Council, explained that: ‘Part of the problem with keeping track of these old birds is that they need to be caught every 10-15 years or so to replace their rings. Shearwaters shuffle around on their tarsi when on the ground and, despite the rings being made of a very durable metal, wear the rings out very quickly. Unfortu- nately, retrapping them is easier said than done, so we will never know how many really old birds have simply lost their rings through wear, are subsequently recaught and a new ring added.’ A New Zealand-born northern Royal Albatross Diomedea epo- mophora (called ‘Grandma’) was the previous holder of the presti- gious title of the world’s oldest known living wild bird, but she failed to return home to her colony in 1990, when aged 62. Although parrots (Psittacidae) are commonly said to be the longest-lived among birds, the highest ever reported age for a bird is an unconfirmed 82 years for a male Siberian White Crane Grits leucogeranus called ‘Wolf’ at the International Crane Centre in Wisconsin, USA. According to the Guinness Book of Animal Records, Wolf, who hatched in a Swiss zoo in 1905, died in 1988 after breaking his bill while repelling a visitor who came too close to his pen. Pigeon fanciers convicted of attempted Peregrine Falcon poisoning OSME summer meeting & AGM The Ornithological Society of the Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia (OSME) will be holding their Summer Meeting and AGM on Saturday 13th )uly 2002 at the School of Oriental & African Studies, University of London (in Thornhaugh Street). Doors open at 1 1.00 am. Talks include: ‘Unravel- ling identification problems in the Middle East’ (Andrew Lassey),‘The Silk Road to Uzbekistan’ (Bob Scott), and ‘Filling the GAP - current bird research in Turkey’ (Geoff & Hilary Welch). This will be a great opportunity to meet up with others interested in this fasci- nating bird-rich region, and members and non-members alike are welcome. Both OSME and Wildsounds will be selling a wide range of books and bird recordings covering the Middle East. For further information visit the OSME website at www.osme.org or contact Dawn Ba Inter (tel: 01842 766734; e-mail: dawn.balmer@bto.org). In what the RSPB has described as a landmark court case, two pigeon- fanciers from South Wales have become the first in the UK to be convicted of using poisoned bait for the purpose of killing a wild bird, and attempting to kill a Pere- grine Falcon Falco peregrinus. Stephen Jones - who was Secretary of the Port Talbot Pigeon Club - and Joseph O’Bryan of Port Talbot were fined over £1,000 between them at Neath Magistrates Court on 8th April this year. The court heard that, on 10th May 2001, the remains of a pigeon carcass and baler twine were found beneath an occupied Peregrine Falcon’s nest. Chemical analysis of the carcass showed that it had been laced with aldicarb and bendio- carb. South Wales Police and the RSPB subsequently searched local premises on 4th June 2001 and seized a quantity of pesticide con- taining bendiocarb. In 2000, the RSPB received several calls about tethered pigeons, laced with pesticide and found close to occupied Peregrine Falcon nests. Eleven peregrines were poi- soned in the UK that year and a further four were suspected to have died this way. RSPB Investigations Officer Chris Townend said: ‘For a number of years, the RSPB has believed these incidents form part of an organised and cruel campaign to kill Peregrine Falcons by a minority of disgruntled English and Welsh pigeon fanciers. We assume they falsely believe these birds of prey cause significant mor- tality among their pigeons. Another suspected poisoned pigeon bait has already been retrieved from an active peregrine nest this year, so we hope this first prosecution will be enough to remind pigeon fanciers that this cruel activity is illegal and indiscriminate.’ Terry Ash, Secre- tary of the I Joining Pigeon Union, said: ‘While some fanciers are frus- trated by heavy losses through pre- dation, this cannot excuse a total disregard for the law of the land.’ 318 British Birds 95 • June 2002 * 317-319 News and comment Woodlarks win court battle against quarry company English Nature has succeeded in a High Court battle to protect an area of forest which is home to European Nightjars Caprimulgus europaeus, Dartford Warblers Sylvia undata and Wood Larks Lullula arborea. The Government’s conservation agency clashed in court with Aggregate Industries UK Ltd, which had applied for court orders overturning the Council of English Nature’s deci- sion in July 2001 to confirm notifi- cation of land at Bramshill plantation in Hampshire as a site of special scientific interest (SSS1). SSSI status is intended to protect valued sites by restricting their use and development. Aggregate Industries argued that the SSSI decision was fatally flawed because it was unjustifiable and breached the company’s rights under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights to a fair and independent hearing. It also breached the ‘legitimate expec- tations’ of the company, which bought the 600-acre forestry plan- tation site in February 2000. Rejecting the company’s legal chal- lenge, Mr Justice Forbes ruled on 24th April that English Nature was entitled to act as it did, in the public interest. The judge observed that the forested area provided important habitats for birds, and is part of a larger area, the Thames Basin Heaths, which are regarded as being of European importance for bird conservation. Further- more, one additional breeding pair of Wood Larks would bring the total at Bramshill to 1% of the UK breeding population, thus quali- fying the site as being of European importance in its own right. Wild fowlers fail to take the lead A study by the RSPB and the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust has shown wor- rying signs that laws designed to reduce lead poisoning amongst wildfowl (Anatidae) are being broken. Lead poisoning can occur when the birds ingest spent lead shot, mistaking it for grit which is needed to aid digestion. The Environmental Protection (Restriction on Use of Lead Shot) (England) Regulations, introduced in September 1999, made it illegal to shoot wildfowl with lead shot and restricted its use over English wetlands. This followed a voluntary phase-out of lead shot, instigated in 1995. The present study found, however, that of 40 Mallards Anas platyrhyn- chos containing pellets and bought from game dealers and butchers, over two-thirds had been shot with lead. David Hoccom, of the RSPB, said: ‘We are concerned that, in the third shooting season since the Regulations were introduced, the use of lead-free shot appears to be low, despite significant efforts to raise awareness among wildfowlers.’ Dr John Harradine, head of research at the British Association for Shooting & Conservation (BASC), said: ‘BASC condemns the illegal use of lead shot. Widespread disregard for the law will only damage shooting and encourage calls for a total ban on lead. Ignoring the law could lead to the prosecution of the shooter, game- keeper, shoot captain and the landowner, the loss of shotgun certificates and the invalidation of shooting insurance.’ Legislation banning the use of lead shot in Wales will take effect from 1st September 2002. Discussions are continuing in Scotland on how best to implement the UK Government’s commitment, under the African- Eurasian Waterfowl Agreement, to restrict the use of lead shot. Great Bittern and Great Tit On 14th February 2002, a female Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris was found dead beside the road near Helston, Cornwall, showing injuries consistent with it having been hit by a car. The body was examined by Vic Simpson at the Wildlife Veterinary Investigation Centre, Truro, and he found it to be in good condition, despite a weight of only 781.5 g ( BWP gives 867-1,150 g for birds in good condition and as light as 430 g for emaciated individuals). Even more interesting was the presence of a recently swallowed Great Tit Parus major in the gizzard. Small birds are not unknown in the diet ot Bit- terns, particularly reedbed birds such as Wren Troglodytes troglodytes and Bearded Tit Panurus biarmicus. Great Tit, however, must be a little more unusual. For further details, contact Vic Simpson, Jollys Bottom Farm, Chacewater, Truro, Cornwall TR4 8PB. The Eric Hosking Charitable Trust The Eric Hosking Chari- table Trust is looking for applications for its 2002 bursary. The aim of the Trust is to sponsor projects on birds and other natural history subjects, which are of scientific and conserva- tion value, through the media of writing, photog- raphy, painting or illustra- tion. Bursaries of up to £500 are awarded to suitable can- didates once a year, and the closing date for applications is 30th September 2002. In 2001, the Trust awarded one bursary, to Sue Worrall. The grant will help Sue in her study of breeding Sand Martins Rip aria riparia in Lancashire during 2002, assessing distribution, numbers and potential con- servation threats. Details are available from the Eric Hosking Charitable Trust, Pages Green House, Wether- ingsett, Stowmarket, Suffolk IP 1 4 5QA; tel: 01728 861113; e-mail: david@hosking-tours.co.uk British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 3 1 7-3 1 9 319 Reviews HANDBOOK OF AUSTRALIAN, NEW ZEALAND AND ANTARCTIC BIRDS. VOL. 5: TYRANT-FLYCATCHERS TO CHATS. Edited by P. J. Higgins, ]. M. Peter & W. K. Steele. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, 2001. 1,270 pages; 44 colour plates; numerous line- drawings and maps. ISBN 0-19-553258.9. Hardback, £135.00. The first and largest volume of this mammoth project was published in 1990 and, since it ran to 1,440 pages, it was divided into two books. It has taken a further 1 1 years to reach the publication of Volume 5, which, at 1,270 pages, is the next largest volume. With two more to come, we may hope for completion by 2006 or 2007. Volume 5 is the first dealing with passerines and covers 118 species, of which 115 are cate- gorised as breeding species, although two of these (Bush Wren Xenicus longipes and Stephens Island Wren X. lyalli) are extinct, and the providence of another (Red-bellied Pitta Pitta erythro- gaster) as a breeder is considered doubtful. The three non-breeders are all vagrants to the ‘HANZAB’ region: two species of ground- tyrants (Muscisaxicola), each with one record on South Georgia; and Blue-winged Pitta P. moluccensis , with four vagrants in Western Aus- tralia and one on Christmas Island. Dominating this volume are the 22 fairywrens, emuwrens and grasswrens (Maluridae) and the 76 honeyeaters and Australian chats (Meliphagidae), but also dealt with are the New Zealand wrens (Acan- thisittidae), pittas (Pittidae), lyre- birds (Menuridae), scrub-birds (Atrichornis) and treecreepers (Cli- macteridae). Of the 68 Australian honeyeaters, 54 are endemic, 13 also occur to a greater or lesser extent in New Guinea and the Lesser Sundas, while Scarlet Hon- eyeater Myzomela sanguinolenta also occurs on New Caledonia. The five extant New Zealand passerine endemics, and many of the Aus- tralian endemics have been exten- sively studied. Not surprisingly, therefore, the page per species ratio in this volume, 10:3, is greater than in any of the earlier volumes. The text for Superb Lyrebird Menura novaehollandiae, with its complex social organisation and behaviour and its astonishingly varied vocali- sations, runs to no fewer than 32 pages. Various minor alterations to the presentation in each text section are detailed in the intro- duction. The most significant is in ‘Taxonomy and Nomenclature’ which now follows the ground- breaking Directory of Australian Birds: Passerines (Schodde 8c Mason, 2000). Thus, for example, Short-tailed Grasswren Amytornis merrotsyi (restricted to the Flinders and Gawler Ranges in South Aus- tralia) is now split from the widely (though disjunctly) distributed Striated Grasswren A. striatus, while Kalkadoon Grasswren A. bal- larae (with a restricted range in northwest Queensland) is split from Dusky Grasswren A. purnelli (with a sizeable range straddling the intersection of Western Aus- tralia, South Australia and Northern Territory). Everything about the highly authoritative text is excellent. Layout, headings and sub-head- ings, readability, presentation of tables and detailed data, distribu- tion maps and references, all are first-rate. The team of three senior editors, two assistant editors and 19 contributing editors has pro- duced a very consistent style of presentation, section by section and species by species. Browsing throughout, and reading through three of my favourite species in full, I failed to spot any errors. Six artists have contributed the series of 44 colour plates, depicting all but three species (the two ground-tyrants and Stephens Island Wren). Sexual dimorphism, age-related variations and all sub- specific variations are shown, with flight views when relevant; Varie- gated Fairy-wren Malurus lamberti gets most images, with 17. The styles of illustration are extremely compatible and all are very attrac- tive: the standard is so highjhat I was unable to select a favourite. Reviews of earlier volumes have attracted many superlatives and Volume 5 is no different: simply brilliant! Nick Dymond DIE TEICHRALLE: ODER DAS TEICHHUHN: GALLINULA CHLOROPUS By H. Engler. Westarp Wissenschaften, Hohenwarsleben, 2000. 359 pages; 5 colour plates; 125 figures; 22 tables. ISBN 3-89432-347-7. Paperback, £46.00. This third, revised and enlarged, edition of Helmut Engler’s Moorhen Gallinula chloropus monograph is an excellent publication in the German- language Neue Brehm-Bucherei (New Brehm Library) series. It comprises 28 chapters, but the main focus is on breeding biology and behaviour, much of the material for which came from the author’s long-term and meticulous observations of parkland Moorhens in Dusseldorf. The many photographs and drawings are an attractive and illuminating complement to the text and the author has also thoroughly reviewed the Moorhen liter- ature. Now fully protected in Germany (unlike the Coot Fulica atra), the Moorhen is nevertheless declining there, with changes in pond manage- ment and in agriculture, as well as disturbance, being some of the factors implicated. M. G. Wilson 320 © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 320-321 Reviews C > EXTRAORDINARY PHEASANTS By Stephen Green-Armytage. Harry N. Abrams, New York, 2002. 1 1 1 pages; 200 colour photographs. ISBN 0-8109-1007-1. Hardback, £16.95. The author states in the preface that his aim was to produce a pic- torial celebration of pheasants (Phasianidae), and that is exactly what he has done. This book is a feast of stunning images of some of the most beautiful, bizarre and sought-after birds in the world. Some 200 colour photos cover more than 50 taxa, including tragopans Tragopan, monals Lophophorus, junglefowl Gallus, the Lophura pheasants, Eared-pheas- ants Crossoptilon and Peacock- pheasants Polyplectron. My personal favourites are the sequences of a displaying Bulwer’s Pheasant Lophura bulweri and a displaying Palawan Peacock- pheasant P. emphanum. All the photos were taken in captivity, and in many cases they are set against a studio background. The 18 pages set aside for various mutant forms of Golden Pheasant Chrysolophus pictus and Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus will be of little interest to birders. The text is limited and pretty basic, covering classification, distri- bution, breeding biology, captive breeding and conservation, with a few notes on each of the species covered in the book. If pheasants are your passion, or, if you are looking for a new coffee-table book, then consider buying this. If, however, your budget is limited, and you want a serious text on pheasants, the recent Christopher Helm publication is a better bet. Paul Harvey BIRDS OF BRENT RESERVOIR By Leo Batten, Roy Beddard, John Colmans & Andrew Self. Welsh Harp Conservation Group, Barnet, 2002. 223 pages; 14 pages of colour plates; line-drawings. ISBN 0-9541862-0-6. Paperback, £12.00. This is a superbly comprehensive local avifauna. At its heart are accounts for the 243 species recorded at the reservoir in over 170 years of bird study. The accu- mulation of historical records is a mine of information on the changing occurrences of both familiar and scarcer birds. For example, Smew Mergellus albellus used to be a regular Brent bird, peaking with an incredible flock of 155 in 1956, but it now occurs very sporadically. Generally, the records are placed in a well-informed wider London context, while a sep- arate chapter considers species trends against the growth of WILD GOOSE WINTER: OBSERVATIONS OF GEESE IN NORTH NORFOLK By James McCallum. Silver Brant, Wells-next-the-Sea, 2001. 