ZS 7Z 1 1 » ' "*t 4 -t >ii« :'f i- '± , S;- Is^sa!• CEM BIC K- J A N U A K V, 19^9 y>- SlIADIM; EASED D\ THE SUM OE MAXIMUM SINGLE COUNTS EOK rLACKS IN EACH VICK-COUNTY MOKE THAN TEN MILES Al’AKT. VOL. .XLv.] LESSER BLACK- BACKED GULL. 5 cases, and appreciative thanks are offered to all who have collected data for the Enquiry in either winter, sometimes in very uncom- fortable conditions. In an enquiry largely concerned with numbers and distribution it is tempting to record results on maps, but such a method would be misleading in the present instance without detailed explanatory notes. An accurate census of any considerable area is very difficult to make in winter, and single counts may represent either a sedentary population or a party passing through. A single map is included to give a general impression of the distribution of Lesser Black-backs in the more fully reported winter, but it should be remembered that no information was received from large areas of Scotland, Wales and Ireland, and from a few inland vice-counties of England. A more accurate record of the distribution of both gulls and observers is provided by the Regional Survey, which summarizes data received on numbers seen in various parts of the British Isles, classified according to the groups of Watsonian vice-counties. A few occur- rences have been recorded by “ outside ” observers visiting the given locality, but in the great majority of cases the mention of a single date and place implies that no other Lesser Black-backs were seen there in regular observations through the winter. The following brief summaries of weather conditions in the eight months of the Enquiry are obtained from the Monthly Weather Reports of the Meteorological Office : November, iq.jQ ; Unsettled, mainly rather mild, especially in the north and north-west. December ; Mainly unsettled and mild, with frequent gales in the west and north. January, 1950 : Remarkable for a very mild spell in the first half of the month and a really cold spell in the second half. February : Unsettled and wet ; mild in the south but rather cold in the north. November, 1950 ; Excessive rainfall in England and Wales ; rather cold and sunny on the whole in Scotland and Northern Ireland. December : Distinguished by extremely low mean tempera- ture and frequent, and, at times, heavy snowfall. Jiuiuary, 1951 ; Rather cold except in the south-east ; unsettled and wet on the whole, with considerable snowfall at times. February : Unsettled and rather cold, with frequent snow or sleet showers in some places. Summary of Winter Distribution, 1949-1951. Mid-winter Lesser Black-backs have been reported in at least one of the two winters from all the vice-county groups (as shown in the Regional Survey) of England and Wales and from Scotland and Ireland, but in most areas records have been of occasional occurrences or of one or two sedentarv individuals. Late migrants (5 BRITISH BIRDS. [V()i.. x\,y. were still passing through in November in both years, but these lingering birds were much more numerous in the north of England than in the south and were general!}' later in 1949 than in 1950. Return migration in February was noticeable in both years, but in most areas was earlier and on a larger scale in 1951, considerable numbers reaching north Lancashire and Westmorland by h'ebruary I2th-i3th. One to two dozen birds spent the winter of 1949-50 in the neigli- bourhood of London, Bristol and Cardiff ; in the second winter there was an increase at Bristol and perhaps a similar group near Gloucester, but probably a slight decrease in London. Nottingham was remarkable for the large numbers in November, 1949, but only a few stayed through the winter and there were smaller numbers in November, 1950. On the reservoirs north of Leeds there were also many in November, but, apart from a temporary absence in Decem- l)er, 1950, tw'enty to thirty remained in January, though numbers dropped sharply in February in both years. There were hundreds near Burnley and Colne in November each year, and thirty or more I)robably spent the winter in the district. Morecambe had a resident population of well over a hundred birds throughout the first winter, and a decrease of 30-40 in the second may be partly accounted for b}' an increase at Grange, on the north shore of Morecambe Ba\\ 'fen were seen together in Ayrshire in December- January, 1949-50, and further search might discover regular residents in the Clyde area. Comparison wuh Previous Winters Information received on this aspect of the Enquiry did not give ^'ery much indication of long-term trends. Observers in several areas stated that mid-winter occurrences had been rare or absent in recent years, notably in Dorset, Hertfordshire, East Anglia, West Wales, the West Midlands, south and east Yorkshire, North- umberland, Isle of Man, the Lowlands of Scotland, and Ireland. However, there is .some evidence of recent change in the following localities : in Cornwall Mr. C. J. Stevens had seen large numbers of Lesser Black-backs on Par Beach or the river Fowey for a few' days in mid-winter in some of the years betw'een 1940 and 1949, e.g., c. 100 on December 29th and 30th, 1944 ; at least 100 on December 19th, 1945, and c. 300 January 20th to 23rd, 1947. seems possible from the irregularity and short duration of these visitations that they may be due to weather movements from further north. In the London area wintering birds have been recorded each year since Mr. Fitter’s note in 1943, and numbers have increased, as is show'n by a count of tw'enty on Hampton filter beds on January 21st, 1948. These larger numbers seem to be associated with an increasing exploitation bv the tliree common species of “ big gulls ” of the facilities offered by London and its reservoirs for feeding, bathing and roosting. At Nottingham the number of late autumn and winter birds seems to have increased noticeably, and the w'intcr Lc'sser Black-backs on the Leeds reservoirs have apparently only been VOL. XLv.] LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL. / recorded in recent years. On the Nortli Wales coast, however, tluac- has been a marked decline since the period 1940-45, when Mr. T. S. Williams saw numbers up to fifty on the Welsh side of the Dee estuary. Mr. A. W. Boyd has had winter occurrences on the Cheshire flashes only since 1928, and in the last few years they have become regular. The large numbers in east Lancashire are a recent develop- ment and seem to be connected with offal tipping. On Morecambe Ba^^ numbers have remained fairly steady since 1945, but there is evidence of a large increase over a longer period. The late Mr. H. W. Robinson of Lancaster recorded the winter of 1920-21 as excep- tional {antea, vol. xiv, p. 236). Between December 2nd and 23rd he saw none of either form, but between December 23rd and January loth saw “ generally pairs and single birds,” and on January nth ” six together, of which five were Scandinavian and one British.” Much larger numbers than these can now be seen in Lancaster, and still more in Morecambe, every winter. It thus appears that, excluding the erratic Cornish figures, there has been an increase in six areas, a decrease in one, and no recent change in several others. If the Enquiry could be repeated in ten years’ time it should show whether the apparent trend towards an increase in the number of residents is a real one. Comments on Distribution A few conclusions may be drawn from the data supplied by the Enquiry. I. Winter distribution is not primarily governed by climatic conditions. Not only is the winter population in the north of England much larger than in the south, but one of the largest groups, at Laneshawbridge near Colne, is found in an exposed situation on the Pennines at about 800 feet above sea level. The Yorkshire reservoirs are also at a considerable altitude, and the Morecambe beach and promenade frequented by scores of Lesser Black-backs through the winter receive the full force of the north-westerly gales. 2. The majority of mid-winter birds is found within a 45-mile radius of a single large breeding colony in the Pennines. Although the rapid growth of this gullery since its establishment in about 1937 has coincided with the virtual extinction of the colonies on the Kent and Leven estuaries and a probable decrease at Walney, it has almost certainly increased the total Lesser Black-back population of north-west England. Addition of the maximum single counts for each locality in January, 1950, gives a total of 185 inside this 45-mile radius and 105 outside. Of the latter group 38 were seen within 30 miles of the Bristol Channel colonies. The inference that most wintering birds derive from local breeding colonies is confirmed by the only mid-winter ringing recovery in the British Isles of a fully adult Lesser Black-back : ringed at Foulshaw, Westmorland, 26.7.35, recovered Leven Estuary, 10 miles W.S.W., 2.1.48. The 8 BRITISH BIRDS. [V(M,. XI.V. exceptional tameness of the Morccaml:)e birds at all seasons also suggests that some of the same individuals are present through- out the year. At a rough estimate the minimum mid-winter population of Lancashire and Yorkshire might amount to 3 to 5% of the breeding population. 3. Many other large breeding colonies, in Scotland, Ireland, Pem- brokeshire and the Scilly Isles, leave \'ery few winter residents or none at all. It may be pointed out that the gulls from thi- Pennines and Walney, Lancashire, and to some extent thos(' from the Bristol Channel colonies, have excellent opportunities for acquiring scavenging habits during the summer, and it will be shown later that most of the wintering birds feed in or near towns. Birds from the Irish, Welsh, Scilly, and most of the Scottish colonics must be almost entirelv dependent on natural foods which would be less easily obtainable in winter. Although Professor Meiklejohn reports that there are many Lesser Black- backs in Glasgow in summer and none in winter it is j)ossible that, as is suggested above, there may be wintering birds in other parts of soufh-west Scotland. 4. In spite of the severe weather of December, 1950, there was no marked movement of Lesser Black-backs to the south and south- west ; but the increase in the Bristol-Gloucester area in that winter and the decrease at Morecambe, Nottingham, and perhaps London, suggests a slight drift in that direction. There are also signs of mid-winter invasions of Cornwall in previous years. There is evidence from Yorkshire that these movements may be connected with the freezing of the inland waters on which the gulls roost and bathe. Lesser Black-backs are much addicted to fresh-water bathing at all seasons, and even the coastal birds would be affected to some extent by the freezing of neigh- bouring waters. '1'he British and Scandinavian Races. This is not the place to discuss the validity of subspecilic distinc- tions, but it is a known fact that Lesser Black-backs breeding in northern Scandinavia and Russia have much darker mantles than those breeding in the British Isles. There is, of course, some indi- vidual variation, and there are well authenticated records of some birds with darker mantles than the normal British type (Luriis fuscus graellsii) nesting on the Scillies. Nevertheless a Lesser Black-back with a mantle as dark as that of a Great Black-back {Larus marinus) can be assumed to be of Scandinavian origin, and as the winter quarters of the Scandinavian race {Lams /. fuscus) are given in The Handbook as “ E. Mediterranean, Red Sea, and Persian Gulf, and . . . Africa south to the Congo and L. Nyasa,” winter occurrences in the British Isles are of some interest. The great majority of winter birds in all areas were recorded as belonging to the British subspecies, and it is as well to emphasize' this, as some bird-watchers and writers seem to have assumed in the VOL. XLV.J LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL. 9 past that Lesser Black-backs seen in this country in the winter were more likely to belong to the northern race. However, a few Scandinavians were recorded, most but not all of them on the eastern side of England : one at Helston, Cornwall, 10.2.51 (A. G. Parsons) ; 2 at Par 13. 2. 51 (C. J. Stevens) ; one at Winchelsea 4.1.50 (A. D. Wilkinson) : ii near Dungeness 6.11.49 (^- L. K. Komer) ; 4 on the North Kent Marshes 4. 11.50 and singles in December (J. F. Burton) ; one to 3 in London tlirough both winters (K. P. Keywood and others) ; singles at Nottingham in both winters (S. Allison, J. Staton) ; one at Northwich 12. 11.49 (^- W. Boyd) ; singles at Blackpool in January, February and November, 1950 (G. A. Bowden) ; one or two near Leeds in both winters (M. A. Barras-Smith, K. Brown, K. G. Spencer) ; one near Penrith 9. 11.50 (G. A. K. Hervey) ; 2 near Carlisle 20.11.50 (E. Blezard) ; 2 on Duddingston Loch, Midlothian 7.12.50 (D. R. Anderson) ; one at Limerick 24.11.49 (N. H. Wilson). Dark birds, some of them probably of the “ intermediate ” form from southern Scandinavia, were recorded singly at Helston 10.2.5 1 i near Cardiff ii. 12.49 (^- Campbell) ; on two or three occasions at Northwich ; at Stocks-in-Bowland in the Pennines 24.2.51 (P. E. Davis) ; at Morecambe 6.11.49 (J- G. Barnes) ; and up to ten in February, 1951, on the Fylde coast, Lancashire (A. F. Airey, G. A. Bowden). A few other observers reported gulls as “ L. f. fuscits ” without giving any details or evidence of identification. Adults and Immatures There are two difficulties in determining the exact proportion of immatures to adults in this species. One is that first-winter birds are only distinguishable from dark Herring-Gulls [L. argentatus) of tl\c same age in exceptional!}^ favourable circumstances, as there is considerable individual variation of plumage in both species. The other is the close resemblance of fourth-winter, and probably some third-winter, birds to adults. At a distance they can hardly be distinguished, but at closer range the pale bill and “ dirty ” appear- ance of the sub-adults mark them as immature, and a careful observer would record them as such. Even allowing for these difficulties it is clear that in winter adults greatly outnumber immatures in all areas. Occasional occurrences were nearly always of adult birds, and in some localities large flocks were reported as composed entirel}' of adults. In a few places where resident gulls could be seen at close range some immatures were recorded, the proportion naturally varying in individual counts. The following figures show the total counts of adults and immatures (excluding the first-winter birds mentioned below) made each month by a single observer in four well-separated localities. The London and Lancashire figures are obtained from both winters, the others from 1949-50 only. 10 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV, Bristol (R. H. Pouldiiig) J.ondon (K. P. Key wood) Percentage * Percentage Adult Immature Immature Adult Immature Immature November . 54 9 14 •27 0 0 JJecember . .. I H 2 10 ^3 1 8 j anuary .. '5 I 9 -3 3 18 February . 5« ^ 5 35 3 1 2 Fccup, Leed-s Lancaster and Morecambe (M. Barras-Smith) (J . A. G. Barnes) November . oc Gn C c 2gi 35 1 1 December . 53 14 JOO ^3 10 January .. 44 '3 J«3 10 5 February . ..II I 8 21J 13 (,) Most of the immatures appeared to be third- or fourth- win ter birds. At Morecambc on November 6th, 1949, five out of a total of 211 Lesser Black-backs were second-winter birds, but there were never more than three in subsequent counts. Mr. S. Allison reported from one to seven first-winter birds near Nottingham in the winter of 1949-50, and at Morecambe there was certainly one on December 26th, 1949, probably four on December 15th, 1950, and a maximum of ten “ possibles ” on January 7th, 1951. It is of interest that a bird ringed on the Pennine Gullery by Mr. G. A. Bowden on 23.7.50 was found dead in a fresh condition at Swansea on 26.12.50. Another ringed in the same place three days later and recovered at Baldoyle, Co. Dublin, on 28.12.50 may have been dead for some time. It seems probable that the number of juveniles remaining in the British Isles after the end of October is very small. Habhat and Activity. Although occasional Lesser Black-backs were reported from a \’ariety of situations, coastal and inland, the more sedentary resi- dents showed well-marked preferences for certain types of habitat. Practically all the large counts during the two winters have been made cither in or very near towns or on gravel ponds and reser\^oirs. Inland waters are not only favourite roosting places but are also frequently visited during the day for resting, bathing and preening. Other roosting places reported include estuary mud-banks, ploughed fields, football grounds and gasometer tops (Weston-super-Mare, Miss L. Garrad). Very few were seen regularly on sandy or rocky beaches, but some were found on estuaries, and docks were frequented at Cardifi, Barry, Bristol and London. At Morecambe the Lesser Black-backs rested on the water, shingle or mud close to the promenade, or on buildings and railings. It was noticeable that very few joined the Herring-Gulls in following the receding tide on to the mud-llats and mussel-beds. Much smaller numbers were seen regularly on other ])arts of Morecambe Ba}^ near small towns and villages, but rarely on the open sands and uninhabited stretches of shore. Inland the chief resorts were offal and refuse tips (Gloucester, Nottingham, Burnle}', Colne, etc.), sewage farms (near London, Bristol, Notting- VOL. XL\'.J LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL. J1 ham), iiiter beds (London), grass lields, especially football grounds (Nottingham, Burnley) and sometimes ploughed fields. Lesser Black-backs are attracted to flood-water with other gulls, and freqrient rivers in towns, with a special preference for weirs (Reading, Lancaster, Kendal) and canals (near Gloucester and Manchester). Although long periods of inacti\ ity are habitual in the large gulls it is surprising how few records have been received of Lesser Black- backs feeding or actively searching for food during the short winter da\^s. The great majority are recorded as “ resting,” usually on the ground or water, but often also on buildings, railings, posts, lioats or buoys. Although it is possible that some of these gulls may have had a watchful eye on some likely source of nourishment it would appear that food must have been found in quantity without active search. The largest numbers seen feeding have been collecting scraps thrown to them (Morecambe, Lancaster), scavenging at offal or rubbish tips, or feeding in fields, especially at flood times. Smaller numbers have been reported feeding at drain effluents or on sewage farms, following the plough and raiding hen runs for poultry food. On Morecambe Bay the favourite natural food seems to be shore crabs, which the gulls catch by wading or ” up-ending ” in shallow water or by clumsy plunges from the air. No instances of the drop- ping of shell-fish were reported, but Mr. S. Allison watched an adult repeatedly dropping an object like a cork on to a frozen gravel- pond from a height of about six feet. Many Lesser Black-backs have developed considerable ingenuity and audacity in exploiting man-made sources of food at all times of year. In Jul3^ 1950, Mr. T. P. Wells S3iw about thirt^^ of them seizing some unidentified food from a railway wagon in Lancaster goods 3^ard, and the two hundred seen around Crewe station in November, 1949, may have had similar intentions. Potato chips, amputated fowls’ heads and legs, numerous egg-shells and a pot egg were found on the Pennine guller}', and young birds on that and another northern gullery vomited quantities of bread and even a large slice of fresh butcher’s meat. Association with other Gulls. Where Lesser Black-backs occurred regularly, either inland or on the coast, they were nearly always accompanied and outnumbered by Herring-Gulls. However, near Nottingham and at Burnley the Lesser Black-backs predominated in the earlier part of both winters, and in the Kent estuar}-’, Westmorland, there were always a few Lesser Black-backs and no Herring-Gulls. Many coastal observers reported large flocks of Herring-Gulls without any Lesser Black- backs. At Morecambe there was a tendency’’ for Lesser Black-]-)acks to separate near the promenade and the}' sometimes outnumbered Herring-Gulls in one small area. Black-headed GuUs {Lams ridibundus) were very often present with Lesser Black-backs in large numbers at both coastal and inland 12 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOJ.. XLV. roosting and feeding places, but the}^ were not reported from some of the roosts of big gulls on reservoirs. Great Black-backed Gulls generally occurred on the coast and estuaries, often in large numbers in the east and south, and on some reser\'oirs. Common Gulls (L. canus) were much less frequently associated with Lesser Black- backs, but were sometimes seen with them on beaches, inland waters and fields. It appears that in winter the Lesser Black-back is less marine than either the Herring-Gull or the Great Black-back in its choice of habitat and is more urban than the Common Gull. Plum.