1 14 pages; 64 colour plates; about 100 drawings. ISBN 0-9541695-0-6. Hardback, £25. James McCallum has had a deep passion for geese all his life and, living in north Norfolk, has had many opportunities to indulge it. The area regularly holds as many as ten species, including up to 20,000 wintering Brent Geese Branta ber- nicla and 70,000 Pink-footed Geese Anser brachyrhynchus. His new book of paintings is the fruit of that long-standing attachment and represents a milestone in the devel- opment of an exceptionally tal- ented painter. The plates are accompanied by a text which gives a valuable account of the birds’ daily behav- iour. The main purpose of the book is, however, as a vehicle for the author’s paintings and urbanisation around the site. But this is much more than a systematic list. Sections on habitat management - enlivened by before and after photographs - should inspire other dedicated bands of local conservationists. Accounts of site ‘firsts’, and rarities - like Britain’s first Iberian Chiffchaff Phylloscopus brehmii in 1972 - convey the thrill of local-patch watching. Concise sections on wider natural history at the reser- voir, from plants, through fish, to insects, complete the picture for what, as Bill Oddie suggests in his foreword, ‘might just be the ideal local patch’. Any reservoir birder will enjoy this book and dreaming of what can be achieved on their own stomping ground. Tony Blake coloured drawings, of which there are about 160, all of them water- colours, all completed in the field. McCallum’s style closely resembles that of Eric Ennion, and that of John Busby, who taught him. The illustrations are quite simply out- standing: remarkably bold in their composition, acutely observed and beautifully committed to the page. The peculiar magic of these highly social birds affects many people, and they will find that quality fully celebrated in the paintings. Mark Cocker © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 320-321 321 IPH D f Monthly Marathon I. Mystery photograph 185. It is amazing just how many birds of prey seem to be flying away from you when you first see them. Picture the scene: you are wandering along some desert wadi, scouring the bushes for small migrants, when you take yet another glance upwards. And this time, instead of a vast expanse of blue, there is a large raptor drifting away and you curse yourself for not having looked up a few moments earlier when it would have been right overhead. So you have to make a decision fast, before it disappears altogether. The overall shape - a bulky bird, with long broad wings and a rela- tively short tail - together with the essentially uniform dark plumage lead us straight away to one of the Aquila eagles. Anyone who has had even a small amount of experience in watching raptors at one of the migration spots in the Middle East might quickly jump to the conclu- sion that this is a Steppe Eagle A. nipalensis , based on what seems to be a uniformly dark body con- trasting with slightly paler, uniform underwings: classic features for an adult Steppe Eagle. Indeed, in the field, as the bird drifted away, a shout of ‘Steppe Eagle!’ would perhaps have remained unques- tioned, but with mystery photo- graph 185 (Brit. Birds 95: plates 10 and 109; repeated here as plate 196) we have the advantage of an indi- vidual frozen in time, and can take a closer, more detailed look. We notice what appears to be a sharp ‘step’ between the length of the outer secondaries and the primaries (indicating moult) but this is prob- ably of little significance in terms of establishing the raptor’s identity; at the angle the photograph was taken it is difficult to assess the relative width of the wing, and impossible to count the number of ‘fingered’ pri- maries, but we can also see that the bird is gliding on flat wings, perhaps slightly bowed. On closer examina- tion of the underwings we can also see that, apart from the darker carpals, the underwing-coverts are marginally darker than the flight feathers, but possibly of greater sig- nificance is the rather conspicuous light spot, or ‘comma’ at the base of the outermost primaries, just beyond the dark carpal patch. Perhaps our initial identification of Steppe Eagle was a bit hasty after all. Golden Eagle A. chrysaetos and both Imperial Eagles - Eastern A. heliaca and Spanish A. adalberti - fall by the wayside on a combina- tion of shape and plumage details; youngsters would show either obvious white wing patches or a paler body and/or underwing. Adult Golden would, even at this angle, give the impression of having a longer tail, secondaries pinched in at the body, and would perhaps be gliding with its wings held in a shallow ‘V’. Adults of one of the two species of Imperial Eagle would, apart from anything else, show the distinct tail pattern of those species. The solid darkness of the plumage more or less excludes Tawny Eagle A. rapax too. We are, therefore, left with Lesser Spotted A. pomarina, Spotted A. clanga or Steppe Eagle. As any field guide will tell you, the underwing-coverts on Lesser Spotted Eagle are paler than the flight feathers and we have already established that, as indistinct as they may be, the underwing-coverts on this bird are slightly darker than the flight feathers. Any good guide will also tell you that it is not always safe to tell Spotted and Lesser Spotted apart on the relative tones of the underwing-coverts compared with the flight feathers and will recom- mend that, in ambiguous cases, more reliance be placed on the extent of the pale ‘carpal crescents’ or ‘commas’. Lesser Spotted usually shows two distinct pale crescents, one within and the other just outside the dark carpal patch, clearly not shown by our mystery bird. So we end up with either our first choice of Steppe Eagle, or Spotted Eagle, and this is where it gets really difficult. This is the time to scruti- nise that underwing in real detail. There is something about this photograph which indicates that the bird is well lit from below, perhaps flying over some open desert where much of the light from above is bounced back, and this is something which needs to be taken into account when looking at the photo. I think it is this lighting from below which has ‘bleached’ the underwings somewhat, making them appear rel- atively uniform and contributing to the darker effect of the body. All the factors combined - the indication of a single, whitish comma and the (albeit indistinct) contrast between the underwing-coverts and flight feathers - go against the more general impression that this is a Steppe Eagle, and, in fact, point to it being a Spotted Eagle. Reflecting the fact that many people find flying raptors incred- ibly difficult to identify was the fact that no fewer than nine species were suggested as the correct answer to this, the first stage of the twelfth ‘Marathon’. The most popular answer, however, was the correct solution of Spotted Eagle, and saw almost 41% of entrants getting off to a good start in the new competition. Steve Rookc 1 96. Spotted Eagle Aquila clanga. location and date unknown. 322 © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 322-324 Monthly Marathon 197. Adult Long-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus scolopaceus, Texas, USA, April 1994. 1 98. Adult Long-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus sco/opoceus.Texas, USA, April 1994 (same individual as in plate 197). 2. Mystery photograph 1 86. Unlike birdwatching in the field, the observer of a mystery bird pho- tograph seldom knows when or where the image was taken. Conse- quently, when faced with the wader featured in photo number 186 (Brit. Birds 95: plates 36 and 110; repeated here as plate 197), a good starting point is to consider what plumage it is in and, if possible, its age. Most small or medium-sized waders have fairly uniform upper- parts during the non-breeding season, which are often essentially dull grey or brown. Our bird shows lots of black-centred feathers with a mixture of rufous or off-white fringes, so we can conclude with some confidence that this is either a juvenile or an adult in breeding plumage. With the bill, legs and eyes obscured from view, soft parts will not help us at all this time. From the manner in which it is feeding in the water we might, however, conclude that it has a rea- sonably long bill and legs, and although it is difficult, if not impossible, to judge the size of a solitary bird accurately, this photo seems to give the impression of a medium-sized wader; certainly not a stint or small peep Calidris. We can probably also rule out all of the plovers (Charadriidae), which seldom feed in deep water. So, what other useful features are visible in the photograph? Although only the rear part of the crown is visible, it seems quite dark and contrasts with the much paler hindneck. Could our bird have a dark cap concealed in the water? Perhaps the most useful feathers which are clearly visible are the three tertials, which look dark grey or black with considerable rufous barring across the longest and other less regular internal rufous marks on the other two. Most waders show distinctive tertials, and in a number of species which we should consider, these are plain in all plumages, or at least show only a pale margin. We can, therefore, rule out Pectoral Sand- piper Calidris melanotos, Curlew Sandpiper C. ferruginea and Stilt Sandpiper Micropalaina himan- topus. Perhaps the European wader which looks most like the bird in the photo is Ruff Philomachus pugnax, and the tertials could fit the breeding plumage of that species. So does anything rule out Ruff? To the left of the longest tertial, part of the tail is visible and careful examination reveals this to be barred grey and white, which does not fit Ruff. In fact, we need to consider waders from farther afield to find the solution to this puzzle. The only waders which show such che- quered upperparts, tertials with bold, internal rufous patterning, and a tail which is barred grey and white are the dowitchers Limnodromus. One of the best ways to tell the two North American dowitchers (Short-billed Dow- itcher L. griseus and Long-billed Dowitcher L. scolopaceus) apart is... the call; everything else, by comparison, requires decidedly concentrated and critical observa- tion, so if you were not one of the few people who was able to identify the bird in the photograph cor- rectly in an instant, you will have had some working out to do. No matter how many times one reads the relevant papers on identifying this notoriously difficult species- pair, most of us are going to have to take them out again and have a ‘crash course’ before we can expect to figure out what we are looking at on this occasion. The first thing we must estab- lish is whether our bird is an adult in breeding plumage or a juvenile. Unlike most of the ‘difficult’ waders, dowitchers are often more readily identified as juveniles than as breeding-plumaged adults. On this individual, the boldly pat- British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 322-324 323 Richard Chandler Richard Chandler Monthly Marathon terned upperparts, in particular the barring on even the smaller wing- coverts, suggest an adult in breeding plumage, as does the hint of light brick-red in the region of the undertail-coverts. Further- more, the neat, rounded tips of all of the upperparts feathers indicate very fresh condition and we can deduce from this that the photo- graph was taken in spring. Now, it would take a lot more space than is available here to elucidate the full range of characters we need to con- sider when attempting to identify a breeding-plumaged dowitcher, but careful reading of the latest publi- cations on this complex subject (Jaramillo & Henshaw 1995; Chan- dler 1998; Sibley 2000) points us in the right direction. Short-billed Dowitcher is the more variable of the two, comprising three subtly different (and to some extent over- lapping) subspecies. We must also be aware of the very significant dif- ference between dowitchers in fresh breeding plumage, like our bird, and the same individuals in worn breeding plumage. For example, Long-billed Dowitcher does not acquire its distinctive, extensively brick-red underparts until well into the breeding season, when the fresh white tips to the underparts feathers have worn off and the brighter portions of these same feathers, originally concealed, are revealed. The extent of reddish or peach tones on the underparts is, therefore, not as developed on fresh spring birds as it is in summer, so we must concentrate on the finer details. Prominent, chevron-shaped white (rather than greyish) tips to the scapulars, and broadly white-tipped, barred (rather than spotted) breast-side feathers - as can just about be imagined on our bird - are consid- ered diagnostic of Long-billed. If you cannot see these differences as being so clear-cut when looking at close-up photos, well, you are not alone! At 200 m, however, it is a different story: a fresh-plumaged Long-billed among Short-billed Dowitchers will look essentially ‘all-dark’ above with prominent white-tipped coverts and scapulars (see plate 13 in (aramillo & Ffenshaw), while the latter have evenly patterned upperparts without the white tips. Unfortu- nately, looking at this photo from a distance of 2 m does not quite do the trick, so we have to look for more clues in the detail. Personally, I would be inclined to ignore the relative widths of the light and dark tail-barring as a potential additional clue; there is some overlap in the patterns, but in this case it really is not sufficiently clear to advance the identification. More useful, perhaps, is the impression that the wing-tips appear to fall slightly short of, or are equal to, the tail; Short-billed usually has wing-tips which extend a fraction beyond the tail. It is not without reason that the two North American dowitchers are considered among the most problematic species-pairs in a field-identification context. Com- parison of our mystery bird with the reference material cited above suggests, on balance, that it is a Long-billed - another photograph of the same bird with its head out of the water makes it look almost easy! It was, indeed, a Long-billed Dowitcher, and was photographed in Texas by Richard Chandler in April 1994. Neatly reflecting my own diffi- culty with this photograph, the vast majority of entrants correctly nar- rowed this down to one of the two North American dowitchers, there being only one or two votes for four other species: Ruff, Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica , Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis and Lesser Yellowlegs T. flavipes. Having got past that stage, there was an almost equal split between the answers for Long-billed (41%) and Short-billed Dowitcher (45%). The results of the early stages of the competition mean that there are a healthy number of people with correct answers to both the opening rounds of the twelfth ‘Marathon’. References Chandler R. J. 1 998. Dowitcher identification and ageing - a photographic review. Brit. Birds 9 1 : 93-106. Jaramillo, A.. & Henshaw, B. 1995. Identification of breeding-plumaged Long- and Short-billed Dowitchers. Birding World 8: 22 1 -228. Sibley, D. 2000. The North American Bird Guide. Mountfield. David Fisher & Killian Mullarney For a free brochure, write to SUNBIRD (MM), PO Box 76, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG 1 9 I DF, or telephone 0 1 767 682969 Sunhird The best of birdwatching tours 1 99. ‘Monthly Marathon'. Photo no. 1 89. Fifth stage in twelfth 'Marathon'. Identify the species. Read the rules (see page 36), then send in your answer on a postcard to Monthly Marathon, c/oThe Banks, Mountfield, Robertsbridge, East Sussex TN32 5JY or by e-mail to editor@britishbirds.co.uk, to arrive by 3 1 st July 2002. 