\ge and Colour of Soft Parts. The Handbook states that the Scandinavian subspecies has the " head and neck in winter considerably less streaked ” than the British ; but even in British adults showing no trace of immaturity the degree of ashy-brown streaking on the head and neck in autumn and winter is extremely variable. In some individuals the whole head and neck look brown at a distance, while in others, even in December and January, the few small flecks are only visible at very close range (E. M. Nicholson, J. A. G. Barnes.). Mr. A. W. Boyd remarks that the wintering birds at Northwich always look shabby, and the great contrast between them and the new immigrants in March is very evident. In a note on the "Colour of the P'eet and Toes of the Lesser Black- backed Gull in the Field" {Ibis, 85 : 92 et seq.) Mr. W. E. Glegg recorded the foot-colour of apj)arentl}7 adult Lesser Black-backs seen in the Thames Valley in all months from July to April and found a considerable proportion of birds of both British and Scandinavian types with flesh-coloured, white, or green feet. He discusses the possibility of a seasonal recession of colour but concludes that " the most likely explanation of the differences of colour ... is that the birds, whatever the}^ maj^ appear to be, have not reached maturity.” The Enquiry has thrown .some further light on this subject and has shown conclusively that there is a seasonal recession in the leg- and foot-colour of the Lesser Black-backed Gull. Apparent adults with flesh-coloured or whitish legs were reported in one or I)oth winters from several parts of the British Isles ; but the best o])j)or- tunities for observation were provided at Morecambe, where con- siderable numbers of these gulls could be seen together at close quarters throughout the winter. Even there it was difficult to make an exact classification of colours owing to varying conditions of light and distance of observation, but the following totals of mature birds seen under optimum conditions between November Tst and February 15th were recorded. ; Flesh-coloured ... 32 Whitish or Greenish ... ... 20 Pale yellow ••• M Normal yellow ... 17 VOL. XLV.] LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL. 13 Precise accuracy is not claimed for this classification, but it is fair to say that as a “ field character ” yellow colouring of legs and feet was only visible in half the winter adults in good conditions, and many were observed carefully at a range of less than five yards. Many of the immigrants in late February and March have legs of rich ochre yellow, and their bills often show a very deep yellow with an almost orange tinge. This deep yellow tint of both legs and bill was lacking in even the most brightly-coloured winter residents, which must acquire it later than the migrants, if at all. Mr. D. G. Sansbury has independently noticed the orange tint in the bills of Lesser Black-backs, and tells me, in litt., that it had faded to a pale yellow in a dead specimen he obtained in the spring. The seasonal change is erratic in some individuals and apparently an occasional breeding bird never acquires any yellow colouring in the legs and feet, e.g. one with flesh-pink legs at Walney on June 30th, 1950, and two with white legs on July 6th, 1951. On the latter date I found that only about half the breeding birds had legs of the deep ochre colour, the others varying from very pale to a light lemon yellow. However, the seasonal nature of the change is shown not only by the rarity of breeding adults without yellow legs of some shade, but also by the fact that in summer some birds in immature plumage have legs and feet of a pale yellow whereas in winter they are always white or flesh-coloured. The change appears to affect British and Scandinavian races equally, and I have seen adult Scandinavians in Suffolk with very pale, whitish or greenish legs in August and early September. Attention has been drawn recently to a seasonal change in the colour of the soft parts of the Black-headed Gull {British Birds, vol. xliii, pp. 408-9). It is unfortunate that this change of leg colour adds to the diffi- culty of identifying Lesser Black-backs in winter, as size and build are the only remaining field distinctions between a Great Black- back and a “ receded ” Scandinavian Lesser. It should be mentioned that the British Museum skins of winter- killed Lesser Black-backs, all taken abroad, are described as having legs and feet of some shade of yellow. More evidence would be needed to show whether the migrants are affected by this change to a smaller degree or for a shorter period than the residents, but the possibility is suggested by these skins and by the rich colouring of the March immigrants. Regional Survey of Distribution. Peninsula (including Bristol and Avonmouth). 1949-50- Mr. A. G. Parsons found single birds in a few places in West Corn- wall in November and January, 5 at Helston on January 28th, ii on Hayle River on February 26th, none on the Scillies December 13th to i6th. One was seen at Par on December loth, 3 near St. Austell on February 17th. In Devon 6 were recorded at Mothecombe on January i6th, one to 5 near Torquay through the winter and 2 near Sidmouth in January. One to 3 appeared at several places on the south coast in the second half of February. In Somerset from one to 3 were seen through the winter near Taunton and a few each month at Weston-super-Mare, maximum 10 on January ist. In the Bristol 14 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. district, well covered by Mi'. R. H. Poulding and others. Lesser Black-backs were present throughout the winter, maximum single counts in each month being 14 on November i8th, 9 on December 30th, 13 on January 29th and February 21st. None seen in West Cornwall from November ist until February 10th, when 16 immigrants appeared at Helston. There were 3 at Par on January 17th, 13 on February 13th. Apart from an injured bird in November none seen on the Exe estuary until February : one on the 4th, 8 on the iSth. Counts in the Bristol district were generally higher than in the previous wintt'r, e.g. 29 on November ist, 35 on December 3rd, 12 on January 21st, 16 on F'ebruary 8th, 26 on the 12th, 35 on the 28th. (R. G. Adams, B. J. Bailey, J. A. R. Bickford, A. E. Billett, P. J. Chadwick, G. E. Clothier, Devon Bird-Watching and Preservation Society per E. II. Ware, Miss L. Garrad, P. Gray, H. G. Hurrell, B. King, A. G. Parsons, R. II. Poulding, J. Shipman, C. J. Stevens, J. J. Walling, M. J. Wotton, A. J. Veatman.) Cm.vnnel. 1949- 50. Negative reports from Dorset. Three near Lymington, Hampshire, on November 4th, one near Southampton on January nth. Single birds at Shoreham, Sussex, on several days in November and December, 3 on February 12th and 14th ; 2 or 3 near Newhaven on December loth, 2 at Winchelsea on November 25th and 26th, one on January 4th. 1950- 51. One near Swindon, Wilts, on February 23rd. Two or more seen in Portsmouth Harbour in February were believed to have wintered there. Negative reports from Chichester and Rye. (Mrs. R. G. Barnes, W. R. P. Bourne, E. Cohen, E. Giles, G. C. Hodgson, K. B. Rooke, J. Stafford, J. R. M. Tennent, A. D. Wilkinson, H. E. Woods.) Thames. .1949-50. Twelve near Dungeness on November 6th ; one near Halstead, Essex, in January. In London the maximum single counts reported for each montli were : ii on November 28th, 9 on December 30th and January 13th, 10 on February i6th. None recorded at Tring; 2 at West Hyde. One or two spent the winter at Reading and 7 were seen on December nth ; single birds at Oxford on three days in November, December ist and February 2ist-24th. 1950-51. Four on 'the North Kent marshes on November 4th and singles on two days in December. A few late migrants near Romford in November, e.g. 9 on 9th ; 2 on i6th and 23rd, but none later. Some again wintered in London, maximum counts being 6 to 8 on December 23rd, " several ” on January 27th. 7 on February 13th. In both winters two or three were reported from many points in the London area, and the total population is difficult to estimate. One was seen at Tring on November 27th, one near Watford on December 23rd, and 4 at Hamper Mill on December 27th. Four flew S.W. over Wootton, near Woodstock, on December 27th, and one appeared at Oxford on February 19th. (H. A. Bilby, B. Campbell, S. Cramp, C. E. Douglas, A. C. Frost, H. H. S. Haj'ward, J. N. Hobbs, P. A. D. Hollom, K. P. Keywood, W. I. St. G. Light, London N.H.S., per C. B. Ashby and R. W. Hayman, J. M. McMeeking, E. M. Nicholson, J. R. Pendle, Mrs. M. Radford, M. L. R. Romer, W. G. Teagle, R. B. Warren.) Anglia. 1949- 50. Singles on the River Stour on January 8th and at Felixstowe on January 21st, 17 near Burj^ St. Edmunds on February 25th. Negative reports from Blakeney and Wells. Three were seen flying over the Wash near King’s l,ynn on December 3rd, 2 on 7th, one on 8th. One at Cambridge on January 7th, 3 on February 25th. 1950- 51. Two near Bury St. Edmunds on January 21st ; 3 at Walberswick on November nth ; one at Southwold on December 25th. One oiled imma- ture on Breydon Water on November 4th ; 3 on the Wash December 8th ; one at Cambridge on December 9th. VOL. XLV.1 LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL. 15 (G. B. G. Benson, W. R. P. Bourne, A. L. Bull, Miss J. M. Perrier, R. H. Harrison, M. Packard, P. R. Westall.) Severn. 1949- 50. A small number apparently wintered near the head of the Severn estuary : 5 at Sharpness on November 12th, one at Slimbridge on January 15th, 3 near Cheltenham on November 13th and December i8th and one on January 28th. One on Chadbury Weir on February 8th, several at Worcester on the 17th, one at Frankley on the 26th. Seven on Aqualate Mere, Staffordshire, on November 13th and one at Bellfields on February 27th, but negative reports from other waters in this area. 1950- 51. Numbers were larger than in the previous winter in the south : at Gloucester 6 on November 15th, 4 on December i6th, 12-I- on January 12th, 2 on February 6th ; at Frampton, Severn estuary, 6 on December 21st, 4 on January 2nd ; one at Slimbridge on December 13th ; 3 near Cheltenham on February 14th. Two at Bewdley on December 20th. One flew N.W. over Alvecote Pools, Warwickshire, on January 21st. One at Bellfields on Novem- ber 5 th. (W. B. Alexander, G. A. Arnold, M. A. Arnold, B. Campbell, P. Evans, L. W. Hayward, Mrs. M. J. Morgan, West Midland Bird Chib per C. A. Norris.) South Wales. 1949- 50. A few were seen regularlj'- in the Cardiff-Penarth-Barry district, e.g. 3 on November 12th, 6 on December 30th, 12 on January 8th, 4 on February 26th. In spite of the large local breeding colonies the only Pem- brokeshire records were 2 near Dale on November 20th, one on December 25th, 2 on January 2nd, with an influx in February, 6 on the 5th, 17 on the 19th. None at Aberystwyth through the winter. 1950- 5 1 . Unfortunately no observations from Cardiff, but 2 were seen at Barry on January 7th and February 4th. In Pembrokeshire one or two were seen through the winter, with a slight increase in February, e.g. 2 at Haverford- west on November 4th, January 27th, February 3rd, 5 on February 24th ; 2 at Dale on December 31st and February 12th, 6 on February 14th. (J. H. Barrett, B. Campbell, T. A. W. Davis, D. G. Salisbury, J. D. R. Vernon.) North Wales. 1949-50. On the Welsh side of the Dee estuary Mr. T. S. Williams noted 10 on November 7th, about 6 on December 2nd and a few on December 28th, but on several journeys along this coast in January and February he saw none. Two on the Menai Straits on January 12th, but reports from Holyhead and Anglesey were negative. A January search of the Conway valley and parts of Caernarvon.shire by Mr. J. C. S. Ellis was also negative. (J. C. S. Ellis, C. P. Raweliffe, E. P. Watkins, T. S. Williams.) Trent. 1949- 50. Single birds at Gibraltar Point, Lincolnshire, on November 6th and January 5th ; 7 near Brigg on December 13th ; negative report from Cranwell. Large numbers were seen in the Nottingham district in November and some stayed through the winter. The following were outstanding single-day totals by various observers : c. 300 on November loth, 105 on the 27th, 80 on December ist, 16 on the iith, 12 on the 31st, 8 on January ist, 37 on February 2nd, 17 on the 12th. There were 17 at Sawley, Leicestershire, on November 4th, dwindling to one on the 30th. 1950- 51. A few were recorded at Sutton-on-Sea in November, December and February but none in January ; monthly maxima : 5 on November 5th, 4 on December 9th and February 25th. There was a negative return for Derby and district. At Nottingham numbers were much reduced : maxima 20 on November 23rd, one on December 31st. (S. Allison, H. Barlow, R. Brook, P. W. P. Browne, E. A. Chapman, A. Dobbs, T. A. M. Hill, D. C. Hulme, N. Johtund, A. H. Jones, Lincolnshire Naturalists’ Trust L. Ottaway, Miss H. Mann, J. M. McMeeking, J. Staton.) 16 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Mkkskv. 1949- 50- ^*1 W'itton J-lashes near X(;ith\vicli Mr. A. W. J5oyd saw a lew through the winter, e.g. 17 on November 4th, 3 on December 24th, two or tj^ree on January 8th, 4 on February 28th. About 200 were reported at Crewe one day in November ; only occasional birds on the \\drral coasts, maximum 5 at Heswall on December 25th. One or two spent the winter by the Manchester Ship Cairal near Partington and Lymm. At St. Annes 4 were seen for some days in December, occasional singles in other months. Blackpool shore was searched daily by Mr. G. A. Bowden, who recorded Lesser Black-backs on 9 days in November, maximum 8 on tlie 3rd, singles on one day in December, 3 days in January and 7 in February ; 3 appeared on February 27th, 10 on the 28th. In East Lancashire Mr. K. G. Spencer recorded many in November and several remained through the winter, e.g. at Burnley 28 on November 12th, 16 on December 4th, 17 on January 15th, 0 on February 5th ; at Laneshawbridge, near Colne, 253 on November 7th, c. 90 on the 27th, 8 on December 21st, 9 on January 14th, 5 to 9 on Februar}^ 12th. At Morecambe and Lancaster numbers were even larger, and after the late migrants had left in November the genuine residents were much more numerous than anywhere else in the British Isles ; e.g. 327 on November 6th, 148 on the 22nd, 100 on December 21st, 112 on January 7th, 75 on February 3rd, 102 ( ±10) on the 2ist. 1950- 51. Again a few frequently recorded on Witton Flashes, monthly maxima : ii on November 2nd, 3 on December 9th, 2 on January 23rd, 3 on February i8th. Negative report from Wirral, but single birds were seen near Thornton-le-Moors and Frodsham on December 31st ; one or two on the Ship Canal in November and February but none between December 2nd and January 31st ; one at Sale on November 19th, 13 at Ainsdale on November 13th. Single birds at Lytham early in February, and 7 on the 23rd, 10 on the 25th. Mr. Bowden found one or two on Blackpool beach on 16 days in November, maximum 7 on the 3rd, and singles on one day in December, 3 days in January and 2 in February. Mr. Spencer again saw many near Burnley in early November, maximum 48 on the nth, but numbers dwindled during the month and the last seen were 3 on December 2nd. He and Mr. J. Webster found large numbers at Laneshawbridge, e.g. c. 190 on November 1 8th, 93 on 26th, c. 96 on December 3rd, 26 on loth, 28 on January 28th, 29 on I'ebruary nth, 884- on the 25th. At Morecambe mid-winter numbers were rather lower than the previous year but still considerable, e.g. 100 (±10) on November 30th, 79 (±5) on December 15th, 63 (±2) on 28th, 78-80 on January nth, 63 on February ist, 116 on the 12th, 170 on the 22nd. The marked increase in mid-February indicates very early immigration. (A. F. Airey, W. B. Alexander, J. A. G. Barnes, G. A. Bowden, A. W. Boyd, B. Campbell, D. G. Cotgrave, R. M. Garnett, N. Harwood, Miss M. Henderson, W. T. C. Rankin, J. P. Savidge, K. G. Spencer, A. R. Sumerfield, J. Webster, T. P. Wells.) Humber. 1949- 50. Considerable numbers were seen near Leeds in November and some stayed through the winter : e.g., 89 at Beeston on November 13th, 45+ at Eccup on November 23rd, 27 on December 20th and January 21st, 5 on February 9th. 7 on Malham Tarn on November 23rd, 2 on December 2nd ; single birds in December at Cawthorne, Settle, Ripley and near York, and in January at Brighouse. Negative reports from other parts of Yorkshire. 1950- 51. Many again in November on reservoirs north and north-west of Leeds, e.g. loo-)- at Eccup on November 8th ; c. 60 at Eccup, 12 at Lindle^^ 15 at Fewston, no at Swinsty on the 19th ; c. 5 at Eccup on December nth ; (±3) at Swinsty on January 7th ; 5 at Eccup, 19 at Swinsty, one at Gouth- waite on the 14th ; only singles in February. The drop in numbers in December may be attributed to the freezing of the reservoirs : Mr. P. E. Davis noted a movement of gulls up the .Mre valley in mid-December. A negative report from the Calder valley. VOL. XLv.] LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL. 17 (M. A. Barras-Smith, K. Brown, P. E. Davis, J. C. S. Ellis, W. F. Fearnlcy, P. F. Holmes, M. F. M. Meiklejohn, K. G. Spencer, A. F. G. Walker.) Tyne. 1949- 50'. Single birds were seen in the Newcastle-Sunderland district on four days in November, 2 on November 25th, and one on January 25th. 1950- 51. One at Low Gosforth on November 5th is the only record. (C. J. Gent, D. C. Hulme, H. Tully.) Lakes. 1949- 50. Some wintered on the Westmorland and Furness shores of More- cambe Bay, e.g., on the Kent estuary 22 on November 14th, 4 on December 8th and 31st, 8 on January ist, 4 on February 19th. Immigration was shown with a count of 57 on February 27th. At Grange 10 were seen on November 12th and 3 or 4 stayed through the winter; 15 near Barrow on December 26th, and 33 were counted from the railway between Ulverston and Seascalc on November 5th. Inland one, occasionally two, were seen fairly regularly in Kendal and at the head of Lake Windermere. Two near Appleby on November 15th and i6th, one on December 27th, 2 on January 23rd ; one over Lake Coniston on February i8th. One regularly near Penrith till November 24th ; one at Carlisle on February iith. None seen in the Isle of Man. 1950- 51. On the Kent estuary 23 on November 23rd, one or two through December, up to 6 in January, and a definite increase in February ; 17 on the 13th, 22 on the 20th, 67 on the 27th. At Grange Mr. H. B. Turney saw 100 on November 7th and gth, 12 on December i6th and 20 on the 23rd, and about a dozen in January and B'ebruary. There were 5 on the Duddon estuary on November 4th ; one or two at Kendal in November and Januarj-. 5 on B'ebruary 13th ; single birds on Windermere and Wastwater in November ; one near Appleby on January 28th-2gth. One near Penrith on November 7th and gtn and December i ith ; 2 near Carlisle on November 20th. Negative reports from the Isle of Man. (J. A. G. Barnes, Mrs. M. F. Bell, E. Blezard, L. .‘V. Cowcill, W. S. Cowin, Miss M. Gladding, G. A. K. Hervey, E. B. Hughes, K. W. Robson, K. G. Spencer, H. B. Turne3^) Scotland. 1949- 50- Reports from Berwickshire, Clyde, B'orth, Inverness and Argyll were negative, with the following exceptions ; 3 at Dumfries on February 10th ; 10 at Galston, Ayrshire, December 26th to January 8th ; 8 on the Tynninghame estuary on November ist, one at Edrom, Berwickshire, on December 26th and one at Coldingham on the 30th ; one at Linlithgow Loch on B'ebruar}' 12th, one at Edinburgh on B'cbruar\- i6th ; 15 at Scourie, Suther- land, November 2ist-24th. 1950- 51. Negative reports from Berwickshire and the Edinburgh district, except for Duddingston Loch, Midlothian, where single birds were seen on tlirce days in November, 3 on November 22nd, 2 on December 7th. (D. R. Anderson, A. H. Gra>% G. Hughes-Onslow, J. E. King, Mrs. C. Knowles, W, M. Logan Home, J. D. Lockie, M. F. M. Meiklejohn, G. W. Sandc- man, I. F. Stewart, Lord David Stuart, F. D. C. Walls.) Ireland. 