324 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 322-324 Recent reports Compiled by Barry Nightingale and Anthony McGeehan This summary of unchecked reports covers mid April to mid May 2002. White-billed Diver Gavia adamsii Kirkabister (Shetland), 28th April and 6th May; Sango Bay (Highland), 7th May. Great White Egret Egretta alba Unstead sewage farm (Surrey), 20th April; Sand Water, 23rd-24th April, and Voe (both Shetland), 25th April; North Ronaldsay (Orkney), 2nd May. Black Stork Ciconia nigra Hawstead (Suffolk), 1st May; Barlavington (West Sussex), 3rd May. White Stork Ciconia ciconia Two, Orlock Point (Co. Down), 19th April; Cork (Co. Cork), 29th April. ‘Black Brant’ Branta bernicla nigricans Blackrock Strand (Co. Kerry), 23rd-24th April. King Eider Somateria spectabilis Immature male, Dunany Point (Co. Louth), 19th-29th April. Bonaparte’s Gull Larus Philadelphia South Uist (Western Isles), 28th April. Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea Flamborough (East Yorkshire), 1st May. Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybridus Kingmill Reservoir (Nottinghamshire), 2nd May. White- winged Black Tern Chlidonias leucopterus Coatham Marsh, 9th May, and near Catterick, 10th May (both Cleveland). Great Spotted Cuckoo Clamator glandarius Carnesore Point (Co. Wexford), 3rd- 14th April. Alpine Swift Tachymarptis melba Filey Brigg (North Yorkshire), 18th April; Lodmoor and Portland (both Dorset), 21st April; Brean and Weston-super-Mare (both Somerset), 21st April. European Bee-eater Merops apiaster two, Portland (Dorset), 5th May; Dungeness (Kent), 9th May. Black Kite Milvus migrans Little Haldon (Devon), 14th April; near Weymouth (Dorset), 5th May; Sandwich Bay (Kent), 6th May. Red- footed Falcon Falco vespertinus Dunwich Heath (Suffolk), 24th April; Oulton Broad (Suffolk), 4th May; Dungeness (Kent), 5th May. Gyr Falcon Falco rusticolus Tory Island (Co. Donegal), 12th-26th April. Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus Two, Titchfield Haven (Hampshire), 17th April; two, Lakenheath Fen (Suffolk), 8th May. Kentish Plover Charadrius alexandrinus Pegwell Bay (Kent), 18th April; Salthouse (Norfolk), 19th April; Oare Marshes (Kent), 27th April to 1st May; Ferrybridge (Dorset), 29th April. Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca St Kilda (Western Isles), 1st May. Calandra Lark Melanocorypha calandra North Ronaldsay (Orkney), 10th May. Short-toed Lark Calandrella brachydactyla Fair Isle (Shet- land), 5th May; Land’s End (Cornwall), 9th- 10th May. Red-rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica Washington (Co. Durham), 19th April; Port- land (Dorset), 25th April and 3rd May; Tresco (Scilly), 26th April to 1st May; Corfe Castle (Dorset), 27th April; Birstall Gravel-pits (Leicestershire), 29th April; Furzton Lakes (Buckinghamshire), 29th April; Land’s End (Cornwall), 2nd May; Wilstone Reservoir (Hertfordshire), 3rd May; Grove Ferry (Kent), 3rd May; Nanjizal area (Cornwall), 4th-5th May; Kilnsea (East Yorkshire), 4th May. 200. Male American Wigeon Anas americana, Ladywalk NR Warwickshire, April 2002. © British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 325-326 325 lain Leach lain Leach lain Leach Recent reports > 20 1 . Female Garganey Anas querquedula, Ladywalk NR, Warwickshire, April 2002, 202. Male Garganey Anas querquedula, Ladywalk NR, Warwickshire, April 2002. Richard’s Pipit Anthus novaeseelandiae St Martin’s (Scilly), 6th-9th May. Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris St Martin’s (Scilly), 5th May. Red-throated Pipit Anthus cervinus Skomer (Pembrokeshire), 24th-26th April. Thrush Nightingale Luscinia lusclnia Spurn (East York- shire), from at least 9th, to 10th May. Subalpine Warbler Sylvia cantillans Winterton (Norfolk), 22nd-24th April; St Mary’s (Scilly), 26th-28th April. Sardinian Warbler Sylvia melanocephala St Martin’s (Scilly), 2 1 st-25th April. Woodchat Shrike Lanius senator Porthgwarra (Cornwall), 21st April; St Levan (Cornwall), 25th April to 1st May; St Martin’s (Scilly), 3rd May; Cot Valley (Cornwall), 5th-9th May; Port- 203. Kentish Plover Charadrius alexandrinus, Oare Marshes, Kent, April 2002. 204. Spotted Crake Porzana porzana, Belvide Reservoir; Staffordshire, April 2002. land (Dorset), 7th- 10th May. European Serin Serinus serinus Portland (Dorset), 19th April and 27th April; Sennen (Cornwall), 21st April; Greatstone (Kent), 27th April; Dungeness (Kent), 2nd May; Bognor Regis (West Sussex), 3rd May. Rustic Bunting Emberiza rustica West Hove (East Sussex), 10th May. Little Bunting Emberiza pusilla Rame (Cornwall), 24th April; Fair Isle (Shet- land), 30th April and 8th May. 0 Rare Bird News supplies all its information free to British Birds. Call 09063 888 III for the latest, up-to-date news (28p/min cheap rate: 4 1 p/min other times: including VAT) Call 07626 923923 to report your sightings to the hotline 326 British Birds 95 • June 2002 • 325-326 Chris Bond lain Leach Maniago Travel & Cruise* Ltd. rare art/ mare e/ajtae ^retff am/ /ode rfsra& a^Tfeapa Thus twelve-day guided bird safari visits many of Kenya's most precious avifauna habitats , including the Ngong Forest Sanctuary, Arabuko-Sokoke Forest. Mida Creek, Malindi flats, Sabaki River mouth, Samburu Reserve, Lake Baringo, Kakamega Forest and Naimbi National Park The safari will be hosted by Nic Cahill of Wilderness Logistics, and operated by Maniago Travel and Cruises Ltd. Safari ornithologist, Robin Cahill, with more than 28 years birding experience in Kenya, will lead the binding. Accommodation is in luxury hotels and lodges, and air charters are used to cover the larger distances between destinations. The expected number of species to be seen on Safari is in excess of 400 and a number of endemic and endangered species will be among them. Costs. Contacts and Further Information £3,380 per person sharing £3,860 per single Costs include all accommodation, domestic flights and transfers, park fees, meals, guiding, taxes and levies Not included are return flights from your home destination, visas, personal items, bar purchases, gratuities, travel insurance and medical evacuation. For details on safari destinations, birding locations, species to be seen, and further information please visit our website www. wildernesslogistics. com For reservations safari extensions and queries please contact nic@wildemesslogisticscom British Birds Binders are now available directly from the British Birds offices at £7.95 each Contact: Tel: +44 (0)1580 882039 during office hours only: 9.00am-5.30pm Monday to Friday Payment accepted via credit card or sterling cheque New Online Guide to Birding in Norfolk latest sightings • directory of sites • site maps free at: www.birdguides.com Get the latest rare bird news on the Internet rarebirdalert.com Call NOW on: 01603 456789 Classified advertising RATES Text: 50p per word. Minimum cost: £10. Semi-display: Mono. £15 per see (width 40mm) or £32 per dec (width 85mm). Minimum 2cm. Series: 5% discount for 6, 10% discount for 12. (All rates exclude VAT at 17.5%) Payment for all classified advertisements must be made in advance by VISA, Mastercard or by cheque payable to British Birds. Copy deadline: 10th of the month. Contact: Ian Lycett, Solo Publishing Ltd., 3D/F Leroy House, 436 Essex Road, London N 1 3QP. Tel: 020 7704 9495. Fax: 020 7704 2627. E-mail: ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk BIRDWATCHING HOLIDAYS BOOKS HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION KIMBERLEY, AUSTRALIA - BIRDING tours. Experienced, knowledgeable ornithological guide - George Swann. Bushwalking, 4WD safaris, coastal cruises. Small groups. Charters available. Kimberley Birdwatching, PO Box 220, Broome, Western Australia 6725 Tel/Fax: +61 8 9192 1246. Email: kimbird@tpg.com.au Web Site: www4.tpg.com.au/users/kimbird SAKERTOUR - THE CARPATHIAN Birding Company. Hungary, Slovakia, Romania. All Central European Specialities. Ten years of experience in professional guiding: Z. Ecsedi and J. Olah jr. extensive local contacts. H-4032 Debrecen, Tarjan 6, Hungary. Tel/Fax: 36-66- 210390. Email: saker@axelero.hu www.sakertour.hu Updated Hungarian Birdnews. CASSOWARY HOUSE Rainforest Guest House Cassowaries! Riflcbirds! Red-necked Crakes = A great birding destination. 14 regional endemics arounc Atherton Tablelands, plus als< Caims/Great Barrier Reef. Beautiful relaxing location, excellent food, expert local guiding. Phil and Sue Gregory. Phone: (61) 740 937318 Fax: (61) '-*() 939855 E-mail: sicklebill@austarnet.com.au Website: www.cassowary-house.com.au Cassowary House, Blackmountain Road, PO Box 387, Kuranda 4872, Queensland, Australia. BIRDWATCHING 426 Species 26 Endemics Tours tailor-made to suit your requirements In Sri Lanka HIGH ELMS TRAVEL (PVT) LIMITED 02, 3rd Lane, Nawala Road Rajagiriya Sri Lanka Tel. 94 1 861 465/94 1 861 466 Fax. 94 1 861 464 e-mail, highelms@itmin.com www.highelmstravel.com BOOKS BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD. Visit our website for our online catalogue Visit our shop and see our extensive collection. Hawkridge Books, The Cruck Barn, Cross St, c ,.i st let on , Derbyshire S30 2WH. Tel: 01433 621999. Fax: 01433 621862. Email: books@hawkridge.co.uk. Web: www.hawkridge.co.uk The original BIRDWATCHER’S LOGBOOK The most concise way to record your observations. Monthly, annual and life columns for 762 species, plus 159 diary pages. Send £7.45 inclusive P/P to: Coxton Publications, Eastwood, Beverley Rd, Walkington, 8everley. HU17 8RP. 01482 881833 RARE AND OUT OF PRINT books on Ornithology. Isabelline Books. Tel: 01326 210412. Fax: 0870 051 6387. BACK NUMBERS OF ALL leading ornithological and natural history journals, reports, bulletins, newsletters, etc. bought and sold. Catalogue details: David Morgan, Whitmore, Umberleigh, Devon EX37 9HB or www.birdjournals.com FOR SALE BRITISH BIRDS BINDERS - WIREX. Eight old size, two new size. Also rarities reports 1990-1996 and volume 90 ( 1997) complete. Tel: 01737 379554. BRITISH BIRDS 1983-1999. Reasonable offers considered. Also past copies of bird journals and reports including USA selection (list available). Tel: 0208 368 5403 or Email: david.lowman@which.net LEICA APO SCOPE. 32x WW plus case and tripod. Swarovski 10 x 42 SLC binoculars. Call for details. All mint. Tel: 07989 405533. HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION England LANCS/CUMBRIA - LEIGHTON MOSS. Next to nature reserves. Luxury ground floor flat, sleeps 4. Quiet. Parking. Tel: 01908 251054 NORFOLK - CLEY. FLINT COTTAGE in centre of village. 3 bedrooms, sleeps 5/6. From £65 per night. 91223 871787. Email: clanparker@aol.com SCOTIAND 16TH CENTURY CASTLE. SPEYSIDE. Sleeps 8/10 on s/c basis. STB***. From £690pw. Weekends also available. Ideal for Loch Garten/Abernethy/Insh/Cairngorms. Tel: 01738 477510. Email: ataylor@fpdsavilIs.co.uk ELLARY ESTATE - MOST ATTRACTIVE choice of self-catering cottages and chalets situated on the shores of Loch Caolisport. While you are at Hilary you are free to go wherever you please. There are hill walks, many lochs and burns where you can fish, numerous wildlife, birds, flowers, etc. The perfect location for the true country lover. For a full colour brochure please write to: The Booking Office, Ellary 7, Lochgilphead, Argyll PA31 SPA. Tel: 01880 770232. Fax: 01880 770386. Email: info@ellary.com SPEYSIDE, NF.THY BRIDGE cottages by river & forest. Private gardens, sleep 2-9 STB *••/**•*' See Capercaillie, Osprey and Golden Eagles. Tel: 01309 672505. www.speysidecottages.co.uk Overseas SINEMORETZ, BULGARIA Villa Philadelphia is a cosy six-room Bulgarian-Amcrican Inn offering exclusive service and excellent opportunities for birding in a once closed rcgion:w ww.villaphiladelphia.com F. m a i 1 : t o u r s @ v i 1 1 a p h i latl e I p h i a . c o m r«l:215. 517. 7639 (USA), 4 159.88 55 16 86 (BG). Overseas PROVENCE, CAMARGUE. Two s/c cottages. Rogers, Mas d’Auphan, Le Sambuc, 13200 ARLES, France. Tel: (0033) 490972041, Fax: (0033) 490972087. OPTICAL EQUIPMENT Binoculars & Telescopes Top Makes, Top Models, Top Advice, Top Deals, Part Exchange Show Room Sales 01925 730399 Orcten 07000 247392 Credit! debit cards accepted SOFTWARE Easy Birding Database For your records and lists. Add your own Photos, Video and sound. CD World £35. W Pal £30 For Windows 95/98/ME/XP/2000 Everett Assoc Ltd. 01263 860035 Longnor House, Gunthorpe, Norfolk NR24 2NS www.birdsoftware.co.uk TRANSLATORS FOR ALL ORNITHOLOGICAL translations from English into French, please contact Marc Albrecht on Email: albrecht.m@wanadoo.fr Tel/Fax: France 03 84 24 79 02 for a quick cost estimate and high- quality work. WANTED DESPERATELY SEEKING 16-20 OLD-SIZED British Bud- binders (Cordex ONLH Dd Nicholas Green 020 7485 9280. For all advertising enquirieSoContact Ian Lycett on: 020 7704 9495 ian.lycett@birdwatch.co.uk ome to BB Books, the new mailorder service from British Birds. In the June issue we are pleased to present around 180 titles, ly 30 of these at special offer prices (denoted in red). oooks included in BB Books are recommended by British Birds as reliable, good value and important additions to any vatcher's library. We aim to provide the most prompt, efficient and friendly service possible. Doks fulfilment is provided by NHBS Ltd in association with British Birds ntage of our excellent selection. ■ • Collins Illustrated Checklist: Birds of West Africa P)S Ber Van Perlo | Essential guide for identifying over 1500 species, giving information on key identification features, habitat, and songs ^ and calls. All plumages for each species are illustrated, including | * 1 males, females and juveniles. □ #11 5638 1 9.99 pbk each sale benefits the journal, so please take Conserving Bird Biodiversity Ken Norris, Deborah J Pain Presents a wide ranging review of bird conservation issues, illustrated with results from actual conservation projects. A must for students, practitioners and researchers in conservation biology & ornithology. □ #127106 27.95 pbk □ #127105 75.00 hbk Birds of Western Africa: An Identification Guide Nik Borrow, Ron Demey Major handbook covering 1282 species occuring in the western countries of Africa. The guide is illustrated with 142 colour plates covering all the species described and distribution maps are provided for the majority of species. □ #40675 49.50 55.06 hbk Extraordinary Pheasants Stephen Green-Armytage Author and photographer Green-Armytage presents a folio of stunning photographs showing the pheasant in all its glorious forms. The varieties included range from the Ringneck pheasant, some popular with hunters, to the Congo peacock. □ #129412 16.95 hbk A Farewell to Greenland's Wildlife Kjeld Hansen A candid and moving story about Greenlanders' enormously wasteful hunting and fishing practices, that are rapidly denuding an arctic landscape of its wildlife. □ #127173 13.00 15.00 pbk Evolutionary Ecology of Birds Peter Marren Employing phylogenetic comparative methods and a database of up to 3000 species, the authors identify the ecological and evolutionary basis of many diversity issues. The most comprehen- sive reappraisal of avian diversity since David Lack's classic Ecological Adaptations for Breeding in Birds. □ #123874 24.95 pbk □ #123873 55.00 hbk Sjpae and Western Palearctic > of Breeding Birds of Lancashire and Merseyside 1997-2000 - #127825 ; in Counties - Ballance - #106513 ; of Europe - Jonsson - #49559 1 2.99 dwatching Guide to Eastern Spain - #108192 9.95 ■ ; of Israel - Shirihai - #21254 . of the Western Palearctic - Concise - #50548 35.00 : of the Western Palearctic - Complete (9 Vols) - #32807 ns Bird Guide - Svensson et al. - #113220 1 2.99 ns Bird Guide: Large Format - #106883 22.99 ; of the Western Palearctic - (CD) - Cramp & Perrins - #28660 ; Atlas of European Breeding Birds - #53830 ; of Britain & Europe - Peterson etal. - #22327 Guide to Birds of the Middle East - #45653 25.99 ng Birds in Britain - Lee GR Evans - #123780 X • New to Britain & Ireland - Palmer - #1 1 1 106 J Jbook of Bird Identification Beaman & Madge - #17061 52.00 j irical Atlas of Breeding birds in Britain & Ireland - #44008 ndic Bird Guide - #120994 27.99 it tification Guide to Non-passerines - Baker - #29342 it tification Guide to European Passerines - Svensson - #889 c irtant Bird Areas of Europe - Heath 8. Evans - #101969 Macmillan Birder's Guide to European and i Eastern birds - #52543 Macmillan Field Guide to Bird Identification - #24237 Atlas of Breeding Birds - Gibbons et al. - #20923 oik: A Birdwatcher's Site Guide - Benstead et al - #126833 Birds of Britain and Europe - #128192 Handbook of British Birds - #125991 re to Watch Birds Herefordshire, Shrops, Warwickshire, Worcs - Helm - #65059 tre to Watch Birds in Thames Valley and the ns - Helm - #125993 i America