1949- 50. Reports from County Cork, Limerick, Dublin, Galway and Mayo were negative, with the following exceptions : 3 at Limerick on November 3rd, and one on November 23rd-24th, December 26th, January 13th and B'ebruary- 4th : one at Arklow, County Wicklow, on January 26th ; one at Dublin on January 5th and 28th ; one at Galway on November 28th. 1950- 51. One at Claddagh, County Galway, on December i6th ; a “ dull and listless ” bird near Dublin from mid October to early January ; and one near the mouth of the Liffey on B'ebruary 3rd and from the 17th to the end of the montli. Negative reports from County Maj'o. (Mrs. Z. Hall, J. Bl. O’Donovan, B. O’Regan, R. B'. Ruttledgc, J. F. Simms, N. H. Wilson.) (18) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XXXV. THE LONG-TAILED SKUA. Photographed by R. Chislett and P. 0. Swanbekg, (Plates 1-8). The present series of plates shows very well the handsome and striking plumage of the adult Long-tailed Skua {Stercorarius longicamhis). In addition to the great length and flexibility of the central tail-feathers, the plates bring out some of the other distinc- tive features, such as the uniform pale under-parts, the dark under- side of the wing and the clear-cut dark cap contrasting markedly with the upper-parts. Some of the flight pictures, notably Plate 3, illustrate the point made in The Handbook that this is the “ most graceful and easy flier of the three smaller skuas, with action more floating and tern-like than Arctic Skua.” Rankin and Duffey {antea, vol. xli, spec, sup., pp. 36-37) record that as a general rule this species afforded only distant views at sea, but that it “ always appeared a slenderer bird with a buoyant flight, becoming, as it were, tern-like.” The same authors, in their Atlantic crossings recorded, ” ii certain and 6 indeterminate birds between the end of July and mid- August. All these mid-ocean records occurred between 30°W. and 45°W.” This gives some indication of the westerly nature of the autumn migration which takes the bulk of the Long- tailed Skuas far to the west of the British Isles. The birds observed in this country are not infrequently juveniles in much less distinctive plumage than that shown in the plates and represent just tlie fringe of the main movement. A search of such recent local reports as are available suggests that in recent years the Long-tailed Skua has been very scarce. A full description of one at Minehcad, Somerset, in May, 1947, has been published in our pages {antea, vol. xl, pp. 286-287) ; apart from this we have come across only the following autumn records : One, Devon, October, 1949 ; one, Lincolnshire, November, 1949 ; one, Yorkshire, autumn, 1950, both the latter having been picked up dead. One might have expected that the violent westerly weather of September, 1950, would have brought in some of these skuas from the Atlantic, but we have not found evidence that this was the case. (19) HEAD FLAGGING IN THE BLACK-HEADED GULL; ITS FUNCTION AND ORIGIN. BY N. Tinbergen and M. Moynihan (Dept, of Zoology, Oxford University) Studies of the reproductive behaviour of various birds and fish have led to the conclusion that many elements of courtship, threat, and other types of display are “ derived ” movements. Some of these, such as the pecking gestures by which a Domestic Cock calls the hens to food, or the “ strutting ” postures of courting gallinaceous birds, have doubtless originated as intention movements ; that is, incomplete movements caused by low motivation (Daanje, 1951) or, if the motivation is relatively high, b}/ partty inhibited motivation. Other movements are combinations of intention movements of different drives ; they are the outcome of low ambivalent motiva- tion. Such is the upright threat posture of the Herring-Gull {Lams argentahis), for example ; a combination of the intention movements of attack and withdrawal (Tinbergen, 1952). A third group of derived movements includes displacement activities, due to a strong but thwarted motivation. Thus the “ grass-pulling ” of the Herring-Gull is actually displacement collecting of nest material, due to strong activation of both the attack drive and the escape drive (Tinbergen, 1952). Such movements, however, often show certain characteristic differences when compared with the original movements from wliich they are derived. In many cases these differences are caused by ritualization ; a secondary evolutionary adaptation to the signal function of the activity. Ritualization tends to make the movement more conspicuous. This may be effected by simplification and exaggeration of the movement itself (Daanje, 1951), or by the use of conspicuously coloured structures which are displayed in the movement, or by both. For instance, the strutting movements of gallinaceous birds are supported by the spreading of beautifulh-' coloured fans, formed by tail, tail-coverts, or wings. The threat movements of Coots [Fulica atra) demonstrate the v/hite frontal plate. The displacement preening of courting ducks is made more conspicuous by the use of brightly coloured parts of the wings (Lorenz, 1941), etc. So many similar examples are known that an observer of courting or fighting lairds expects their “ ceremonies ” to display the conspicuous parts of the plumage. During our recent field studies of the reproductive behaviour of the Black-headed Gull {Lams rtdibimdus) we paid particular atten- tion to one specific courtship movement : tlie Head Flagging. This, like the examples cited above, seems to be a derived movomnit. Unlike theirs, its ultimate derivation is obscure, as it could have originated either as an intention movement or a displacement activity, or perhaps even as something else. Whatever the original 2U BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV movement may once have been, it is now thoroughly ritualized in connexion with its function. It is precisely in this function that the interest and significance of the Head Flagging lies : it seems to negate or nullify a different and entirely distinct behaviour pattern : the Forward Display. It seems, therefore, obvious that the evolu- tion of Head Flagging has been dependent on the evolution of the pattern it serves to nullify. We believe that such a clear and complete case of evolutionary dependence of one distinct behaviour pattern on an entirely different pattern has not previously been described. Perhaps the above might be more easily understood if we describe the courtship of the Black-headed Gull in a little more detail. Contrarj^ to reports in the literature (Kirkman, 1937 ; Lack, 1940) we found that not all members of a breeding colony of Black- headed Gulls are mated when they arrive in spring. Pair formation takes place in or near the colony, on “ pre-territories ” taken up by single males. These are visited by single females ; such visits eventually lead to pair formation. After the pair has been formed, the pre-territory is abandoned and the pair select a nesting territory together. When male and female meet, either before pair formation or after they have become mutally attached, they go through various court- ship movements. The male, standing in his pre-territory, first reacts to an approaching flying bird of either sex by uttering a loud long call (Plate 10, upper). We may provisionally write this as “ kreeooo.” We consider it an expression of aggressiveness, with threat function, as it is often uttered in obviously aggressive situa- tions, such as fights between neighbouring males. Moreover, intruding males are strongly repelled by it. When the approaching bird alights (which only females do) both birds adopt the Forward Display attitude (Kirkman). Since this posture is even more common during hostile encounters between neighbours than in encounters of (prospective) mates, we consider it a threat posture. This is also indicated by the form of the display itself : the bill is pointed forward, suggesting preparedness to fight (Plate 9, upper and lower ; Plate 10, lower). As an element of the behaviour of sex partners it is commonest in the beginning of the season, although it may also occur later. We believe that it indicates a certain degree of hostility towards the sex partner. Hostile behaviour in similar situations has been reported in several other birds (Heron {Ardea cinerea), Verwey, 1930 ; Snow-Bunting {Plectrophenax ■nivalis), Tinbergen, 1939) and in fish (Cichlids, Baerends and Baerends, 1949 ; Three-spined Stickleback, \'an lersel and Tinber- gen, unpubl.). After the Forward Displa}/, both birds usually adopt another attitude which is, in several respects, the exact opposite of it. They stretch the neck vertically upward, and, with a sudden movement, jerk the head to the side, pointing the bill away from the partner when they do so (Plate ii). The neck Britisli Birds, \'ol. xlv, PI. ]. )>ong-Tailed Skua (Stcrcorarius Pppicr : Nest and eggs. Lower : Nicstling. SwicDTsii Lapland. (Pholo'^raphcd hy P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PJ. 2 I.oNG-TAiLKTi Skua {Stcrcovarius lonpicaudns) in fi.ight. Swi'.nisii I,APi.ANn. {Photographed})}' P. O. Swanberg) ^ British Birds, Vol. xlv, PL 3 Long-tailed Skuas [Stercorariiislongicaudus) in flight. Swedish Lapland. {Phoiogvaphcd by P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI 4 1 British Birds, Vol. xlv, PL 5. Swedish Lapland. {Photographed by R. Chislett). British Birds, Vol. \'lv, Jd. 6 British Birds. Vol. xlv, PI. 7 I I I,oNT,-TAir.i';n Skua {Stri'carariiis lon^icamhts) at nf.st. Swicnrsn I, apt. and. (l'hi)to;^ya[^hrd hv 1^ Ciitsi.ic tt) . British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 8 l.oN(;-T.\!Li-;i) Skua {Stcrcoravius longicaudns) wiTii chick. SwiCniSH I-APCANU. {Photogya plied bv I^. Chislett). British Birds, Vol xlv PI. !>. Black-headed Gull (Lams ridibundns). Upper : Forward display. Schouwen, Holland, 1926. Lower: Mutual forward display in an aggressive encounter between NEIGHBOURING MALES. SCHOUWEN, HOLLAND, 1926. (Photographed by N. Tinbergen). ]3ritish Birds, \’oi. xlv, PI. 10 BL..\CK-nic.M)i-;i) CrUi-i- {Larus ri(/ibiiiu/us). Pppick : 'I'lnc tkumpkti.vc; c.m.l, uttkrkd hv ,\ m.m.k ; i-Ivm.u.p; (kk;iit) .\HOUT TO SICTTUC OX XlvST. Tl'XI'.I,. K)jS. Powi;r : I-'orwako oISPI..\^■ as sickn opponicnt. Scoi.t iii-.u) Island, 1051. I riiolo,L;r((f>lic(/ hv X. Tixm-KGKN). Hritish lairds, \^ol. xlv, PI. 11. 1 ci H O'. y. c (j p- cr. 'fii t: X H Xi c c/} _) *— a •— a o c S c o o X. o w w 'O ^ C'- E u: l-H — X H - ^ H H (/) H s 3 w TO Ci - *> H "T" ■“ (/: U4 l-v* H ;; H H c/5 c o -:i K W 'S. c < — ^ Ch 2 E 2 ^ 5 o ^ < j t" j vui . XLV.J HEAD FLAGGING IN BLACK-HEADED GULL. 21 feathers are ruffled at this time, making the neck appear very thick. A similar movement has been observed by Noble and Wurm (1943) in the Laughing Gull {Lams atricilla) ; they named it “Head Flag- ging.” Kirkman mentions the movement in passing, as an occasional sequel to the “ upward display.” We are convinced that he includes more than one posture under the term “ upward display,” and that he failed to recognise the importance of Head Flagging because he appears to have missed the pair-forming ceremonies entirely. Unlike the Forward Display, Head Flagging is never seen during hostile encounters. It is done exclusively by partners or pros- pective partners. As it is known that many displays which are oriented to another individual serve to demonstrate conspicuously coloured structures, we naturally wondered whether the Head Flagging made a gull more conspicuous to its partner. We soon realised, however, that a head-flagging bird shows nothing but the white neck to the partner. This can hardly be considered a very conspicuous feature in a pre- dominantly white bird like the Black-headed Gull. At the same time we noticed that the Head Flagging, in complete form, usually had the effect of concealing the brown face from the partner. This concealment of a conspicuous feature gave us a clue in our attempt to understand the function of Head Flagging. In the Forward Display, the birds direct their bill more or less toward the opponent. This orientation is not perfect ; a bird may even stand at right angles to another bird, but it ver}' rarely faces away from it. The threat function of the Forward Display, undoiibtedly based originall}^ on the aiming of the bill, is enhanced by the brown face. It seems ver}’ probable that the latter has evolved primarily to emphasise the threat gesture. In this connexion it might be significant that Huxley and Fisher (1940) found that attacks of Black-headed Gulls on stuifcd-gulls are directed at the head or nape. We are, therefore, led to suppose that Head Flagging has evolved as a friendly gesture because it is the opposite, or negative, of the threat movement. It means something like “ no offence meant.” Other types of “ display ” may have evolved in rather similar manner. A male Coot, for instance, threatens other Coots by facing them with the head pointing forward and downward. This movement displays the white frontal plate (which is larger in males than in females, and is largest in spring). The Coot also has a friendly gesture; it bends the head down to such an extent that the front is parallel to, and almost touching, the water’s surface. This movement does not display any conspicuous structure ; rather it serves to hide the conspicuous bill and white frontal plate. Again it seems plausible to consider the threat gesture as the “ prim- ary ” movement, and the other as a “ secondary ” movement, developed to offset the effects of the threat. It seems to us that the many “ inferiority gestures ” in which, as Lorenz has repeatedly emphasized, the occiput is turned towards 22 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. the opponent, may not be a “ demonstration of a vulnerable spot ” inhibiting attack (Lorenz). Their effect would seem to be due instead to the fact that the main weapon (the bill, or in mammals such as the Dog, the teeth), and also such structural releasers as support the demonstration of the weapon, are turned away. Summary. The Head Flagging of the Black-headed Gull, and probably also other gestures of appeasement in different species, seem to have the function of nullifying the effect of threatening gestures and struc- tures. Whatever the origin of such appeasing movements may have been, ritualization seems to have followed the opposite course from that which it usually does. In such cases conspicuous struc- tures are concealed rather than displayed. Therefore, the process of ritualization of these movements has been dictated b}^ the concomitant ritualization of their opposites, the threat movements. References. Baerends, G. P. .and Baerends, J. M. (1950). “ ,\n introduction to the study of the ethology of Cichlid Fishes.” Behaviour, SuppL, i : 1-242. Daanje, .a. (1950). ” On locomotory movements in birds and the intention movements derived from them.” Behaviour, 3 : 48-99. Huxley, J. S. and Fisher, Ja.mes (1940). ” Hostility reactions in Black- headed Gulls.” Proc. Zool. Soc. London, A 110 ; i-io. Kirkman, F. B. (1937). Bird Behaviour. London-Edinburgh. Lack, D. (1940). ” Pair formation in birds.” Condor, 42 ; 269-2S6. Lorenz, K. (1935). ” Her Kumpan in der Umwelt des Vogels.” Jour. J. Ornithol., 83: 137-213 ; 289-413. Lorenz, K. (1941). ” Vergleichende Bewegungsstudien an .Anatincn.” Jour. f. Ornithol., 89, Sonderheft ; 194-294. Noble, Cr. K. and Wurm, M. (1943). ” The social behaviour of the Laughing Gull.” Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 45 : 179-220. Tinbergen, N. (1939). ‘‘ The behaviour of the Snow-Bunting in spring.” Trans. Linn. Soc. N.Y., 5 : 1-92. Tinbergen, N. (1952a). ” Derived movements ; their causes, functions, origin and evolution.” Quarterly Rev. of Biol, (in ]>ress). Verwey, j. (1930). ” Die Paarungsbiologie dcs Fischreihers.” Zool. Jahrb. Physiol., 48 ; 1-120. THE STATUS OF THE BLACK-HEADED GULL COLONY AT RAVENGLASS. BY S. Makchant. Although there is an interesting association of several species of sea and shore birds breeding on the Drigg sandhills opposite Raven- glass in large numbers, the site has received little serious study and is generally known only for the size of the colon}' of Black-headed VOL. XLV.] BLACK-HEADED GULL COLONY 23 Gulls {Larus ridihundtis) and for the yearly presence of Sandwich Terns {Sterna sandvicensis) in somewhat fluctuating numbers. When in England during the summer of 1948, the writer noticed an obvious decrease in numbers of Black-headed Gulls and immedi- ately realised that it was possible to make a more accurate estimate of the size of the colony than was done in 1938. The interpretation of the results of observations in 1948 was open to some doubt, and in consequence a more detailed check was made in 1951. The present writer was responsible for the figures for the Raven- glass colony supplied for the Survey of Black-headed Gull colonies carried out by the British Trust for Ornithology in 1938. In his report on that survey {antea, vol. xxxiii, pp. 202-221, 230-244) Hollom described the colony as by far the greatest in the Kingdom, over five times the size of its nearest rival, and amounting to two- thirds of the total breeding population of Black-headed Gulls in England. The more important details given were that the birds bred over an area of about | square mile and that " in 1938 (there were) some tens of thousands breeding pairs, probably less than 50,000,” figures which were based on the present writer’s submission. It will be shown that at the present time the size of the coloii}^ is far smaller, the difference being so great that, together with what evidence can now be collected for pre-war numbers, it must indicate that the 1938 estimate was much exaggerated. At the same time there is clear evidence for some natural decrease. It is not necessary to discuss the results of observations made in 1948, though they will be mentioned later, since they show that a decrease has occurred since the war. The accompanjdng map shows the breeding area of the gulls as measured in 1951, when the writer visited the colony on June 24th and 25th. These areas were mapped as carefully as possible by rather primitive pacing and compass -methods : though they are not thought to be absolutely precise, they are probably quite reasonably accurate. As far as possible all nests were counted directty, and, though naturally the final figures are not exact, they are probably on the generous side since they include all nests which showed signs of occupation this year, whether they contained eggs or young or were empty : finally the figures were rounded off upwards. The numbers on the map against each more or less easily separable area show the nests counted and their total is 5,640. If then we say that no more than 6,000 pairs bred at Ravenglass in 1951, we cannot, it is thought, be making an underestimate. In 1948 the birds bred over a slightly larger area than this year. The extension is shown on the map. It is not likely that there were more than an extra 500 pairs in that year. The map also indicates roughly those areas where the gulls used to nest before the war ; it is now impossible to be exact on this point, partly because of lack of records and partly because the topography of the sandhills changes somewhat in the course of time, obliterates landmarks and 24 BRITISH BIRDS. [vui.. XLV. makes it dit'ticult to be precise as to localities. Nevertheless tlie areas indicated are not wildly inaccurate. Measured as generously as possible they comprise approximately 400,000 square yards. This is a very different hgure from the f square mile implied in iq38, though in the broadest sense it is not far out to say that the birds did nest “ over ” that area. Now, this year (1951) it is possible to estimate the breeding density fairly accurately. There were h^'e to VOL. XLV.] BLACK-HEADED GULL COLONY 25 six tliousand breeding pairs in an area of approximately 200,000 square yards, i.e., one pair per 35-40 sq. yds. Incidentally in 1948 a sample count in an area of 100 x 150 yards showed 150 nests or one pair per 100 sq. yds., but that was a selected area which included some bare sand, a factor which has been excluded as far as possible in the 1951 figures. In both years the density in the breeding patches seemed to be much the same as before the war. On this basis, then, say one pair to 40 sq. yds., we could expect a population of just about 10,000 pairs in pre-war years. Certainly it would be wrong to suggest a figure an5cway nearly approaching 50,000, and, even by putting the most liberal interpretation on the estimates of area and density made above, it would be hard to reach a figure of 20,000. The writer’s opinion is that 10,000 pairs is a very fair estimate of the pre-war population and there is support for this from two independent sources. The semi-permanent watcher at Ravenglass who has been associated with the gullery for 30 years or more, considers that, though undoubtedly some decrease has occurred, as is obvious from the decrease of the breeding area, this is nothing like of the order of ten times ; but that on the contrary it is remarkable that the gulls have been able to maintain their numbers so well, in spite of bombing and shelling during the war, when the sandhills were used to some extent as a practice area, and also in spite of a general falling-off in protection leading to more intensive and excessive egg-collecting. Moreover the records of eggs collected by the Muncaster Estate over the last 20 years are instructive. These show very great fluctuations, but in an average year before the war almost exactly the same number was collected as in the past two or three years. The pre-war fluctuations can best be attributed to outside factors such as bad weather or inability to collect systematically. The average figure is between 20-25,000 eggs, and as this year that amount was collected from about 6,000 pairs, it is hardly likety that before the war it came from a much larger number, since the collecting methods have not been appre- ciably intensified. I am obliged to Mr. E. M. Nicholson for pointing out that a further check on numbers both before and after the war is possible. In particular by considering the year 1941 when an especial effort was made by the Muncaster Estate to collect as many eggs as possible, a more reliable figure for early war-year, and so, perhaps, pre-war, numbers might be found. If we knew, or could reasonably estimate, the number of eggs collected from each pair on an average, by divid- ing that figure into the total number of eggs collected, we would get the total number of breeding pairs. In 1941, it is recorded that 72,498 eggs were collected for the Estate in about six weeks, i.e. probably from about April 20th to about June ist. Hardly any other eggs can have been collected by people not working for the Estate during that season, as the sandhills had been taken over as a 26 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. military area. Mr. Joe Farren, the watcher at Ravcnglass for more than 25 years, considers that a pair usually lays again on about the second day after the nest has been robbed of a single egg, until the normal clutch has been laid, and that then there are a few days before the birds lay again. He also says that he has taken uji to 13 eggs from one nest. It is certainly a matter of fact that in pre- war years dwarf, deformed and unnaturally marked eggs with poor chalky shells could often be found towards the end of the collecting period — probably a sign of exhaustion in some of the birds. As it does not seem that we have much exact knowledge of the laying behaviour of the gulls when their nests are robbed, i.c. whether they really do go on laying till the normal number of eggs in a clutch has been laid, or whether they are discouraged for longer than a couple of days, or indeed whether a pair actually uses the same nest the whole time, some uncertainty still surrounds the number of eggs likely to be provided by one pair during a given period. However, without going into details we might suggest that an average pair would provide either two or three clutches of 2 or 3 eggs each in a four week collecting period, or an average of i to 2 eggs per week. In the 1941 season of six weeks the limits of eggs per pair would be, taking the lower figure, probably 5 to 10, taking into account the longer period : taking the higher figure it would be 6 to 12. Taking a round figure of 73,000 eggs collected, we would thus get limits for the total population of c. 14,600-7,300 or c. 12,150-6,000 respectively. Obviously the arithmetic mean of these figures could be reasonably accepted, if the extremes are agreed upon, and we therefore again reach a figure for the total population of about 10,000 pairs in 1941. In the writer’s opinion a mean figure of 7-8 eggs per pair in itself seems more acceptable since it would better account for signs of exhaustion in egg laying than the low figures of 5-6, the higher figures (ro-12) being altogether too high for an average. Applying this estimate to the 1951 season of four weeks approximately, when 24,568 eggs were collected by the Estate, we find that the total population would be between 7,500 and 3,750 O’" 3.330 : that is, if the total number of eggs collected was 30,000, and Mr. Farren estimates that about 6,000 eggs may be taken by people not working for the Muncaster Estate. The mean of these figures is 5,000-5,500, which agrees well enough with the count. In conclusion, then, the evidence collected in 1951, together with local opinion and the record of the egg-collecting, suggests that not so very many more than 10,000 pairs are likely to have bred at this colony before the war. Consequently the 1938 estimate must be regarded as grossly inaccurate. Thus, the colony would probably have fallen into Hollom’s fourth group (1,001-10,000) even if right at the top of it, and becomes comparable with some ten other colonies throughout the British Isles, rather than being so vastly superior in point of numbers, as formerly reported. By comparing the breeding area of this year with that of 1948 and pre- VOL. XLV.] BLACK-HEADED GULL COLONY. 