der's Guide to Florida - #779 der's Guide to the Rio Grande Valley - #100616 der's Guide to SE Arizona - #44527 der's Guide to S. California - #86478 I Guide to the Birds of N. America - Nat Geographic - #88711 mingbirds of North America - #119786 i uide to N. American Birds Part 1 - Pyle - #75330 l American Bird Guide - Sibley - #106918 35.00 hbk 89.00 in nc rt/rtTO 78.95 A Cl CA ‘47. Dv7 250.00 i a an I O.T7V 29.99 116.33 59.95 hbk 19.99 hbk -9Tr95 hbk 19.95 25.00 -65T3© hbk 31.95 hbk -322)5 hbk 19.50 pbk 36.00 pbk 75.00 pbk 17.99 hbk hbk pbk pbk hbk hbk hbk pbk hbk CD pbk hbk pbk hbk spr 14.99 53.95 12.95 16.99 pbk 9.99 pbk 12.99 pbk pbk 14.99 17.95 24.50 22.95 24.50 12.99 pbk 19.95 pbk 29.99 spr spr spr spr □The Sibley Guide to Bird Life and Behaviour - #124065 South & Central America & Caribbean □Where to Watch Birds in Mexico - Howell - #85698 □The Birds of Ecuador vol 1 - Ridgeiy & Greenfield - #21379 □The Birds of Ecuador vol 2 - Ridgeiy & Greenfield - #1 17744 □The Birds of Ecuador, 2-volume set - #118677 □ Birds, Mammals & Reptiles of the Galapagos - Swash & Still -#86419 □ Birds of the West Indies - Raffaele et al. - #69140 □Collins Field Guide: Birds of the West Indies - #128700 □ Birds of Southern S. America - de la Pena & Rumboll - #66504 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Peru - Clements et al - #63442 □Guide to Birds of Costa Rica - Stiles et al. - #4386 □Guide to Birds of Trinidad & Tobago - French - #14770 □ Lista de las Aves de Colombia /Checklist of the Birds of Colombia - #126076 Africa, Middle East & Indian Ocean Islands □The Birds of Africa vol 1 - Fry etal. - #571 □The Birds of Africa vol 2 - Fry et al. - #572 □The Birds of Africa vol 3 - Fry et al. - #2780 □The Birds of Africa vol 4 - Fry et al. - #10567 □The Birds of Africa vol 5 - Fry etal. - #19103 □The Birds of Africa vol 6 - Fry et al. - #19104 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - #40871 □ Birds of Madagascar: a Photographic Guide - #54245 □Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of Eastern Africa - #43706 □Collins lllus. Checklist: Birds of S Africa - #86446 □ Birds of East Africa - Stevenson 8 Fanshawe - #22326 □ Birds of the Gambia & Senegal - Barlow et al. - #31919 □ Birds of Kenya & Northern Tanzania - field guide - #127592 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Seychelles - #116115 □ Important Bird Areas in Africa and Assoc Islands - #120103 □SASOL Birds of Prey of Africa & its islands - #85607 □ Birdwatching Guide to Oman - Erlksen et al. - #126092 □ Birds of the Indian Ocean Islands - #70343 35.00 hbk 15.99 pbk 44.00 rtr no “,w pbk 32.00 /in no pbk 64.00 o n nn OU.Uu pbk 13.99 1 c nc 1 O.JZ) pbk 28.99 qc nn 3D Wv hbk 19.99 hbk 14.99 ■j Q QQ pbk 36.99 /in nn ■*4\7T\7V7 pbk 32.00 /in nn w;vu pbk 25.00 jnnn 3 a .w pbk 12.00 pbk 130.00 hbk 130.00 hbk 130.00 hbk 115.00 hbk 120.00 hbk 115.00 hbk 40.00 hbk 28.00 hbk 16.99 -19t99 pbk 19.99 pbk 29.95 hbk 28.00 hbk 16.99 pbk 25.00 pbk 55.00 hbk 19.99 pbk 20.00 pbk 17.99 pbk Asia & Pacific □The Birds of Japan - #10075 □The Birds of New Guinea - #1683 22.00 -40^0 hbk 35.00 pbk □Checklist of Birds of the Oriental Region - #54331 □ Field Guide to Birds of Bhutan - #97388 □ Field Guide to the Birds of China - #101745 □ Field Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #66407 □ A Field Guide to the Birds of Korea - #1 19805 □Field Guide to the Birds of Nepal - #107846 □Field Guide to the Birds of SE Asia - Robson - #126456 □ Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka - #83310 □ Field Guide to Birds of W. Malaysia 8 Singapore - #83306 □ A Guide to the Birds of Fiji and Western Polynesia - #125340 □Guide to the Birds of the Philippines - #101746 □Guide to the Birds of Thailand • #9945 □Guide to the Birds of Wallacea - #31250 □ A Photographic Guide to Birds of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore - #121749 □Pocket Guide to Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - #126854 □ Birdwatchers' Guide to India - #82704 □Threatened Birds of Asia (2 Vol Set) - BirdLife - #120107 □Threatened Birds of Asia CD-ROM - #125996 10.00 pbk 16.99 pbk 29.99 pbk 25.00 hbk 24.95 pbk 19.99 pbk 19.99 pbk 29.95 pbk 32.50 pbk 22.50 hbk 34.95 pbk 45.00 hbk 41.00 hbk 7.99 pbk 17.99 pbk 18.75 pbk 55.00 hbk 12.00 CD Australasia □Collins Field Guide to Birds of Australia - #88226 1 6.99 1 9.99 pbk □ Field Guide to Australian Birds - Morcombe - #122064 23.95 pbk □ HANZAB vol 1 - Marchant 8 Higgins - #10556 155.00 hbk □ HANZAB vol 2 - Marchant & Higgins - #10667 75.00 hbk □ HANZAB vol 3 - Marchant & Higgins - #10668 75.00 hbk □ HANZAB vol 4 - Marchant & Higgins - #10669 1 45.00 hbk □ HANZAB vol 5 - Marchant & Higgins - #10670 125.00 1 35.00 hbk □The Hand Guide to the Birds of New Zealand - #116574 19.50 pbk World □ Birds of the World: a checklist - Clements - #101888 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 1 - #17555 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 2 - #17556 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 3 - #17557 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 4 - #17558 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 5 - #17559 □ Handbook of Birds of the World vol 6 - #17561 □ Handbook of Birds of the World. Vol7 - #17562 □Threatened Birds of the World - BirdLife - #110198 □World Bird Species Checklist - Wells - #77401 35.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 110.00 hbk 70.00 hbk 25.00 hbk Monographs □ Albatrosses - Tickell - #101886 □The Atlantic Gannet - Nelson - #123245 □ Buntings & Sparrows - Byers et al. - #21255 □The California Condor - Snyder 8. Snyder - #105565 □Crows & Jays - Madge & Burn - #97387 □Cuckoos, Cowbirds & other cheats - Davies - #104272 □ Raptors of Europe, Middle East & N. Africa - Clark & Schmitt - #54599 □ Finches & Sparrows - Clement et al. - #97396 □The Golden Eagle - Watson - #53818 □The Great Auk - Fuller - #101 175 □Gulls: A guide to identification - Grant - #580 □Swallows & Martins - Turner & Rose - #3929 40.00 hbk 24.50 hbk 28.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 16.99 pbk 24.95 hbk 29.50 pbk 19.99 pbk 31.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 27.99 hbk □The Hobby - Chapman - #103400 □ Munias and Mannikins - Restall - #54237 1S.40 □The Mute Swan - Birkhead & Perrins - #1165 □ New World Blackbirds - Jaramillo & Burke - #82707 □ New World Warblers - Curson et al - #29510 □ Nightjars - Cleere - #65487 1 6.50 □ Nightjars 8 their Allies - Holyoak - #105584 □The Nuthatches - Matthysen & Quinn - #69079 □Owls - Konig et al - #66408 □ Parrots - Juniper & Parr - #65486 □The Peregrine - Ratcliffe - #858 □ Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse - #66365 □ Pigeons 8 Doves - Gibbs et al. - #66403 □ Pittas, Broadbills and Asities - #29868 □ Rails - Taylor & van Perlo - #66402 □ Raptors of Europe and the Middle East - Foreman - #55844 23.95 □ Raptors of the World - Ferguson-Lees et al. - #5601 □ Ratites and Tinamous - #105583 □The Red Kite - Carter - #115639 □Seabirds: An Identification Guide - Harrison - #851 □Seabirds of the World: A photographic guide Harrison - #63122 □ Shorebirds - Hayman et al. - #554 □Shrikes - Lefranc & Worfolk - #54240 □Shrike 8 Bush-Shrikes - Harris 8 Franklin - #105227 □Skuas 8 Jaegers - Olsen & Larsen - #63425 □Starlings 8 Mynas - Feare & Craig - #82706 □Sunbirds 8 Flowerpeckers - Cheke & Mann - #66414 □ Swifts - Chantler & Driessens - #86417 □ Sylvia Warblers - Shirihai et al. - #107849 □Thrushes - Clement et al. - #107850 □Tits, Nuthatches 8 Treecreepers - Harrap & Quinn - #13707 □Toucans, Barbets and Honeyguides - short 8 Horne - #101743 □Tundra Plovers - Byrkjedal 8 Thompson - #69080 □Warblers of Europe, Asia 8 N. Africa - Baker - #65060 □Wildfowl - Madge 8 Burn - #2621 □Wrens, Dippers 8 Thrashers - Brewer - #66416 Recordings & Videos □African Bird Sounds, 2-Volume Set - Chappuis: North, West & Central Africa and Atlantic Islands - #1 19048 □ Bill Oddies's Video Guide to British Birds - #98805 □The Birds of Britain and Europe, 4-Video Set - #39466 □ Bird Songs and Calls of Britain and Europe (Complete 4 CD Set) - #63342 □ Eastern Rarities: The Birds of Beidaihe - #86435 □Video Guide to the Gulls of Europe, Asia and North America - Oddie 8 Doherty - #126592 □The Raptors of Britain and Europe - Video - #49316 □Sound Guide to Nightjars 8 related Nightbirds- #82371 8.28 □ A Sound Guide to the Owls of the World - #84226 □The Warblers of Britain and Europe - Video - #86434 Miscellaneous □ Bird Migration: A General Survey - #1 19016 □ Birders - tales of a tribe - Cocker - #120708 □The Birds of Heaven - #127165 16.00 □The Lost World of the Moa - #122238 22.50 hbk TO Aft cO.UU hbk 15.