27 war, it is quite clear that a decrease has occurred and is possibly still continuing. Further, it is seen that the deserted areas are those most quickly and easily reached when approaching from Drigg or Ravenglass : consequently thej^ are probably the places most heavily cropped by the egg-collectors and at the same time least easily protected. It is reasonable enough, without going into details, to suggest that the decrease has been largely due to excessive egg-collecting by unauthorised persons continued too long into the summer, during the immediate post-war years : and that this has been connected with an inability to afford the same degree of pro- tection and control as before the war. I should like to thank Mr. P. A. D. Hollom and Mr. E. M. Nicholson for helpful advice and criticism when preparing this article, and also the staff of the Muncaster Estate Office for giving me access to their records. To Mr. J. Farren of Ravenglass I am much obliged for providing many details of past occurrences and for the assistance of his experienced knowledge. I We accept Mr. Marchant’s conclusion, in the light of his careful resurvey, that the level of the pre-war breeding population of P)lack-headed Gulls at Ravenglass should be taken as about 10,000 pairs, rather than as “ some tens of thousands breeding pairs, proba- bly less than 50,000 ” previously stated {antea, vol. xxxiii, p. 220). The effect of this very large revision is to reduce the estimated breeding population for England in 1938 from about 70,000 pairs to about 35,000 pairs. This imderlines the need for treating with the greatest reserve estimates of the size of large colonies unless they are made with the utmost thoroughness and are, if possible, re-checked by an independent observer. Reference to the original return shows that Mr. Marchant noted that owing to lack of time he had been unable to attempt an estimate himself, and that he made it clear that he was merely passing on and commenting on an estimate tentatively put forward by local watchers. Moreover the Schedule declared that it was “ not intended to carry out a census, but any estimate of numbers will be welcome.” At subsequent stages, however, the resulting figures tended to be taken more literally than the circumstances of their collection could justify. It is fortunate, therefore, that the estimate has now been critically examined while it w still possible to carry out a comparison between the 1938 colony and the present one. — Eds. | (28) NOTES. Effect of a snow-storm on breeding birds.— With reference to the article on this subject {antea, vol. xliv, pp. 57-59), Mr. C. E. Bruce- Gardyne reports that in April, 1949, he had under observation nests of a Blackbird {Ttirdus merula) and a .Song-Thrush {T. ericetorum), both in rhododendrons, at Friockheim, Angus. On the morning of April 7th about 3 inches of snow fell. The Blackbird continued to incubate four eggs throughout the storm, but left the nest for a short while when the storm was over. The eggs, however, failed to hatch. The Song-Thrush, which had a more protected site than the Blackbird, also sat throughout the storm, but in the afternoon the nest was found tipped to one side, full of snow and apparently deserted. The snow was cleared out, the nest straightened, and the bird came back. The three eggs had all hatched by the evening of April 12th. Magpie covering eggs with nest-lining. — On April 12th, 1951, it was decided to destroy the nest of a Magpie [Pica pica) built in a low but extremely thick thorn bush near Newbury, Berks. The nest was cut out carefully, and then examined, but no eggs could be seen, although the birds had been in occupation, and one had been put off it several times, so that it had been presumed that incubation had started. The nest appeared in good condition and the lining (of the usual rootlets) was smooth and undisturbed. However, on pulling the structure about, the lining became displaced, and eggs were rendered visible. There were six of them, concealed under the lining, and all proved to be fresh. G. H. R. Pye-Smith_ Magpie running. — As 1 can trace no record of a Magpie {Pica- pica) running it may be worth recording that on April 9th, 1951, whilst travelling by train through Somerset 1 noticed, from a carriage window, a bird of this species running swiftly across an area of close cropped grassland. 'Fhe bird was about twenty yards distant and it was impossible to estimate how far it ran owing to the motion of the train. E. G. Richards. I Short-toed Larks in Sussex and Suffolk. — On April 29th, 1951 Michael Gore and myself saw two larks in appearance sufficiently different from any birds known to us to rouse our immediate atten- tion. The birds were encountered feeding on the short grass of a water meadow adjacent to Pagham Harbour, Sussex, a site extremely popular with many types of migrant passerines. After observing them for two minutes we concluded that the birds were not Sky- or Wood-larks and were probably of a species that is seldom met with in Britain. The birds were seen for a total of about ten minutes at 15-20 yards and briefly at 10 yards, to. 5 X 40 and 6 x 30 glasses being used. Light was good but cloudy, thus an accurate account of detail was possible. The bill appeared relatively stouter than a Sky-T.ark’s {Alauda Vol.. \1,V.J NOTES. 29 arvensis) and yellowish in colour. Legs were liesh coloured. Gait, a walk with occasional hop. The back was very boldly marked, feathers black-brown with light edgings, producing a chequer or zigzag pattern (juite unlike that of any familiar lark, Under- ])arts were pale sandy in colour and quite unstreaked except for a faint uniform collar on lower part of throat, formed by small streaks. An obscure darkish patch, difficult to dehne, on the side of the upper breast near the wing-coverts, was observed on one of the birds b}' myself and this detail was only seen for the duration of one short inspection, being at other times not visible or noticed. The head was that of a typical lark, crown sandy-brown with darker streaks running from forehead. Nape was lighter with uniform faint streaks. A pale sandy eye-stripe running from the eye was not very extensive. There was no trace of a crest. The tail was longer than a Woodlark’s {Ltillula arborea) and near enough to that of a Sky-Lark, though I have found the latter species to vary to some small degree. In colour, when in flight, the central part of the tail was distinctly darker than the rest of the plumage. The outer feathers were light. The wing pattern was not so clearly seen but possessed no distinctive feature. The birds did not call. No accurate estimate could be made of size, but it was obvioi:s that in this respect, they were not far removed from Sk3^-Larks and could have been smaller. B. Metcalfe. ('ommander F. H. Phillips, Mr. R. L. \’ernon and the writer ^■isited Havergatc, Suffolk, on June 24th, 1951. Whilst (j[uietly watching waders, terns and gulls from a hide, our attention was attracted by the appearance of a lark looking noticeably light-brown in colour, which had settled on marshy ground not more than 25 \’ards distant. Such unusual characters as stout but pale yellowish bill, broad' buffish-white lores and superciliary^ stripe, whole of throat, breast and belly unstreaked except for blackish-brown markings on either side of neck, were clearly visible through x S binoculars and x 30 telescope, It was in fact so unlike the numerous Sky-Larks {Alauda arvensis) present that we were convinced the bird was indeed one of the rare British larks. Later, on consulting 'riie Handbook it was evident the bird could be none other than a Short-toed Lark {Calandrella brachy dactyl a). The following are the plumage details as we made them - Head and nape light brown, hnely streaked ; mantle, back and wings greyish brown with prominent dark brown markings ; tail dark brown. Lores whitish with superciliary^ stripe pale huffish-white, ear coverts dark brown, hneffi streaked. Chin and neck white, breast and belly pale buffish-white with deeper buff across the upper breast. Pronounced blackish-brown markings on either side of the upper neck, with few light brown markings. Bill pale yellowish-brown, legs same colour. The bird was under review for at least five minutes, then with BRITISH BIRDS. [VOl.. XLV. .‘}U strong undulating liight it liew out of our field of view, only to return for just a short period. Once it sang from the ground, the gape' being a bright }'ellow-l:)rown colour. Unfortunately, mucli of its song was inaudible due to the constant calling of terns and gulls, but thin high-pitched notes were occasionally heard. It is believed that this is the first recorded instance of a Short- toed Lark for Suffolk. Bkknakd Kinc,. Early nesting of Tree-Creeper.— Mr. A. \'. Cornish reports that at I funster, Somerset, he saw a Tree-Creeper (Cerihia faniiliaria) nest- building on March 25th, 1951. The nest contained two eggs on April 1st and five on the 8th. Three well-fledged young were visilfle on May bth and all had flown b}^ May 13th. The Handbook states that the breeding season begins in “ the latter part of April ” ; another case of early breeding has recentl}^ been reported {antea, vol. xliv, p. 71). Blue Tits usurping a Great Tit’s nest. — A pair of Great Tits (Pams major) built in a nesting bo.x at Oxford in the middle, of .\pril, 1951. On the 21st there were two eggs and by the 2bth live. That afternoon a pair of Blue Tits (P. ccemleus) invaded the I10X. 'I'he Great Tits made a good deal of noise and twice attackc'd the Blue Tits, but were driven oft and the latter remained in })os- session. 'I'he weather turned cold and the Blue 'hits did not la}- till May ; seven eggs were laid and they hatched by June 4th (possibly a day or two sooner) and the young flew on the ibth. Under the Blue 'hit’s nest was the Great 'Fit’s containing five eggs. M. C. Kaukoki). I Cases of usurpation previously reported (aniea, vol. xliii, p. 184) include attacks by Great 'Fits on Blue 'Fits, but not vice versa. —Eds.]. Great Grey Shrike hovering. — I can find no mention of hovering by the Great Grey Shrike (Lanius excubitor) in The Handbook, in Olivier’s Monographic dcs Pies-Grieches or in Nainnann’s Vogel Mitteleuropas but there is a l^rief mention in Pfeifer’s Taschenbuch dcr Dcutschen Vbgelwelt that the species sometimes ho\-ers like a Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus). In North-west Germany where the bird is not uncommon, 1 have seen them hovering several times during the last two years. 'Fhc bird normally has an undulating flight and before hovering rises about six feet higher than usual and then hovers at an angle of about 30 degrees from the perpendicular. It surprised me that on each occasion the tail was kept closed, unlike the Kestrel’s. Possibly this is associated with the more perpendicular j)osition that the shrike adopts. 'Fhey seem to remain stationary only for a short time ; fifteen seconds was the longest that 1 noticed. 'Fhis habit is associated with hunting, for 1 watched one on March 3rd, i()5o, that was hovering over a stubble-field in Schleswig-Holstein. 'Fhc bird \Ol.. XI, V. NOTES. 31 searched several ditlerent spots in this way and tlien suddenly dropped down to the ground where it appeared to catch and eat some prey. The usual hovering height was from three to four yards off the ground and when dropping down the tail is held above the back and the wings downward, rather like a Sky-Lark {Alauda arvensis). jEFi-KHV G. H.VRkison. Unusual feeding behaviour of Willow-Warblers and Whitethroat. -At a small reservoir at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, Leicestershire, on ,\pril 22nd, 1951, a bright sunny morning with a cool east wind, I saw two Willow-Warblers {Phylloscopus tivchilus) feeding on a grassy bank. After a time they flew well out over the w'ater, hovering some six inches above its surface. They appeared to jjerch on the leaves and stalks of Broad-leaved Pondweed {Poia- mogeton polygonifoUus), sometimes those under the water, so that their bodies touched the surface. They pecked at something near the surface, presumably insects, fluttering their wings as they did so. I also saw a Whitethroat {Sylvia communis) behaving in a similar manner some distance away. All three birds continued these tactics for the remainder of my stay, half-an-hour or so. Hirun- dines which were hawking low over the surface of the water dis- turbed them by making dashes at them as the}^ perched on the weed. I have never seen warblers do this before, nor have 1 seen it referred to in any literature. G. Rowbottom. Song of Female Blackcap. — On April 22nd, 1950, whilst on the Ouantock Hills, .Somerset, I heard fairly good song from a female Blackcap {Sylvia atricapilla). The songster was perched in the open, slightly above eye level, and by making use of existing cover 1 was finally within six feet of it and clearly noted the red-browai, not black, cap. The song consisted of short phrases of two or three seconds duratidi and was far more subdued than that of the male although possessing the same rich warbling notes. E. G. Rich.vrds. Mistle-Thrush roosting on a house. — Mr. Derek C. Huhne has sent an account of a Mistle-Thrush {Turdus viscivorus) which roosted on the window-sill of a suburban house in Derb}/. It was observed on every night but three between January 5th and h'ebruary 5th, 1951. Once it had settled down the bird was not disturbed either by lights, movement or observers on the inside of the window, or by cars in the drive outside. The window-sill faced N. E.,but the bird continued to roost there in E. or N.E. winds. Blackbird using feathers as nest-lining. — Mr. M. C. Powys Maurice reports that on April 22nd, 1951, at Droxford, Hants, he found the nest of a Blackbird {Turdus mcrula), the lower half of which was neatly lined with feathers. The feathers were identified as breast feathers of a female Blackbird. Blackbird attacking its own image. -Throughout March, 1951, a male Blackbird {Turdus merula) freqiiently attacked its own image 32 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XL\'. reflected in the window of a garage in the garden of niy house, and in the window of a neighbouring garage. At times the bird stood on the branch of a tree and pecked at its image, but more commonly fle^\• at it from a bough about a foot or eighteen inches away, its beak repeatedly tapping hard against the window pane. E. F. Wakken. A “ Double” Robin’s nest. On March 20th, 1951, a Robin (Lu'ithcicus rubecula) completed a nest on a ledge inside a small shed in my garden at Horton-cum-Studley, near Oxford. The (;ggs laid during the next few days were eaten by mice, and thc^ nest was deserted about March 28th, 1951. The pair of Rol)ins (both identihed by coloured rings) then reared a brood in a stable nearby, the young birds being fledged on May nth, 1951. A few days later the fledglings left the garden, and the cock bird has not been seen since. On June 17th, 1951, I noticed a Robin entering the small shed in which the earlier nest had been built, and on examining the nest I found that a second “cup ” had been made, and well lined, in the considerable mass (7 in. high) of grasses and leaves of the original nest. The old “ cup ” was somewhat dis- placed and distorted by the pressure of the new one. The Robin now (June 29th) incubating five eggs has been identified by her ring as the hen of tlie pair already referred to, but her original mate (which was very tame) has not reappeared, and an imringed Robin was trapped and ringed within a few yards of the nest on June 2ist, 1951. Raymond F. Bavvtrhe. Dominant and Submissive Behaviour of Bee-eaters. — On May 8th, 1951, several Bee-eaters {Mcrops apiastcr) were feeding or resting in an area about a quarter of a mile from their breeding site in Provence. One Bee-eater flew to another that was perched on a piece of dead tamarisk and made as if to pei#i beside it, but tlic otlier raised its head and the\^ sparred Indell^q then one fled, the other pursuing it a 3'ard or two, but then desisting. A moment later anotlier Bee-eater, “ A,” with an insect in its bill, glided up to a bush on which live others were sitting and perched a few inches from one of them. This latter raised its head, with bill pointed defensively at the alighting bird “ A.” “ A ” then swallowed his prey, Hew to a ])crch a yard awa}' and settled beside “ B.” As he alighted beside her “ A ” cuffed “ B ’’ hard with his wing, striking downward and raising the offside wing in the same manner as a lighting dove or })igeon. “ B ’’ cowered and lowered her head, whereat “ A ’’ desisted and after perching bolt upright with head feathers raised for a moment or two, he relaxed, as did “ IT” and thev both perched peacefully side by side. After a few minutes “ A ” rose, circled, alighted on a perch some yards away and calU-d, whereat “ B ” flew straight to him and perched beside him. Identical behaviour was seen on the same day between two other “ pairs ” of Bee-eaters except that owing to the numbers of birds Hying about I was not able to keeji track of them once they had VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 33 taken wing again. In one case the “ alighting and cutting ” bird had an insect in its bill which it did not eat till afterwards when they were sitting relaxed together. In each case the submissive bird appeared from its slightly less brilliant colouring to be a female. Aly own opinion is that this behaviour is connected with pair formation, only females ready to pair responding by submissive behaviour when thus attacked, and males or “ unripe ” females either lieeing or responding defensivel^v Further obser\'ations are of course needed to prove or disprove this explanation. Derek Goodwin. Unusual Feeding Ground of Lesser Spotted Woodpecker. — On May 3rd, 1951, 1 was watching a Reed-Bunting {Emberiza schceniclus) in the extensive reed bed of the worked out portion of a gravel pit at Aldermaston, Berkshire, when I saw a small pied bird in the reeds beyond. This bird, which was readily identihed as a male Lesser Spotted M'oodpecker {Dryobates minor), was watched for the next se\’enteen minutes at ranges from six to fifty yards, working up the stems of the Great Reed Mace {Typha latifolia). I was unable to see what food it was gathering in spite of the good light, short range and aid of X 8 binoculars. Some reeds it merely probed, others it tapped lightly whilst others again it split open. At the end of this time it flew off to an ivy-covered elm tree near liy. K. D. G. Mitchell. Rough-legged Buzzard in Co. Galway. — On September 5th, 1950, after stormy weather, it was learned that a large hawk had been picked up alive on the mountain near Leenane, on the northern boundary of Co. Galway. Next day I was able to inspect the bird which proved to be a Rough-legged Buzzard {Btiteo lagopus), an adult female on wing measurement : it was still alive and taking food, but unable to fly, having probably been damaged internally during the recent storm. It died within a day or two, and it is understood that it was forwarded with the help of Major R. F. Ruttledge to the Dublin Museum for preservation. The interest of this record lies not only in the fact that this is the first absolutely authentic record of the species in Connaught {vide “ A list of the birds of the Counties of Galway and Mayo,” by R. F. Ruttledge, Proc.R.I.A., vol. 52, 1950), but also in the earliness of the occurrence, previous Irish records apparently not being before October {vide “ A list of Irish Birds,” b3^ G. R. Humphreys, 1937). English occurrences before October are also unusual, according to The Handbook. S. Marchant. Bittern “ freezing ” when standing on open ground. — Mr. Bernard King has sent an account of a Bittern {Boiaurus stellaris) which was seen to ” freeze,” with head and neck extended and bill pointing upwards, on an open pathway at Blagdon reservoir, Somerset, on January 7th, 1951. The bird was watched from a car and main- tained its posture for some two minutes before walking off down the 34 BRITISH BIRDS. rvoi.. xi.v. track “ with a slow, hif,hi-stci)ping gait, sometimes i)icking up what appeared to be small pieces of grit.” The bird cventuallj^ Hew when Mr, King got out of the car. \\c understand that a number of observers saw a Bittern which kept on ” freezing ” in a fairly open spot at Cley, Norfolk, in the autumn of 1951. Canada Goose Diving. — On April 14th, 1951, on the lake at Bretton Park, West Yorks., a Canada Goose {Branta canadensis) which had been swimming along quietly not far from the shore, suddenly submerged, with a considerable commotion. It reappeared some feet further on and repeated its underwater excursion twice. On the third and hnal dive it remained submerged for about 10 seconds and surfaced a correspondingly greater distance away. There seemed to be no external stimulus for this strange dis- play. Nothing was present to alarm the bird and other members of the same species were in the vicinity, some apparently sitting. 