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 27.99 hbk -BS^O hbk 50.00 hbk 25.95 hbk 35.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 36.95 hbk 45.00 hbk 38.00 hbk 26.00 hbk 35.00 hbk -29t95 hbk 49.00 hbk 49.50 hbk 22.50 hbk 29.99 hbk 15.99 pbk 29.99 hbk 25.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 24.00 hbk 32.00 hbk 37.00 hbk 28.00 hbk 60.00 hbk 35.00 hbk 29.99 hbk 60.00 hbk 29.95 hbk 32.00 hbk 29.99 hbk 1 35.00 hbk 159.95 CD 17 95 vid 49 94 vid 39.95 CD 17.95 vid 27.95 vid 17.95 vid | ~+4t99 CD 24.99 CD 17.95 vid i 27.50 pbk 15.99 hbk ta r>n hbk 57.00 hbk BB binders are now available from British Birds, tel: 01580 882039 Prices quoted in £ (UK Sterling). All special offer prices are valid until 31 July 2002, other prices quoted are subject to any publishers increases and all sales subject to NHBS Ltd Terms & Conditions (available on request). VAT is included in the price of CDs, Videos etc as applicable. Make all cheques and POs payable to NHBS Ltd. Payment can also be made in USS & C, please contact customer services for details. Orders are normally despatched promptly from stock, but please allow up to 21 days for delivery in the UK, longer if abroad. Name Address Postcode Subscriber No Email Please sign here Telephone Goods total £ P&P total £ Total £ Please debit my Visa/Mastercard/Switch/ AMEX Switch - Start Issue No AMEX - Start date Expiry date / Code VISA Standard Service (books) postage & packing charges and delivery times Special overseas postage rates apply to sets & heavy items Video Maps/CDs Over In transit (Per (Per Up to and £5.00 including £10.00 £30.00 £45.00 £65.00 £100 £100 times (from despatch) item) item) United Kingdom£1.00 £2.00 £4.00 £4.50 £5.50 £7.50 £7.50 3 days £2.00 £1.25 Europe £1.50 £4.00 £5.00 £6.50 £8.50 £10.50 11% 5 days £2.50 £1.50 Rest of World £2.00 £4.50 £6.00 £7.00 £10.00 16% 16% 20 days £3.00 £2.00 Please send order to: BB Books, do NHBS Ltd, 2-3 Wills Rd, Totnes, Devon TQ9 5XN, UK Fax 01803 865280 Tel 01803 865913 email bb-books@nhbs.com - always quote bb-books when orderi Guidelines for contributors British Birds publishes material dealing with original observations on the birds of the Western Palearctic. Except for records of rarities, papers and notes are normally accepted for publication only on condition that the material is not being offered in whole or in part to any other journal or magazine. Photographs and drawings are welcomed. Referees are used where appropriate, and all submissions are reviewed by the B8 Editorial Board or Notes Panel. Contributions should, if possible, be submitted on disk or (preferably) by e-mail, to the Editor. Most word-processing applications are suitable, but, if you are not using an up-to-date, standard program, it is best to submit two versions, one in the original word-processed format and one in a basic text format such as RTF (Rich Text Format). For contributors without access to a computer, text should be submitted in duplicate, typewritten, with double spacing and wide margins, and on one side of the paper only. Hand-drawn figures should be in black ink on good-quality tracing paper or white drawing paper; lettering should be inserted lightly in pencil, while captions should be typed separately. Please discuss computer-generated maps and figures with the Editor before submitting them. For use in main papers, notes and letters, photographs should preferably be either 35-mm transparencies or high-quality prints. Digital images are acceptable, but, to ensure good reproduction, these should be saved as a TIFF or an EPS file with a resolution of no more than 300 dpi and an image width of at least 13 cm and supplied on a CD-ROM. Digital images with lower resolution, or in other formats (e.g. JPEGs), do not reproduce well, and will be used more sparingly, and usually only when there is no alternative (for example, for ‘Recent reports’). Digital images should be sent to the Design and Production team at The Banks (see inside front cover), and large images should be submitted on CD-ROM. With the increasing use of digital photography, some photographers will wish to supply images taken with digital cameras. To ensure that our high standard of photographic reproduction is maintained, however, we would ask all photographers to read the Code of Practice for the Supply of Digital Images issued by the Association of Photographers, posted on its website as a downloadable Adobe Acrobat PDF file www.aophoto.co.uk/aoppdfs/DIGcode.pdf Only images of the very highest quality, supplied as a 35-mm transparency, will be considered for a front-cover illustration. Papers should be concise and factual, taking full account of previous literature and avoiding repetition as much as possible. Opinions should be based on adequate evidence. Authors are encouraged to submit their work to other ornithologists for critical assessment and comment prior to submission. Such help received should be acknowledged in a separate section. For main papers, an abstract summarising the key results and conclusions should be included, but should not exceed 5% of the total length. Authors should carefully consult this issue for style of presentation, especially of references and tables. English and scientific names and sequence of birds should follow The ‘British Birds’ List of Birds of the Western Palearctic ( 1 997); or, for non- West Palearctic species, Monroe & Sibley (1993), A World Checklist of Birds. Names of plants should follow Dony et al. (1986), English Names of Wild Flowers. Names of mammals should follow Corbet & Harris (1991), The Handbook of British Mammals, 3rd edition. Topographical (plumage and structure) and ageing terminology should follow editorial recommendations (Brit. Birds 74: 239-242; 78; 4 1 9-427; 80: 502). Authors of main papers (but not notes or letters) will receive five free copies of the journal (plus three each to subsidiary authors of multi-authored papers). Further copies may be available on request in advance, but will be charged for. A schedule of payment rates for contributors (including authors, artists and photographers) is available from the Editor. Don’t miss our £990 selection for 2002 www.naturetrek.co.uk These action-packed, long-haul hireling tours - each led by an expert local ornithologist - offer excellent value for money, and outstanding birding. ETHIOPIA NAMIBIA 08-17 Feb 2002 18-27 Jan 2002 29 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 08-17 Feb 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 ETHIOPIAN NEPAL Departs every ENDEMICS Friday throughout 15-24 Feb 2002 Jan & Feb 05 - 14 Apr 2002 03-12 May 2002 22 Nov -01 Dec 2002 17-26 May 2002 FLORIDA NEPAL - THE IBISBILL TREK 08-17 Feb 2002 10 - 19 May 2002 GAMBIA 24 May - 02 Jun 2002 SOUTH AFRICA 25 Oct - 05 Nov 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 INDIA 08-16 Feb 2002 29 Mar - 06 Apr 2002 05- 14 Apr 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SOUTH AFRICA - 15-23 Nov 2002 CAPE BIRDING KAZAKHSTAN 23 Mar - 1 Apr 2002 23 Aug -01 Sep 2002 06-15 Sep 2002 16-24 May 2002 23-31 May 2002 SOUTHERN MALAWI MOROCCO 15-24 Feb 2002 01 - 10 Mar 2002 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 08-17 Mar 2002 13-22 Sep 2002 SRI LANKA 08-17 Feb 2002 15-24 Feb 2002 22 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 15-24 Mar 2002 15-24 Nov 2002 WASHINGTON STATE 1 3 - 2 1 Apr 2002 ZAMBIA 08-17 Feb 2002 05 - 14 Apr 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 THAILAND 08-17 Feb 2002 25 Oct - 03 Nov 2002 UAE & OMAN 24 Feb - 03 Mar 2002 31 Mar - 07 Apr 2002 10 - 17 Nov 2002 If you would like further details of a particular tour, please call us now! Or visit Naturetrek, Cheriton Mill, Cheriton, Alresford, Hampshire S024 ONG Tel: 0 1 962 73305 1 Fax: 0 1 962 736426 e-mail: info@naturetrek.co.uk web: www.naturetrek.co.uk