'I'he weather was fine with a cold north-westerly wind. A. N, Sykes. [Mr. N. G. Blurton Jones, who has spent much time watching Canada Geese, informs us that, though young birds dive readil}' when in danger, he has never seen an adult do so, even when in moult. — Eds.] American Wigeon in Cheshire. — On February 28th, 1951, Mr. Mark Dean saw a drake American Wigeon {Anas americana) on Tabley Mere, Cheshire and on the following day I saw it in a flock of some sixty Common Wigeon {Anas penelope). It is, I understand, the first known occurrence of this species in the county, although from May 19th to 31st, 1937, 1 saw on Ros- therne Mere an obviously hybrid American Wigeon, which had doubtless escaped from captivity. On enquiring this year at the Severn Wildfowl Trust we were told that none has escaped from the collection there, and we have not discovered evidence of an escape from any other source. 'I'he possibility of its having reached England under its own power is strengthened by the fact that Dr. Finnur Guddmundsson of Reykjavik saw an adult drake in breeding plumage on June 27th, 1949, on Lake Myvatyn, Iceland. He has written in a letter to Mr. J. Fisher to say that F. Coburn's records of its breeding in Iceland fifty years ago are unreliable, although it is likely that he shot an adult drake there in i89(>. The species has not been recorded in Iceland between 1899 ^94b, but it is at least possible that the bird he saw in 1949 or any other that reached Iceland might accompany the Common Wigeon on their way south. A. W. Boyd. Defensive behaviour of Cormorant. — Mr. Bernard King has sent an account of a display by a Cormorant {Phalacrocorax carho) in defence of its young, seen at Steep Holm, Bristol Channel, on June i8th, 1950. A pair was together, one attending the chick, when a third bird arrived. 'I'he bird at the nest uttered deep, guttural VOL. XLV. NOTES. 35 calls, spread its wings over the chick and began a rhytlimic side-to- side movement of the head, accompanied slow, alternate stamping of the feet. The performance lasted two or three minutes before the intruder departed. Mr. King points out that this display has some affinities with an autumn display already recorded {antea, vol. xliii, p. 341). Cormorant perching on a cable. — On June nth, 1951, near Pentre-berw, Anglesey, Messrs. P. E. S. Whalley and M. j. Wotton watched a Cormorant {Phalacrocorax carbo) resting on a high tension electricity cable at a considerable height above the ground. Despite its natural insecurity in such a position the bird even extended its wings to dry for a short while. Reactions of Fulmars to Skuas. — The note on aggressive display of Fulmar [Fitlmarus glacialis) [anted, p. 107), prompts me to send in the following observations I made whilst aboard 0.TT.5. Weather Explorer in the North Atlantic in July, 1950. The Fulmars tended to collect into more compact flocks on the water and fly more together whenever there were skuas about. On July 13th, a single Arctic Skua [Stercorarius parasiticus) chased one or two Fulmars. None of them dropped any food and the skua flew off without feeding. There is no record in The Hand- book of Arctic Skuas attempting to parasitize Fulmars. When the skua first appeared most of the Fulmars flew up to the ship leaving one by itself on the water. When the Arctic Skua flew near this bird it reacted in a similar manner to the one described in the note referred to above, the only differences being that its bill was opened wide and its partly-opened wings instead of being raised over its back were just held away from its sides. The response to the presence of Great Skuas [Stercorarius skua) was more intense than that elicited by the Arctic Skua. The fanned tail was held almost vertical and the hind-part of the bod}^ raised out of the water and some Fulmars in this aggressive posture rushed towards and stopped just short of Great Skuas sitting on the water feeding on scraps. Neither species of skua responded in any way to this display. F. R. Allison. Unusual call of Curlew. — A note [antea, vol. xliii, p. 380) recorded a call of the Curlew [Numenius arquata) which did not appear to have been recorded previously. Two further records of this call have been supplied. On February 3rd, 1951, Mr. M. J. Wotton saw a party of Curlews flying along the Menai Straits, several of them calling “ with a continuously repeated, rather nasal ‘ ark, ark, ark,’ unlike any of the normal calls of the species.” Mr. M. J. Rogers reports that at Cley, Norfolk, in January, 1951, both he and Mr. R. A. Richardson heard this note. Mr. Rogers adds that when he first heard the call he thought it came from geese. Great Snipe in Somerset in 1949 and 1950. — Mr. Bernard King has sent us detailed accounts of single Great Snipe [Capella media) 36 BRITISH BIRDS. VOL. XLV. seen on March 6th, 104c), at Blagdon, on April 3rd, 1440, at tl\e chpy pits, Clieddar, and on December 27th, 1950, at Blagdon, Somerset ; on the first occasion Mr. King was accompanied by Mr. R. H. Pould- ing and on the last by Mr. M. J. Wotton. The species is described by H. H. Davis (M revised list of the birds of the Bristol District, p. 256) as a " very rare vagrant ” to the dis- trict. A search of available county reports shows the following other records for these years : — 1949— One, Yorkshire, September (two possibles, Devon/Cornwall border, August). 1950— One, Warwicks, May ; one, Berks., September ; one, Sussex, September. Terek Sandpiper in Sussex and Suffolk. — When at the Midrips, near Camber, Sussex, on May 30th, 1951, I saw a bird working along beneath the foot-high mud bank and noted the following details : general size and build of a Common Sandpiper {Actitis hypoleiicos) with similar bobbing action, but uniform ashy-grey above with perhaps a buffish tinge ; there was a pale stripe through the eye, and throat, breast and under-parts were pure white. The outstanding features were, however, a long, slender black bill with (as I jotted it down on the spot) “ a definite slight upturn ” — not so pronounced, that is, as in an .\vocet {Avosetta recurvirostra) — and legs somewhat longer than a Common Sandpiper’s and bright yellow. In flight, skimming the water from bank to bank, the impression gix'en was that of a ghostly Common Sandpiper with that bird’s characteristic shallow, “ flicking ” wing action. The bird was watched for some fifteen minutesjsteadily feeding, usually dipping the morsels obtained from the mud into water before swallowing. Owing to the low bank it was most convenient to watch from across the stretch of water, but views within 25 yards were obtained with S X 30 binoculars and x 25 telescope under excellent light con- ditions, though a high wind was troublesome. On checking over the details of my observations with The Hand- book, and after examining skins at the British Museum, 1 am con- x’inced that the bird was a Terek Sandpiper {Xemts cinerens). H. Betts. On the evening of June 2nd, 1951, W. E. Rowe saw a strange wader on a marsh near Southwold. In better light next day he was able to identify it as a Terek Sandpiper {Xemts cinerens). It remained until about 16.30 G.M.T., June 6th, and was seen by a number of observers including Mr. F. C. Cook, Chairman of the Lowestoft Field Club. In general appearance it was a conspicuously light-coloured wader, intermediate in size between a Redshank {Tringa tot anus) and a Curlew-Sandpiper {Calidris testacea), with which birds it was momen- tarily in close company, grey (brownish not bluish) above and white below. The two dark streaks on the back converging slightly towards the tail, the bright yellow legs, and the dark, slender, upturned bill were very obvious characteristics. small dark patch VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 37 was clearly visible at the carpal joint of the folded wing. The neck and upper breast were slightly greyed. There was a small white stripe from the base of the bill to the eye. The base of the bill was rather lighter than the remainder but this could only be seen at elose range. We did not see much of the bird in flight, but the fore-wing appeared rather dark and the secondaries to have white tips ; but there was nothing like the contrast of a Redshank’s wing. It “ bobbed ” in sandpiper fashion, but not so constantly as a Common Sandpiper {Actitis hypoleucos). It waded about the shallow pools often up to the belly feathers, and appeared to feed almost exclusively from the surface — once or twice only was the bill totally immersed. Normally it remained apart from other birds. It was once put up by a Redshank and once by a Ringed Plover {Charadrms hiaticula). On the evening of the 5th it appeared restless and called repeatedly, a note which I wrote as a sweet, quick “ wee-wee- wee ” (occasionally “ wee-wee ”), undoubtedly The Handbook’s “ dii dii du.” G. B. G. Benson. [Careful search by other observers in the area of the Midrips on June 2nd produced no sign of the bird reported by Mr. Betts. It is thus possible that these two records refer to the same individual. Attention is drawn to the photograph, reproduced on Plate 12, of a Terek Sandpiper caught and ringed at Ottenby, the Swedish bird observatory in the Baltic. Details of this occurrence, the fourth record for Sweden, together with another photograph, will be found in Vdr Fagelvdrld, 10 : 103, 123. We are indebted to Mr. A. G. Parsons for forwarding this photograph. It is also of interest to note that the first occurrence of this species in Denmark took place in 1951, an adult having been caught near Copenhagen on July 23rd. An account of this, together with a photograph of the bird whicii is now in the Copenhagen Zoo, appears in Dansk Orni- thologisk Forenings Tidsskrift, 45: 223-225. — Eds.]. Redshanks’ reaction to an Otter. — On June 23rd, 1950, my wife and son and I were sitting in one of the observation huts at Mins- mere, Suffolk, with the R.S.P.B. watcher. The hut faced a longish mud flat between a pool of deep water and a reed-bed. About 20 Redshanks {Tringa totanus) were feeding quietly on the mud with six Sheld-Duck {Tadorna tadorna). When a Bittern {Botauyus stellaris) emerged from the reeds neither Redshanks nor Sheld- Ducks showed any sign of excitement, but suddenly all the Red- shanks flew up and circled excitedly over the pool, very close to the water. We noticed a large black object in the water and soon afterwards the head of an Otter (Lutra hUra) appeared. The Otter went on land into tlie reeds, only its head remaining visible. All twenty Redshanks formed a semi-circle round the head, their bills pointing towards the Otter. The birds were bowing and bob- bing all the time, appearing very excited, but did not utter a call. The Sheld-Duck continued feeding quietly. After a short while 38 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. the Otter emerged from the reed-bed and walked very slowly the whole length of fhe mud-flat. The Redshanks formed into a solemn procession at each side of the Otter walking very slowly in step with it, bowing and bobbing occasionally, but still silent. The Sheld- Ducks joined the strange procession, walking slowly in the rear, also silent. Redshanks and Sheld-Ducks accompanied the Otter the whole way until it disappeared into another reed-bed farther away. Then tlie Sheld-Ducks walked back and the Redshanks flew back and continued feeding as if nothing had happened. Gustav Warburg. Common Gulls robbing other birds of food. — Mr. E. H. Gillham has sent an account of Common Gulls {Lams canus) hovering over feeding Oyster-catchers (Hamatopus osiralegus) and attempting to make them drop food by landing on their backs or by chasing them. Common Gulls were also seen to chase Rooks (Corvus frugilegus) which were feeding on the shore. These observations were made in the North Kent marshes in the winter 1949-50. P.A.D.H. adds records of observations made in March, 1947 in the Isle of Wight, where Common Gulls were seen to chase Fieldfares {Turdus pilaris), Lapwings {Vanellus vanellns) and Black-headed Gulls {Lamts ridibundus) , to rob them of food. A.W.B. states that Common Gulls sometimes join Black-headed Gulls in their persistent attacks on grebes when they emerge with food on the Cheshire meres. Common Gull nesting in tree. — Col. R. Sparrow informs us that on May nth, 1951, he visited a small colony of Common Gulls {Lams canus) on a small island in Loch Oich, Inverness. One pair had a nest on the horizontal bough of a Scots Pine about 15 feet from the ground. A record of nesting in birch trees in Scotland has already been published {anica, vol. xxxix, p. 61). Storm-driven Kittiwake quartering ground in search of food. — Mr. Bernard King states that on February 14th, 1950, following severe westerly gales, there were three Kittiwakes {Rissa tridaciyla) at Cheddar reservoir, Somerset. On February 19th one of these lairds was observed over a long period quartering a ])loughed held in search of food and only when food was obtained returning to the reservoir to sip water. On February 26th all three Kittiwakes were found dead. Corn-Crake calling in February. — Mr. C. R. Tublas reports that on February nth, 1951, near Bedhampton, Hants, he heard a Corn-Crake {Crex crex) calling from a half-cut cabbage held. He had good views of the bird and heard it calling for 27 minutes. This appears to be an excc]>tionally early date for a bird to be calling, and this individual had presumabl}/ wintered. Under-water habits of Moorhen. — On the evening of April 2jrd, 1951, 1 noticed a Moorhen {(lallinula chloroptis) submerge in a small pond in Denne Park, Horsham, Sussex, and hide under a loose branch of a tree with only the ti]i of its tail above water. VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 39 When I returned ten minutes later it sulimcrged again and when 1 removed the branch it remained immobile so that it could be pushed with a stick, showing that it was not holding on to the stems of water plants with its feet. After continuing this for some time 1 lifted what i thought was a carcase out of the water, but it rose buoyantly. After a few seconds the bird flew away. Dr. Ticehurst states in The Handbook that he was satisfied that a bird which showed no more than the beak and forehead above water did not hold on to anything with its feet, but in this case a totally submerged bird was not holding on to water plants. Gordon Slvtield. Leg-colour of Moorhen. — In connexion with the notes already published {antea, vol. xliii, p. 383 ; xliv, p. 140) on Moorhens {Gal- linula chloropus) with legs of unusual colour, Mr. A. R. T. Moody records that in March, 1950, in the water meadows of the lower Test, Plants, he saw a pure white Moorhen in which the bill and legs were bright yellow. Drowning of Red-legged Partridge. — ^On April 7th, 1951, at Spurn Head, Yorkshire a Red-legged Partridge {Alectoris rufa) was first noticed flying northwards over the Humber approxi- mately 200 yards from the shore. It then turned into the westerly wind, stalled, lowered its feet and settled on the water. There was a fair swell on the estuary, but the bird swam bo5^antly like a duck, southwards with the current for about 60 yards. Gradually the current brought it inshore, but its head sank lower and lower, eventually dropping under water. On recovery, after ten or so minutes afloat the bird was dead ; it was found to have taken in a good quantity of saline water, but its plumage had stood the swim fairly well. John R. Govett. REVIEWS. A History of the Birch of Durham. By G. W. Tempcrlcy {Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. of Northumberland, Durham and NewcaMe-upon-Tyne (New Series) vol. ix, 1951). Price 15s. The County of Durham has in the past been overshadowed by its larger neighbour Northumberland in ornithological writings. Hitherto the best separate account of its birds was that contributed by Canon H. B. Tristram to the Victoria County History of Durham, published in 1905, but this was hardly more than an annotated list. Now we have a real history giving for each species what is known of its status in the past and in the pre.sent. In addition to the published writings of Selby, Proctor, Hogg, Hancock, and others, Mr. Temperley has been able to consult two unpublished lists of the birds of the county compiled respectively by Edward Backhouse of Sunderland in 1834 and John Hutchinson of Lanchester in 1840, both including statements 40 BRITISH BIRDS. VOL. XiV. uii tliu status oi tlie species in tlieir time, lie has thus very strong grounds on uhich to base his estimates of the changes that ha\e occurred in the past century and he quotes the evidence fully. it is satisfactory to lind that in spite of the great increase in jropnlation and industrialization in the east of the county, comparatively few sjrecics have disappeared altogether and it is possible to give considerable lists of species which have increased. Perhaps the most unexpected of these increases is dm- to the colonization of the cliffs near Marsden successively by the J'ulmar, the Kittiwake, the Herring Gull and the Lesser Black-back within the last twenty years, no cliff-nesting seabirds having been recorded as breeding in the county previousl}'. On the other hand the colonics of terns which, with the 03'ster-catcher, Kingce^ Plover and Sheldrake, formerl}' nested on the dunes at the mouth of the Tees, have now almost disappeared, and the marshes and mnd-flats of the Tees estnar^g and J arrow .Slake at the month of the' Tyne, have been greatl}' reduced in area and arc much less attractive to wildfowl .and waders than was formerly the case. The loss or diminution in area of famous bird haunts on the coastline has been partially compensated by the formation of ponds due to the Hooding of disused brick-fields or the subsidence of land over coal-mines and b}' the creation of a sewage farm for Darlington. These have provided many inter- esting records in recent 3'ears ; whilst the western parts of the countv, with a large area of moorland, some of which rises to over 2,000 ft., and tlie upper portions of the valley’s of the Tees, Wear and Derwent, remain almost unspoilt and provide habitats for birds of man)- kinds. In the introductory section of this book Mr. Tcmpericy has provided a brief summary of the ])rincipal habitats and their characteristic birds, an account of the changes to some of which we have already referred, and brief accounts of migration and other bird movements, of the jirotection of birds in the county, of museums and collections and of former Durham ornithologists and their writings. A sketch map of the county is ])ro\ ided at the end, but there are no illustrations. In the copy sent for review there is no indication on the cover that this is a si>ccial volume of the .Society's 'Lransactions devoted to a single subject, hut w.' un lerstan 1 that bound copies suitabl)' titled are also available. W.IL.\. The llii'ds of Newfoitndla>i(7. By If. S. Peters and T. D. Burleigh (Department of Natural Kesources, Province of Newhntndland, St. John’s, 1031). 'Fhe authors of this book are officers of the United States h'ish and Wildlife Service by which they were deputed to jrrepare it when a request was rccei\ ed from the Government of NewfoundlaTid in 1941 for a book to aid the people of the island in idcntifv’ing their binls. tntroductory sections deal with Ornithological Work in Newfoundland ; The Study of Birds in Nature ; Geographical Distribution and Life Zones ; Conservation and Protection of Birds ; and Systematic Classification. The bulk of the volume is devoted to the individual species, or rather subspecies, since where two races of a species are recorded from the island they are given separate headings with trinomial names not only in Latin but in English, e.g.. Boreal Yellow-shafted Flicker and Northern Yellow-shafted Flicker. This seems to the reviewer very unnecessary and undesirable in a book which the authors hope “ will be of special interest and use to the schools.” The book is illustrated by 32 coloured plates by Roger Tory Peterson on each of which several species are depicted. These plates are very much like those produced by Fuertes for Forbush’s ” Birds of Massachusetts ” and cannot fail to enhance the reputation of the artist, e.specially among.st those who only know him through his ” Field Guides.” The authors have in fact provided a text-book of Newfoundland birds, with admirable illustrations, which will doubtless long remain the standard work on the subject. But those who wish to identify birds in the field are likely to continue to use Peterson’s ” Field Guide ” in preference to this large and heavv volume. W.B..\. R. M. LOCKLEY’S THE NATURE-LOVERS’ ANTHOLOGY Compton Mackenzie: “ A good anthology ... I particularly liked the illustrations”. Richard Church: “A delightful companion ... I know that I shall enjoy it for a long time ”. B.B.C. Home Service: “ It’s a book which gives you the feel of the open air and the countryside without all the unreal sentimentalising one finds all too often in such books ”. Punch: “ A ‘ must ’ for all nature lovers ”. West Country Magazine: “. . . charmingly decorated by Phyllida Lumsden ”. 10/6 net Published by H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD. EBOOK SERVICE. — Out of print and rare ornithological works will be searched for and reported on. Natural History books bought. Please address communi- cations to Book Dept., British Birds, 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C. I. 6BRITISH BIRDS, BOUND VOLUMES.— The Publishers have now available only seven sets of bound volumes. Nos, I to 12 and the Index to r.hese 12 volumes. The charge is 30/- each volume and 10/- for the Index : )r £10 for the complete set of 12 volumes and the Index. In addition they “Will consider the purchase of back volumes (bound or unbound). A VERY LIMITED number of copies of the work Glossarium Europae Avium by Harriett I. JORGENSEN and Cecil I. BLACKBURNE are available from H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., at 12/6 each. MR. & MRS. D. A. T. MORGAN, M.B.O.U., Hunt’s Barn, Knodishall, Suffolk, will welcome a few ornithological paying guests. Separate Sitting Room avail- able. Garage for I, parking space for 4. Bicycles on loan. Packed lunches a speciality. Handbook for reference. Ideal centre for Walberswick, Minsmere and Havergate. I mile Leiston Station. Terms £5 5s. p.w., IS/- per day inclusive. BRITISH BIRDS BINDING. The Publishers are now able to undertake the binding of Volume XLIV at a charge of 8s. 6d. per volume. This charge also applies to any earlier volumes which subscribers wish to have bound. The parts to be bound should be sent, with remittance please, to British Birds (Binding), 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. WALBERSWICK This charming Suffolk coast village on the edge of the Dunwich marshes and within five miles of the Minsmere Sanctuary is an ideal centre for Bird Watchers. STAY AT THE BELL HOTEL Small ♦ Comfortable •* Warm ♦ Good Food Moderate Terms •* Fully Licensed Telephone : Southwold 3109 Printed in Gt. Britain by The Riverside Press, Ltd., Twickenh.\m, Middx. Published by H. F. & G. WITHERBY, LTD., 6 Warwick Court, W.C.I. BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST BRITISH BIR,DS EDITORS. " E. M. Nicholson 28 FEB 1852 and W. B. Alexander - A. W. Boyd P. A. D. Hollom - N. F. Ticehurst - J. D. Wood Contents of Number 2, Vol. XLV, February, 1952. PAGE Shearwaters in the English Channel. By E. M. Nicholson ... ... 41 The distraction displays of the Little Ringed Plover and territorial competition with the Ringed Plover. By The Rev. E. A. Armstrong 55 Studies of some species rarely photographed. XXXVI. The Nutcracker. Photographed by P. O. Swanberg ... ... ... 60 The Little Ringed Plover in Great Britain in 1950 By E. R. Parrinder 61 The Index of Heron Population, 1951. By W. B. Alexander ... 64 Notes : — Rooks hiding pine cones and other food ... ... ... ... 68 Nutcracker in Yorkshire (K. Dawson) ... ... ... ... ... 68 Unusual nesting place of Chaffinch ... ... ... ... ... 68 House-Sparrows attacking Swallows ... ... ... ... ... 68 Swallows and House-Martins alighting on the ground to feed ... 69 Fourteen House-Martins roosting in one nest (A. G. Oldfield) ... 69 Kingfisher attacking Little Grebe (Carol Greenwell) ... ... ... 70 Courtship and threat displays of Kingfisher (R. G. Pettitt ; Geoffrey Boyle) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 70 Marsh-Harrier in Surrey ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 71 Distraction display of Pintail ... ... ... ... ... ... 71 Eiders off coast of Kent ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 71 Balearic Shearwater off Sussex and Norfolk (L. P. Alder, D. D. Harber, C. M. James, A. R. Mead-Briggs) ... ... ... ... 72 Colonial nesting of Great Crested Grebe ... ... ... ... 72 Wood-Sandpiper in Radnorshire ... ... ... ... ... 73 Golden Plover in Sutherland showing characters of Northern race (David Jenkins) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 73 Sandwich Terns carrying food on migration (T. C. Smout and H. P'. Dixon) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 73 Herring-Gull dropping and catching object in bill ... ... ... 74 Iceland Gulls in Caernarvonshire ... ... ... ... ... 74 Supplementary Notes. ... ... ... ... ' .i. ... ... 74 Reviews ; — Granlands Fugle (Part II). By Finn Salomensen ... ... ... 78 The laud of the Loon. By G. K. ^'eates ... ... ... ... 79 Letter ; — “Sootv Shearwater off Sussex.” (Professor .M. P. M. Meiklejolin) ... 79 BRITISH BIRDS Number 2, Vol. XLV, February 1952. SHEARWATERS IN THE ENGLISH CHANNEL. BY E. M. Nicholson. In his well-known paper, “On the Habits and Distribution of Birds on the North Atlantic”, Wynne-Edwards (1935) called attention to the possibility that some of the records of shearwaters in the English Channel had been based on errors of identification due to observers having jumped to conclusions in ignorance of the number of different forms which might be present in these waters. He referred particularly to the question whether earlier ornithologists had attributed to the Great Shearwater {Pujfinus gravis) specimens and observations which in fact related to Cory’s Shearwater (P. kuhlii = P. diomedea). The late H. F. Witherby followed this up (1940) with a review of The Species of Great Shearwaters in the English Channel in which he showed that all the Great Shearwaters identified as P. gravis which he had been able to trace were correctly identified. He concluded that, on our present knowledge, P. kuhlii “must be deemed very scarce off our coasts”. In this paper he mentioned that Wynne-Edwards had informed him of some doubts about the correctness of his identification as P. kuhlii of a con- siderable number of birds seen in the Channel on September loth, 1933, between the Casquets and Prawle Point, Devon. It was on the strength of these birds that Wynne-Edwards had raised the question and had based his conclusions about the field-characters of kuhlii, which were followed by various other observers. On October 17th, 1945 (see nntea, vol. xxxix, p. 271), I saw off southern Cornwall and Devon large numbers of shearwaters “differing from kuhlii” (of which I had seen dozens in the Atlantic up to two days previously) “in smaller size, absence of extension down sides of neck of dark colour from upper-parts, and lack of a white patch over the tail-base, from gravis also in the lack of white above the tail and the lack of a “cap”, and from pujfinus in the contrast between the dark head and blackish primaries and the brown mantle and remaining upper feathers of the wings, together with the apparently larger size.” I concluded that these birds must have been Pujp,nus p. mauretanicus, which M. Noel Mayaud had found to migrate regularly round the Brittany coast and up to the Somme during July-September and which Wynne-Edwards had now recognised were the birds which he had seen on September loth, 1933. I added “Nearly thirty examples of mauretanicus have been shot off the Channel and East coasts of Great Britain, but considering this total and the bird’s distinctive appearance it is surprising to find that there are no British sight records The identification of birds at 42 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. sea is often difficult and the difficulty is increased by the fact that knowledge of the field-characters of some of the birds Concerned is still incomplete. This is particularly true of the shearwaters, and the field-descriptions in The Handbook of P. knhlii and P. p. mauretaniciis appear to call for some revision (in respect of the white basal patch on the tail which is normally conspicuous in kuhlil as well as in gravis and in respect of the shade and colour distinctions, especially as between the upper and under surfaces in specimens of maiiretanicus which do not belong to the extreme dusky type).” While preparing this paper in February, 1946, I had written a letter to British Birds on Shearwaters in the English Channel in which, after referring' to H. F. Witherby’s confirmation of Channel records of gravis, I said “There is however no such firm basis for the records in this area of the North Atlantic Shearwater [Pujfiniis knhlii borealis) which, like the Mediterranean race (P. k. kuhlii) has apparently only been fully verified as a British bird on the basis of skins obtained in Sussex, both picked up in early Spring .... Repeated N. Atlantic transects by good observers have shown that P. kuhlii, presumably borealis, moves north of its most northerly breeding stations in the Azores and the Berlengas in summer, extending uninterruptedly up to within 300 miles west of the Channel by late July. Notes kindly made available by Mr. H. G. Alexander show that on August 30th last this species, together with P. gravis and P. p. puffinus was identified at intervals up to nearly as far east as the Lizard, on a voyage which had given previous opportunities of comparison to this excellent and highly experienced observer. Philipson [antea, vol. xxxiii, p. 245) also found kuhlii extending more or less con- tinuously up to near the Scillies on a voyage back from Jamaica on September 30th, 1939. Nevertheless available evidence indicates that kuhlii only reaches this extreme north-east limit of its regular range in small numbers and for at most a few weeks in August-September. ” Further information only adds to the mystery why the only specimens of kuhlii (or diomedea as it must now be called) for the British Isles should have been obtained at a season when there is no reason to expect its presence in our waters and on a short strip of coast remote from that end of the Channel to which it has been traced by observation on continuous voyages from its breeding areas. In France two have been found dead near Biarritz on August 29th, 1945, a third captured on September 29th, 1938, not many miles farther north on the Bay of Biscay coast, and a fourth captured on the coast of the Channel entry, not far east of Ushant, on September 23rd, 1938. These recent French records tally closely with the evidence of the voyages quoted above that fair numbers of this warm-water pelagic species drift over the Western Approaches region of the North VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 43 Atlantic (between 40° and 50° N.) in late summer and that smaller numbers, in some, years at least, continue into Biscay and Channel up to about 5° W., with the natural result that stragglers and casualties are from time to time driven onto the neighbour- ing coasts during this limited season. The German Baltic record of P.d. borealis is also an August one. Yet all three British specimens of P. diomedea, including the third previously overlooked occurrence of P.d. borealis in Kent in January, 1901, which was recorded in 1946 by Mr. W. E. Glegg [antea, vol. xxxix, p. 56), have heen found in the first three months of the year between Dungeness and Beachy Head, hundreds of miles north and east of the extreme normal range of the species in the Atlantic at that season. Two of these birds were found dead and the third was washed ashore alive. In view of the many ships from their Atlantic and Mediterranean haunts passing near this coast and the improbable dates of occurrence the possibility of their passage having been humanly assisted cannot be ruled out. Another puzzling feature is the absence of any further British specimens (as distinct from sight records) over so long a period as 37 years, during which so many oiled birds have been examined. The letter referred to above was never published since it led to a correspondence with the late B. W. Tucker which showed the need for fuller information. I accordingly arranged, by courtesy of the Admiralty, for a reconnaissance starting from Fowey on H.M.S. Fort York on September 2nd, 1946, which Tucker was unfortunately unable to join. Lt.-Cdr. Hammond kindly set a course down to Lat. 50° N. which we followed, through the area in which mauretanictis had been seen the previous October, most of the way between 5° and 4° W, altering course NE at 16.25 BST and passing off Start Point and Berry Head to shelter in Brixham 'Roads from a severe gale which kept us stormbound for the remainder of this trip. Although passing at the right season through a favourable area with plenty of Storm-Petrels (Hydro&afes pelagicus) we saw few shearwaters; 4 at about 50° N. 4° 30' W. were definitely Manx and after a two-hour interval some ten others were noted 3-4 miles off .Start Point which were probably Manx also, but the light was by then too bad to eliminate the possibility of mauretanicus . Another offer of help from the Royal Navy in the following year unfortunately could not be taken up and it was not until September 20th, 1948, that (after a night sail across the Channel on lyth-iSth) I was able to begin a search from Alderney in the yacht Petula (Lt.-Col. H. G. Hasler, D.S.O.), accompanied by James Fisher and Capt. E. Dacre Stroud R.M. It was a dull morning with sea-fog and a light westerly breeze, and our progress was very slow. After seeing some unidentified shear- waters during the first hour-and-a-half after sailing (about oSoo 44 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. BST) we were passed at 9.35 by two shearwaters uniformly brown above and below, and at 10.21, when we were about 6 nautical miles NNE of Alderney, 13 or 14 mauretanicus flew close under our stern. They travelled low over the water in fairly close line abreast with strongs, fast wing--beats and no appreciable gliding or canting, no doubt owing to the light wind. They were the same apparent size as P.p. puffmus, the upper-parts being all dull dark brown with no visible blackish plumage. While rather less than half of them appeared more or less equally brown below, the under-parts of the majority were brownish-white, although in no case as pure white as in the Manx Shearwater. The position was about 49° 49' N., 2° 7' W., and the depth nearly 40 fathoms, on the edge of the Hurd Deep. Although we cruised about in this area for some hours we saw no more shearwaters near enough to be identifiable except one definite Manx at 17.20 in about 49° 50' N., 2° 50' W., with very white under-parts and blackish plumage above. The following day, at about 50° 27' N., 1° 3' W., (roughly 10 miles SSE of \'entnor and in full sight of the coast) we saw a typical Manx, blackish above and white below and close to the same spot James Fisher saw another brown mauretanicus, as dark below as above. This was about 10. 10 hrs., in about 20 fathoms. On May loth, 1949, near Aigues-Mortes on the Mediterranean coast of France P. A. D. Hollom and I saw some fifty shearwaters moving east during a stiff offshore Mistral, all of which appeared rather warm brown above in the sunlight and showed “underwing usually only white in centre with darker lines running towards leading and trailing edges” (P.A.D.H.), although only two or three had brownish under-parts. These were within 250 miles of breeding places of mauretanicus but closer to those of yejkouan discovered by Mayaud and Heim de Balsac among islands near Marseilles. M. Mayaud informs me that mauretanicus has not been recorded on this coast by French ornithologists but its occur- rence in waters so near its known breeding grounds can hardly be exceptional, and is supported by the specimens examined by Collingwood Ingram (1926) in a Nice taxidermists’ which had been brought in by local fishermen. My next contact with mauretanicus was off the He de Batz near Roscoff, Finist^re, on September 5th, 1949, when, about 16.30 hrs., large numbers began to pass about J-mile and more offshore, heading eastwards in a strong southerly wind, at times wheeling rather high above the skyline and all showing brown (not black or blackish) upper-parts and in most cases whitish under-wings with brown edges, a few however being brown below as well as above. Probably over a hundred went past in half-an-hour ; observation was helped by the good light behind me, a position on rising ground above the shore and by the use of Ross 12 x 50 marine binoculars kindly loaned by the Director of the Roscofl' VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 45 Marine Biological .Station. There were definitely none passing either the previous afternoon or the next, and this, taken with the previous record, suggests that a stiff breeze blowing frorii offshore may be a factor leading these birds to come upwind as far as possible and then travel close enough to the coast to be observed by watchers on land who in other weather conditions might be unable to see them. Further field confirmation of Mayaud’s discovery of the large- scale immigration of mauretanicus in summer along the French side of the Channel was obtained in 1949 by R. M. Lockley, who had at the last minute been prevented by an accident from accompanying us on the previous year’s cruise but on June 12th, 1949, found within 5 miles of Guernsey three very brown-backed, dull-bellied, medium shearwaters, evidently maaretam’cws, in waters in which a Manx was also seen, other Manx Shearwaters being identified on the two following days near the Roches Douvres off Brittany and also north of Herm. On September 13th, 1949, leaving St. Helier at 08.10 hrs., Lockley saw two shearwaters slightly larger than Manx with brownish sides to their bodies flying west just off the harbour, and several dozen more brownish shearwaters (as well as a party of 7 Manx and one odd bird of that form flying separately) on a return trip to Granville, Normand)^ by the Isles of Chausey. The weather was rainy with a NNE wind blowing at about Force 4 on leaving. On July 30th, 1950, when sailing between Jersey and Lezardrieux, C6tes-du-Nord, France, in Riduna III (Skipper B. M. Arnold, D.S.O.), Lockley saw several flocks of shearwaters, but only managed to come up with one, about four miles east of Barnouic Rocks. This contained about forty individuals, of which about half were identified as P.p. puffinus and the rest as mauretanicus. The distinctions were clear; mauretanicus was drab brown on the back merging into dirty white beneath and smoky cream on the undertail, and appeared slightly larger than the Manx, which in contrast appears as a brilliant black-backed and crisp-white bellied bird. The flock rose from the water just out of gunshot, but soon after one P. p. puffinus came within range (the only bird to do so) ; on being secured it proved to be a male with undeveloped, or regressed, organs. On Augst ist, on the return journey between Lezardrieux and Jersey, when thp yacht was west of Barnouic Rocks and about south of Roches Douvres, Lockley and Arnold saw several parties of shearwaters, and some individuals alone, and passed close enough to identify the individuals in three parties of 12, 15 and 30. Roughly one-third of these could be distinguished as mauretanicus , it being a calm day suitable for careful comparison, and again the P. p. puffinus stood out very sharply black-and-white in contrast with the muddy-looking, slightly larger mauretanicus . 46 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV In Lockley’s experience the region between Roches Douvres and Granville therefore appears to be a collecting or feeding ground of the medium-sized shearwaters in early autumn. Many storm- petrels also frequent this area and were seen by him on all voyages mentioned. In 1950, I made the sea crossing from Gorey in Jersey to Carteret in Normandy on August 31st and back on September 14th without seeing any shearwaters either way, but weather was unfavourable throughout this period and I was unable to make any special search at sea. The only shearwater which I saw at Carteret was a definite Manx flying very close inshore on September 13th. On the English side of the Channel Lt.-Col. Hasler kindly arranged a further cruise in 1949 sailing from Weymouth on the evening of September loth. (Crossing from Jersey to Weymouth that day by the mail steamer in good weather with first-rate visibility I saw only one shearwater, about 10 m. N of the Casquets, which was probably mauretanicus , the mantle being brownish but the wings blackish). On this occasion V. C. Wynne-Edwards and C. P. Blacker joined Petula and we cleared for France in fair weather with high hopes of finding how far the flocks of mauretanicus ranged across the Channel, but soon after we passed the Shambles lightship towards midnight the wind got up and, after a fruitless and unpleasant day in which the few shearwaters seen were either Manx or unidentifiable, we were forced to run for shelter into the Yealm, which we made after a fast passage with- out ever having hoisted the mainsail. The next day, the wind blew with undiminished force and we were unable to leave ; we saw only two shearwaters, probably Manx, which came close in under the coastguard station. On the 13th we crossed the Yealm Bar at 14.50 into a sea which had not much moderated, with a fresh east breeze. About 3-3! nautical miles S. of Rame Head, Cornwall, and some 5 miles from Wembury Point, Devon, a very dark shearwater passed us with little white on the under-parts, a diagnostic character of mauretanicus. The weather again worsened and at 19.00 hrs. we once more had to abandon our objective and to make for the shelter of the Helford River, which we reached about midnight. The weather continued thoroughly unsatisfactory and the cruise was abandoned on .September 15th. Thus of these few searches for shearwaters in the Channel three had to be curtailed at an early stage owing to storms, and despite the favourable season and area none afforded a glimpse of any of the three larger species gravis, diomedea or griseus. Some success was, however, achieved in’ reducing the degree of ignor- ance of the distribution and field-characters of mauretanicus, and there were plenty of opportunities of contemplating the difficulties and pitfalls of bird observation in these waters. VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 47 The most important finding is that field observation confirms the obvious deduction from the number of specimens of maiiretanicus recorded in the North Sea and (particularly on the French side) in the Channel, that this very distinct form is present in substantial numbers annually and that it is at least as readily separated in the field from the British breeding race as the Scandinavian Lesser Black-backed Gull [Larus f. fiiscus), the White Wagtail {Motacilla a. alba) or the Blue-headed Wagtail [Motacilla f. jlava). It does not make sense that a bird so often shot within comparatively short distances of our coasts and so conspicuously mobile should never have been seen in British waters, yet (up to the publication in this issue of two 1951 occurrences) that is how the record stands. The question therefore, arises : when mauretanicus has been viewed but not shot here, as it must have been, what has it been wrongly identified as? Tucker’s view [in litt., Feb. 16, 1946) was that “no experienced observer seeing the birds reasonably close could take mauretanicus for kuhlii” and that “for what my opinion is worth, I am convinced that when mauretanicus is seen in English waters it is with Manx that they are confused and not with the big ones. After all they are only races of one species, so what more natural?’’ M. Mayaud expresses a similar opinion from his own expert knowledge. Tucker however was relying on a recollection “that birds in the Mediterranean don’t look very different from Manx in respect of their under-parts, and as the observations to which I refer were made off Naples 1 presume these were mauretanicus , though I suppose there is a possibility they were yelkouan” . As yelkouan inhabits the Mediterranean from Marseilles and Corsica eastwards it seems quite likely that the birds on which he based his view were of that race (which is indistinguishable in the field from the Manx) and not as he supposed maiiretanicus. In any event my subsequent Investiga- tions have deepened my own suspicion that, at the long ranges and in the poor conditions of observation so frequent with birds at sea, observers who are not fully aware of the range of plumages of mauretanicus may on occasion mistake the lighter examples for kuhlii and the darker examples for griseus. Such a mistake certainly could not happen if either the size or the style of flight were critically studied, since in all plumages of mauretanicus there is a plain resemblance to the Manx in both of these points. But unless the range is close and the light good or there are other known birds really close alongside for comparison there is always a special need for caution in judging the size of birds at sea, and shearwater flight varies sufficiently in different wind conditions to mislead observers with little (or only long previous) experience of the different species. The skins at South Kensington show so much v^ariation, both in size and in plumage, that the largest mauretanicus is not markedly shorter in over-all length than the shortest diomedea or griseus and the darkest mauretanicus is not markedly paler under the wing than the palest griseus. 48 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. While the material for a definitive field description of mauretanicus is not yet available the following' amplification of the Handbook account is believed to be reliable: Under-parts. Manx, at all seasons, pure white from base of bill to dark edgings and tip portion of tail. Flanks and sides also white, and under-wings white with narrow blackish leading edges and broad blackish trailing" edg"es and tips. Mauretanicus (Balearic), pale birds, more or less white on chin, breast and middle of under-wing's but throat more or less clouded with brownish-grey, flanks and belly dirty brownish, axillaries and under-tail coverts more or less sooty, and broad brown trailing edges and tips to under-wings, general effect being that extent of white expanses shown is considerably less than in Manx, and except in brilliant light at longish ranges the white tends to look more or less dirty, but brown does not appear in isolated smudges as in Great Shearwater. In dark birds of this subspecies virtually the entire under-parts may appear pale sooty-brown, extreme individuals looking as nearly uniform above and below as a young Starling, when flying above water especially in poor conditions of visibility, which no doubt intensify the effect of dark plumage. M. Mayaud comments {in litt.) that he has never examined an actual specimen in which the under-parts were of a darker colour than “whitish washed with brown (blanchatre lavd de brun)’’, but, apart from differences in appearance of the same bird examined in the cabinet and seen flying at sea, it must be remembered that far too few specimens of mauretanicus have been collected to permit confidence that the full range of variation is represented among them. Extreme dark individuals are certainly a smallish minority, but at times several may be seen in company. Upper-parts. Manx in autumn almost entirely black or blackish-brown; in spring, some brownish feathers especially on shoulders, mantle and wing-coverts, but brown normally only visible at extremely close range, and no evidence of this subspecies ever looking brown in normal field conditions, although further verification of this point is desirable. Tail also black or occasionally brownish-black from above. Demarcation between blackish plumage and rest is both sharper and higher on the bird than in Balearic, giving Manx a whiter appearance as regards sides as well as under-parts than any other regular British shearwater, as well as a blacker appear- ance above than any except, in some conditions. Sooty. Mauretanicus (Balearic) in autumn blackish primaries visibly contrasting in good light with brown or brownish-white remainder of upper-parts. Head slightly darker than mantle. At other seasons no black even on primaries, and shade of brown generally paler. VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 49 Field-characters of Shearwaters. (Upper and under surfaces). Drawn by R. Gillmor. Top left pair Sooty (P. griseus). Top right pair Cory’s (P. diomedea—kuhlii). Centre pair Great (P. gravis) . Lower left pair Manx (P. p. puffinus) . Lower right pair Balearic {P.p. mauretanicus), dark example in front, pale example behind. 50 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Provided a good view in a fair light is obtained by an observer sufficiently experienced in watching birds at sea an individual of this species can be identified as Manx if the whole of the upper- parts are black or nearly so and the whole of the under-parts pure white with a sharp contrast between them. (This contrast is correctly stated in the text of The Handbook but the coloured Plate 95 does not fully convey it, the foreground bird being too brown and smudgy). Identification as niauretaniciis can be made if the whole of the upper-parts (or all except the crown and wings) show clearly brown (not black or blackish) and if the belly, flanks, axillaries and vent area, if not other parts of the under-surface also, are brown or brownish-white (not pure white). The essential point is that if there are definite patches of brown or brownish- white below, the bird is mauretanicus ; birds which appear brownish above but whose under-parts cannot be proved to have the diagnostic markings are also probably mauretanicus but, until a longer series of skins has been compared, some uncertainty remains whether this character by itself is fully reliable. On the average mauretanicus is, and at times appears, appreciably larger than Manx, but this is a marginal character, the wing being at most less than 30 mm longer. Comparison of this description with that of diomedea=kuhlii shows that although mauretanicus is a much smaller bird (averaging two-thirds of diomedea borealis in wing-length), and has a much more brisk wing-action, the two forms have a slight resemblance (so far as the light examples of mauretanicus are concerned) in their uniformly brownish upper-parts and less contrasty plumage than either P.p. puffinus or P. gravis. All three subspecies of pufjinus however lack the white patch on the tail-coverts usually present in diomedea. Prof. V. C. Wynne- Edwards {in litt.) describes the white base to the latter’s tail as rather narrower than in P. gravis and definitely absent from a few birds. A diagnostic character at long range is that diomedea differs from gravis in being “hooded”, not “capped”, the greyish-sooty- brown of the head extending down the sides of the neck and throat, while in gravis the broad white collar is almost complete round the back of tbe neck and in the more frequent lighter examples of mauretanicus the white of the under-parts extends up to the sides of the neck giving a more streamlined horizontal line of demarca- tion between the dark upper- and light under-surface. There is no reasonable risk of confusion once it is appreciated that a shear- water with more or less completely brownish upper-parts is not necessarily diomedea and that one which appears entirely dusky above and below is not (as most observers have probably assumed) necessarily griseus but may be a dark example of mauretaiiicus , which at a distance superficially resembles it except in wing-action and size. (See diagram of field characters p. 49). VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 51 This discussion suggests that a re-examination of what we know about shearwater distribution in the Channel and also in the North Sea is called for. The Manx Shearwater has breeding stations at both the northern and southern entrances to the Channel (in the Scillies and near Ushant) and at the North Sea entry in Orkney and Shetland (has bred in Durham) and occurs in some numbers in the Channel and certain parts of the North Sea, such as the Firth of Forth. It is said to have been of normal occurrence off Heligoland up to about a century ago, but to have become a rare vagrant since then. P.p. mauretanicus is known to occur in some numbers regularly between June and September along most of the French coast of the Channel from Crotoy (Somme) westwards, and the evidence of sight records quoted above indicates that at least in some autumns plenty move across within easy distance of the Cornish and Devon coasts, although the proved occurrences in these waters are surprisingly few, the most recent skins having been obtained in 1875. The status of mauretanicus in the North Sea is even more obscure. It has been recorded on the Dutch and Danish coasts and out of 22 shearwaters examined by W. J. Clarke in the Scarborough area between i8go and 1908 no less than 12 proved to be of this form, between two and four of them being shot in the month of September off Scarborough in four different years (antea, vol. ii, p. 207). Clarke, who was a wildfowler, considered it “the commonest Shearwater off the coast of Yorkshire in the autumn, but in his experience it never approaches near the shore and must be sought in the dusk”. H. F. Witherby in recording this added “Shearwaters are difficult birds to observe, and the Levantine” (later separated as mauretanicus) “has for many years been confused with the Manx Shearwater . . . We hope that Mr. Clarke’s observations will induce some of our readers . . . to study Shearwaters”. Durihg the forty-three years since these words were written no appreeiable progress has been made in clarifying the status of these two forms of shearwater in the North Sea, and in recent years the position has been complicated by a number of problematical sight records from the Thames estuary and other areas. The only certain occurrence on the east coast during the following forty years was one shot sitting amongst Guillemots and Razorbills not more than a mile from the shore at N. Bamburgh, Northumberland, on September 8th, 1921, [antea, vol. xv, p. 239). It remains quite possible that the annual movement of mauretanicus which Mayaud has traced up the northern coast of France extends up the east coast of Britain to the waters off Yorkshire, Durham and even Northumberland, where in September, 1932, Mr. W. B. Alexander saw some dark shearwaters which may have been of this form, after noting small flocks of entirely dark birds flying rapidly northwards off Seaton Carew, Co. Durham, on November i6th, 1929. If such a move- 52 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Diagram of Sea Areas round Great Britain, illustrating principal features of the distribution and movement of shear- waters during the first half of September, so far as at present known. Names of sea areas follow the map of Regions of the North Atlantic in B.T.O. Bulletin No; 36, Jan., 1950, also reproduced in Proc. Xth Int. Orn. Congress Uppsala, 1950 (in press) and in Audubon Water Bird Guide (1950) by R. H. Rough. Arrows represent general direction of underlying movement disregarding daily, short term or local journeys, effects of stormy weather and minor deviations. Except for the Manx Shearwater the number of birds involved is so small and available data are so inadequate that the diagram may well have to be considerably redrawn in the light of fuller study which it is designed mainly to stimulate. Abbreviations. C — area off which occurred the 3 British specimens of Cory’s Shearwater. B — area off which the majority of British specimens of Balearic Shearwater were secured. VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 53 ment continues, the negative evidence of Capt. Wolfe Murray’s thorough and prolonged observations over the Dogger Bank and the eastern North Sea [antea, vol. xxv, pp. 6-ii and previous references there given) indicates that it is more likely to be traced on the English than on the Continental side of the North Sea. The evidence for an annual, or at least occasional, late summer movement of diomedea into the waters off the Scillies and south- west Cornwall is satisfactory, although still meagre, but it is difficult to feel much assurance over the various sight records of occurrences farther up the Channel of this essentially warm-water species, which seems unlikely to occur otherwise than as a vagrant east of Cornwall except possibly in late August and September. The Sooty Shearwater (P. griseus) undoubtedly has occurred nearly all round the British Isles, but recent surveys have shown that it is remarkably sparingly distributed over the North Atlantic in our latitude and in view of the risk of confusion with dark examples of mauretanicus , against which no warning is given in The Handbook or other identification books, sight records should be treated with extreme caution. Finally the Great Shearwater, P. gravis, has been shown to be a regular visitor in large numbers to the North Atlantic, including those regions of the ocean off our western shores, but its penetra- tion in the Channel seems to be very limited and in small strength compared with that of the Manx and mauretanicus. A very tentative diagrammatic chart of the supposed distribution and movements of shearwaters near Great Britain in early autumn appears on p. 52. It remains to formulate some of the questions on which further data are required. First, it must be recognised that the basis for sight records will not become unshakeable until a number of additional specimens, particularly of mauretanicus have been obtained and critically studied with full data. Nearly all the existing specimens in this country, of which the British Museum Bird Room has eleven, are faded survivals from the days before mauretanicus was separated, and they by no means fully represent the different plumages which are known. The easiest area to choose in order to collect more would probably be in the waters south of Jersey, but collecting in the Scillies and the Scarborough area would also be likely to help in establishing the facts, and in relating field descriptions to descriptions of skins. The occurrence of diomedea in the Channel in autumn also calls for confirmation by a specimen, not merely washed up on the shore, which would enable subspecific determination to be made. It would also be helpful if more could be found out about the movement of mauretanicus out of and into the Mediterranean, which an observer at Gibraltar should be well placed to check. 54 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL XLV. Observers on the coasts of Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, the Isle of Wight and other southern and eastern counties would do well to examine most carefully and to make full and immediate field descriptions of any unusual shearwaters, and to take full advan- tage of any opportunities for offshore searches between the latter part of August and about the end of October. Those travelling across or down the Channel at that season, and especially observers in vessels not bound to follow a particular course can assist by keeping special note of the descriptions, positions, numbers and behaviour of any shearwaters encountered (including Manx) as this information is needed in order to establish further points of distinction or similarity, and seasons or areas of overlapping distribution. Those who have opportunities of flying low in aircraft could also assist in reporting locations of large numbers of shearwaters, as has been shown to be practicable by Rankin and Dufl’ey [antea, vol. xli, Supplementary Number, July, 1948, p. 15), even though the species may normally not be identifiable. The weather preceding the appearance of shearwaters is also worth noting. A full study of mauretanicus in its Balearic breeding quarters would be of great interest. Reliable sight identification of the various shearwaters at sea round the British Isles is certainly possible, but before it can be generally established more material and knowledge and experience must be gathered, and in our present state of ignorance it is no use pretending that the same reliance can be placed on such sight records as on those of land birds for which immeasurably more data and better opportunities of close, sustained comparative observation are usually available. The compilation of definitive field-descriptions and distributions of the shearwaters occurring around our coasts will fill the last great gap in the basic elementary material of British ornithology, and it is to be hoped that this task which has been postponed so long will soon be tackled and completed. While hasty, speculative and dogmatic identifications of shearwaters on insufficient evidence only add to the confusion, cautious descriptions and information about unidentified individuals or flocks may, when related to other data, prove of some value. In conclusion I must express my great indebtedness to Mr. R. M. Lockley and Professor V. C. Wynne-Edwards for their most valuable and expert help both in the searches at sea and in criticising and adding to this paper; to Mr. Noel Mayaud for criticising it from his unequalled experience of mauretanicus ^ to Messrs. W. B. and H. G. Alexander and P. A. D. Hollom for their valuable criticisms and field notes covering in each case Mediterranean as well as British observations; to Lt.-Col. H. (i. Hasler, D.S.O., for his unfailing patience and kindness and superb seamanship in searching the Channel for shearwaters; to the Board of Admiralty and to Lt.-Cdr. Hammond and the ship’s company of H. M. S. Fort York for the initial 1946 reconnais- VOL. XLV.] SHEARWATERS IN ENGLISH CHANNEL. 55 sance ; to Mr. Robert Gillmor for preparing" the diag rammatic illustrations of field characters on p. 49 and to Miss J. H. Lidderdale for the map diagram of shearwater distribution and movements on p. 52. The following references should be added to those given as they occur in the text: — Ingram, Collingwood. (1926). Birds of the Riviera, p. io6. Mayaud, N. (1931). “Contribution a I’etude de la mue des Puffins.” Alauda Series ii : 230—249. Nicholson, E. M. (1946). “Some further notes from the North Atlantic.” Brit. Birds, xxxix: 265-274. Nietham.mer, G. (1942). Handbuch der Deutschen Vogelkunde, vol. iii, pp. 6-12. WiTHERBY, H. F. (1908). “The Levantine Shearwater in British Waters.” Brit. Birds, ii : 206-8. WiTHERBY, H. F. (1940). “The Species of Great Shearwaters in the English Channel.” Brit. Birds, xxxiii : 248-9. Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1935). “On the habits and distribution of Birds on the North Atlantic.” Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist, xl: 233-340. THE DISTRACTION DISPLAYS OF THE LITTLE RINGED PLOVER AND TERRITORIAL COMPETITION WITH THE RINGED PLOVER. BY Edward A. Armstrong. The distraction displays of the Little Ringed Plover [Charadrius dubiiis) bear a general similarity to those of the Ringed Plover [Charadrius hiaticula) (Williamson 1947) and Kentish Plover [Leucopolius alexandrinus) (Simmons 1951). The following observa- tions are based mainly on the behaviour of a pair with small chicks in East Anglia. It was not possible to study the forms of display throughout the nesting cycle so these notes are necessarily incomplete. As the behaviour of the birds with the brightest plumage was consistent with their being males they are referred to as such. The principal display-patterns observed were (x) the crouch- run, (2) the squat and (3) injury-simulation. The sense in which “injury-simulation” is used is indicated elsewhere (Armstrong 1949). (i) The crouch-run. The first reaction to an intruder of a bird on the ground consisted of running away with the body held low. It was most characteristic of the female. As performed by some other waders this has been styled the “rodent-run” (Williamson 1950). 56 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Although Selous (1927), writing of such behaviour by the Kentish Plover, describes the bird as looking rather like a rat the term “crouch-run” used by Simmons when referring to this species seems more suitable as it avoids raising the question of the degree of similarity between the appearance of bird and mammal. The Golden Plover {Pluvialis apricaria) and, to a rather lesser extent, the Ringed Plover, and even less the Little Ringed Plover, act during the crouch-run in such a way that one has the impression that the bird is being inconspicuous conspicuously! Their behaviour seems to be, not simply retreating in the manner best adapted to evade observation, as a Corn-Crake [Crex crex) will run with head and neck depressed through low herbage looking like a small quadruped, but a form of distraction display. A little evolutionary modification may transform escape move- ments into diversionary activity. It is perhaps, impossible to make a rigid distinction between behaviour such as the Corn-Crake’s, which is purely an escape reaction, and the crouch-run by other species which functions as distraction display, but during the latter the bird is apt to appear occasionally where inequalities in the ground would enable it to remain con- cealed and to look around from time to time. As the term “mobile lure-display”, used by Simmons to describe another form of display, would include the crouch-run and other types of behaviour its employment in this connexion is ambiguous and confusing. Similarly his term “static lure-display” does not aptly denote the incapacity-simulation display which he describes nor discriminate it from other forms of display to which it might be applied. (2) The squ.\t. After running a short distance either male or female may squat, but the male’s attitude is peculiar, for his head and body are held low but his stern is often raised and he is apt to make odd little shifting or turning movements. The male Ringed Plover performs in a similar way, as shown in one of my photographs (Armstrong 1950b). It is difficult to decide whether the net effect is to conceal the bird or render him more conspicuous as much depends on the nature of the terrain. The posture seems to be distinct from displacement-brooding though it bears some super- ficial resemblance to it. Probably it has a threat function. A crouching attitude when menaced is characteristic of many birds. (3) Injury-simulation. After the crouch-run the Little Ringed Plover commonly squats, frequently in a hollow or rut, and begins flicking its wings; first a quick wing-flip, then another, gradually warming up to realistic injury-simulation with first one pointed wing raised high, then the other, and so on, sometimes spread-eagled with both wings on the ground. Neither of the birds was seen to flounder forward. VOL. XLV.] DISPLAY OF LITTLE RINGED PLOVER. 57 then pause with flapping- wings and flop with both wings outspread as a Ringed Plover, disturbed at the nest, will do, though a wing-flip or two may precede the performance. Like the Ringed Plover the Little Ringed Plover manages to keep an eye on a human intruder while engaged in this form of distraction display. When I was the occasion of it the display was never enacted nearer than 25 yards. Although the bird rendered itself highly conspicuous, exposing a remarkable amount of white plumage and constantly uttering clinking notes, yet at this distance a mammalian predator probably would not have seen it and a human spectator without binoculars could scarcely have recog- nized it. When the bird performed in a hollow the under-side of the expanded tail was exposed. The dark markings on the white feathers constituted a strikingly conspicuous and beautiful pattern. This incapacity-display sometimes continued for a minute or longer while the bird spasmodically flapped in the chosen hollow ; then it would run on and start performing again. I have not noticed such prolonged injury-simulation in one spot by a Ringed Plover. A fragment of epigamic display was seen. With tail fanned the male flew near to where the female was feeding and uttered a high, s'weet trill before alighting. As an incidental matter of interest it may be mentioned that one bird was seen to spend some minutes pecking at a large dragon-fly. Territorial rel.ations between Little Ringed Plover and Ringed Plover. There was constant quarrelling between the Little Ringed Plovers and the male of a pair of Ringed Plovers. The latter frequently, flew near to the Little Ringed Plovers and often both the smaller birds would fly at him. There would be a flurry of fawn and white plumage, but in spite of the vicious darts made at him it is doubtful whether he was ever actually struck. At the height of these attacks the Little Ringed Plovers utrered a high chirruping or hinny — apparently a higher-pitched version of the whistle which Ringed Plovers utter when attacking. On such occasions the threat display of the Ringed Plover consisted of fluffing the feathers on head, neck and breast while the body was held at a slight angle, the wing opposite the Little Ringed Plover being somewhat raised and the partly-expanded tail held rather obliquely so that its markings were visible to the attacker approaching from the side. The tail was not depressed acutely or trailed as in the injury-simulation display and, sometimes, during threat display. The posture bore a vague resemblance to the beginning of injury-simulation. The Little Ringed Plovers also enlarged their contours by fluffing the white plumage, including the body feathers. 58 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. I have suggested (1950 c) that the injury -simulation of the Ringel Plover and Killdeer [Oxyechus vociferus) incorporate elements from the threat and courtship displays. Probably this is also true of the Little Ringed Plover’s injury-simulation display. Sometimes the male Ringed Plover would pursue the (presumed) male Little Ringed Plover by stages, though the procedure was more like following than pursuing. When the Ringed Plover alighted the Little Ringed Plover would squat a few feet ahead, the Ringed Plover would run past a foot or two and the smaller bird would again run ahead, perhaps giving a flip of his wings, and squat again. So they would proceed until they reached the boundary of the Little Ringed Plover’s territory ; then the latter would fly back with the Ringed Plover in pursuit and the pro- cedure would begin all over again. Once during this curious progress, when the Ringed Plover was obviously in a state of tension, he raised and shook his plumage — a common displacement- activity in this species (and others) (Armstrong 1950a). Imme- diately the Little Ringed Plover, which had been squatting, flew at him. Sometimes during these territorial disputes the Little Ringed Plover’s squatting developed into injury-simulation, either a mere a-synchronous flipping of the wings or the full performance 2-3 feet from the Ringed Plover. The latter would follow and the Little Ringed Plover would move on, creeping, crouching and injury-simulating until the boundary was reached and the birds returned. The male never did anything more interesting than squat when I approached him. Two days later the Ringed Plover, which had then three small chicks, was frequently seen chasing the Little Ringed Plover in flight, sometimes flying around the area in which both families fed for more than five minutes at a time. They flew fast, the Ringed Plover following every dart and swerve of the Little Ringed Plover. Once when both had alighted the male Little Ringed Plover squatted but the Ringed Plover dashed at him before he could begin his incapacity-display. The Little Ringed Plover was silent most of the time during the chase but occa- sinally uttered whistling notes. A chittering call was also heard, apparently emanating from this bird. In spite of this continual friction, which occupied a great deal of the birds’ time, the Little Ringed Plover reared young success- fully, and doubtless the Ringed Plovers were also successful. Thus the situation provided an illustration of territorial alterca- tions between closely related species with somewhat similar ecological preferences, one larger and more powerful than the other with the advantage of being resident and so of being able to establish territory before the other arrives, the other a smaller summer visitor, yet neither succeeding in preventing the other VOL. XLV.] DISPLAY OF LITTLE RINGED PLOVER. .59 competitor from breeding".* However, a few hundred yards away the relationship between the two species was puzzling. In a Little Ringed Plover’s territory there was an apparently deserted clutch of three Ringed Plover’s eggs, yet there was no sign that the Little Ringed Plovers had eggs or young. Once or twice they both flew around high up as if the male was chasing the female. Both sexes of the breeding pair of Little Ringed Plover acted sentinel, but the male appeared to spend more time acting in this capacity than his mate. He would spend as long as 15 minutes on the look-out perched on his right leg on a vantage-point, but his alertness may have been accentuated by the state of tension which existed between the two species. Ringed Plovers will shelter their fledged young under their bodies as they perch on the ridge of a shingle bank or hillock where they can have a wide view and perceive approaching intruders; this appears to be the customary way for an adult with small chicks to spend the night. The manner in which Little Ringed Plovers were seen with chicks around them, on a shingle bank suggests that they may roost in the same way. Summary. Forms of display by a pair of Little Ringed Plover with chicks are described and an account is given of territorial altercations with a Ringed Plover, which did not prevent successful breeding. REFERENCES. Armstrong, E. A. (1949). ‘‘Diversionary display.” Ihis, xci: 88-97, 179-188. Armstrong, E. A. (1950 a). ‘‘The nature and function of displacement activities.” Symposia Soc. Exp. Biol., iv; 361-384. .Armstrong, E. A. (1950 b). ‘‘Photographs of the complete series of the Ringed Plover’s ‘distraction display’.” Illust. Lond. News, ccxvii: 219. Armstrong, E. A. (1950 c). ‘‘Counterfeit terror.” Animal Kingdom, liii : 11-15. Selous, E. (1927). Realities of Bird Life. London. Simmons, K. E. L. (1951). ‘‘Distraction-display in the Kentish Plover.” Brit. Birds, xliv ; 181-187. Williamson, K. (1947). ‘‘The distraction display of the Ringed Plover.” Ibis, Ixxxix; 51 1-5 13. Williamson, K. (1950). ‘‘Interpretation of ‘rodent-run’ display.” Ibis, xcii: 28-33. *Mr. K. E. L. Simmons has drawn my attention to the observations of S. Durango (Fauna ocli Flora, 1943: 145-154) who gives two records of Ringed Plovers taking over Little Ringed Plovers’ nests containing two eggs and laying their own c/4 in them, (60) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XXXVI. THE NUTCRACKER. Photographed by P. O. Swanberg. (Plates 13-20). We are grateful to Mr. Yeates for securing for us a series of photographs of the Nutcracker [Nucifraga caryocatactes) taken by Mr. P. O. Swanberg who has devoted a great deal of time to the study of this species over the past ten years. With one exception all the pictures show the Thick-billed form [Nucifraga c. caryocatactes) of which there have been rather fewer authentic occurrences in Britain than of the Slender-billed (N. c. macrorhynchus) shown on Plate 18 (lower). The latter is liable to occur in “irruptions” which bring it into Europe — and sometimes to Britain — from its breeding quarters in Siberia. The irruption of 1950 was apparently on quite a small scale at Ottenby in Sweden and did not produce many authentic British records ; it may, however, be noted that an account was published in The Field for June i6th, 1951 (Vol. 197, p. 962) of a pair of Nutcrackers seen feeding a young bird at Scotton, near Knaresborough, Yorks, during May, 1951. This record, which was accompanied by evidence for Identification, has been investigated by Mr. Ralph Chlslett who informs us that he regards it as “non-proven”, a verdict with which we concur. It is most unfortunate that Mr. Chislett was not informed of this occurrence until some weeks had passed, during which the birds disappeared and the oppor- tunity for confirmation by an experienced ornithologist was thus lost. We are grateful to Mr. Chislett for information on this matter and for passing on to us a record which appears in this issue. Apart from this record from Leeds there seems to be only one record for Britain since the war [antea, vol. xli, p, 149). It may be worth emphasising that the Nutcracker Is not simply a “brownish bird, speckled with white” and that some “Nutcrackers” reported may be aberrant Rooks [Corvus frugilegtis) with brown or “rusty” plumage. In fact, as Mr. Swanberg points out, one of the most conspicuous features of the species is the white under tail-coverts and the broad white border to the under-side of the tail, formed mainly by the outer tail- feathers. This feature is particularly well shown in Plates 13, 17 and 20. From above only a narrow border, formed by the central feathers. Is visible on the closed tail (Plate 18 upper). Another field character, the breadth of the wings, is well brought out in Plate 17. Mr. Swanberg’s photographs — ^notably Plates 13 and 16 (Right) — also record some of the characteristic habits of the bird. In Sweden the species feeds principally on hazel-nuts which it stores British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 13. Thick-billed Nutcracker {Nucifraga c. caryocatactes) . The habit of perching on the topmost shoot of a conifer is CHARACTERISTIC AT MOST TIMES OF THE YEAR. BiLLINGEN, NEAR Skara, Central Sweden, March, 1944. {Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). Thick-billed Nutcracker {Nucifyaga c. caryocnlactes). At the nest in a spruce tree. The young are 13 days old. Central Sweden, May {Phologyap>ked by P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 15. Thick-billed Nutcracker (Xucifraga c. caryocaiactes). It is common to see snow round the nest rim early in the breeding season. This bird is brooding young 6 days old. Central Sweden, May 7TH, 1944. {Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). i hick-Billed Nutcracker {\ucifraga c. caryocatactes). Left ; Feeding the young, 12 days oi.d, by Right : Headlong diving with wings closed is as REGURGITATION. CHARACTERISTIC A HABIT AS PERCHING ON THE VERY Central Sweden, AIay 6th, 1945. top of a tree. Central Sweden. (Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol. xlv. PI. 17. Thick-billed Nutcracker {Nucifraga c. caryocatactes), WITH A LOT OF HAZEL NUTS IN THE THROAT POUCH AND ONE IN THE BII.L. Central Sweden, M.arch iith, 1951. {Photogvaphed by P. O. Swanberg). fh Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. i8. \ > Upper ; Thick-billed Nutcr.\ckek {Xucifyaga c. caryoctactcs). With the special winter food, Hazel-nuts. Central Sweden. Lower ; Slender-billed Nutcracker {Nucifraga caryocatactes macrorhynchos). An “invader” in the autumn of 1950, this bird was attracted to a bird-table at LjUSNE, 135 MILES NORTH OF STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN, AND WINTERED THERE. PHOTOGRAPHED MaY 23TH, IQ51. {Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol xlv, PJ. 19. 20. Thick-billed Nutcracker (Nucifraga c. caryocatactes). HACKING A CONE OF PinUS COUbva PRESENTED BY THE PIIOTOGR.\PHER. ThIS WILD BIRD, A MALE, WEARS ONE ALUMINIUM AND TWO COLOURED RINGS FOR IDENTIFICATION. CENTRAL SWEDEN, MaRCII i8tH, I95I. {Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). VOL. XLV.] SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. 61 in the ground In Its territories in the pine woods. Reference to food-hoarding- by Rooks is made elsewhere in this issue, but to the best of our knowledge this habit has been much more fully developed by the Nutcracker. An account of Mr. Swanberg’s observations on this point is, we understand, to be published in the Proceedings of ihe X International Ornithological Congress and a brief reference to his work has appeared in The Countryman (vol. xlii, p. 171). J.b.W. THE LITTLE RINGED PLOVER IN GREAT BRITAIN IN 1950. BY E. R. Parrinder. In 1950, the Little Ringed Plover [Charadrius dubius) nested in England for the seventh year in succession. The breeding population showed little change from 1949 (see antea, vol. xliii, pp. 279-284) ; proof of nesting was obtained for twenty pairs and at least eight other pairs spent the summer and possibly bred. Gravel pits were again the most favoured habitat, but several pits, where nesting had occurred in previous years, had become unsuit- able and some fresh pits were occupied. Little Ringed Plovers bred for the first time in Surrey and in Derbyshire. The nest in Derbyshire was on a shingle bank in the River Trent; this is the first time in England that the species has been known to use this habitat, a common one in parts of its Continental range. As the Little Ringed Plover increases and spreads it is seen more frequently on passage at reservoirs, sewage farms and other places adjacent to its breeding haunts. To save space, and the account from being tedious, these occurrences are not included below — most of them have been (or will be) published in the appropriate local reports. Away from counties where they also nested. Little Ringed Plovers were seen in Dorset (first occurrence : two at Radipole Lake, Weymouth, on May 3rd, Miss M. D. Crosby per K. B. Rooke); Northamptonshire (one at Ecton Sewage Farm on August 5th and 20th, per R. Felton); Norfolk (Salthouse, one on May 2nd and 3rd and on September 6th, iith and 13th, Wild Bird Protectioyi in Norfolk, 1950, p. ii, and C. C. Rose; Cley, one on August i8th, 19th and 21st and on September nth, ibid, p. 13, and W. H. D. Wince; Blakeney Harbour, one on September 8th, C. C. Rose) and Cambridgeshire (one at Cambridge Sewage Farm on May 8th, loth and i8th. Report of Cambridge Bird Club, 1950, p. 21). I am grateful to the observers named in the text, and to the members of the London Natural History Society, too numerous to mention individually, who .supplied details for Middlesex and the other counties within the London Area. 62 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. I am now compiling' an account of the occurrences in 1951 and I should be glad to receive records of nesting, or of birds seen on passage. Ihese should be sent to me at 27, Gwalior House, Chase Road, Southgate, N.14. Sussex. Four pairs bred. Birds were first seen on the nesting ground (same general area as in 1948 and 1949) on April i6th and three pairs hatched young which in two cases certainly reached the flying stage. fourth pair at a new site about four miles distant also brought young to the flying stage. On April 19th one was seen to fly in over the sea wall near the Midrips and thence inland, calling. The latest occurrence in Sussex was on September 30th, when one was seen at Rye Harbour. [The Sussex Bird Report, 1950, p. 22, and G. des Forges). Kent. Three pairs bred at the pit where nesting was first noted in 1949. The first occurrence was on April 12th. Two nests, one with three and the other with four eggs, were found on May 21st and a third pair was seen on the same date. On June nth and i8th the two pairs with nests had young; the nest of the third pair was not found until July 24th, when it contained one egg and a newly hatched chick. The last occurrence at the site was on August 20th (L. E. Batchelor and E. H. Gillham). Surrey. One pair bred — the first nesting record for the county. A Little Ringed Plover was seen at a gravel pit on July 8th and a nest found the next day on a clinker dump. The three eggs were intact on July 13th, but unfortunately the site was not visited subsequently (E. G. Pedler). Essex. Four pairs certainly, and two more possibly, spent the summer at Locality “A”. The first bird was seen on April 2nd. A nest with two eggs found on April 22nd had four eggs on May 7th; lack of observation prevented proof of the breeding of the other pairs being obatined [A. E. Jolley, E. R. Parrinder). The gravel pit. Locality “B”, where four pairs probably bred in 1949, has been flooded and is now unsuitable for nesting ; a single bird was seen there on May 6th and 21st, June nth and 19th and July 7th (O. J. H. Davies, D. A. T. Morgan). Hertfordshire. Up to two birds were seen at each of three gravel pits in the breeding season, but breeding was not proved, or suspected. VOL.XLv ] LITTLE RINGED PLOVER IN GREAT BRITAIN. 63 Middlesex. A pair nested at each of four gravel pits (one more than in 1949) and, as in 1949, nesting may also have occurred on London Airport. At Locality “E” (where Little Ringed Plovers have bred since 1947) a pair was seen on April i6th; the nest was not found but the adults were seen with two chicks on May 28th. At Locality “F” (bred 1948 and 1949) four birds were seen on April 9th ; one pair stayed the summer but proof of breeding was not obtained until July 29th, when a chick was seen with one of the adults. At Locality “G” (bred 1949) two were seen on April i6th. A nest with one egg found on May 14th contained two on May 17th; this appears to have been the complete clutch and the two eggs were still being incubated on June 4th. On June 21st the area was found to have been rolled and the nest had disappeared. But six birds (some of which may have been juvenile) were seen on June 24th and their behaviour suggested that the young may have escaped destruction. At Locality “L” (a new site) two birds were seen on April 15th and on June 4th an adult was seen with three chicks — their subsequent history is not known. Perry Oaks sewage farm and the shingle banks of the R. Colne on Staines Moor were again used for feeding ; Little Ringed Plovers were seen at both places on many dates between April ist (Staines Moor) and October 3rd (Perry Oaks sewage farm — a late date). Occasional birds were seen at the Staines and Brent reservoirs and at West Kempton one-three stayed from April 7th until June 3rd, when the water level was raised. Berkshire. Two pairs nested, one at Locality “A” (for the first time since 1947) and the other at Locality “B”, where nesting was first recorded in 1949. At Locality “A” the first bird was seen on March 25th — an early date. Nesting was confirmed when a chick about one day old was found and photographed {per A. C. Fraser). At Locality “B” two birds arrived together on April ist. A nest with three eggs found on May i6th held four eggs on the following day, but on May 19th only yellow stains and a few fragments of shell could be found. The nest had probably been stepped on by a workman, but its destruction sooner or later was inevitable as it was sited in the path of, and not many yards from, a mechanical excavator. No further attempt at nesting was observed. Another bird defended a territory some two hundred yards away and a fourth bird was occasionally seen in this terri- tory, but no nest was found. All four birds had left the site by early July. 64 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV A single bird was seen on May 20th at another gravel pit, where there are suitable nesting sites {per C. E. Douglas). Buckinghamshire. A Little Ringed Plover was seen at the 1949 breeding site from April 24th to May nth, but not subsequenly (J. Field). Suffolk. Only one pair of Little Ringed Plovers was proved to breed in Suffolk in 1950; three birds were seen at Locality “B” in May and a nest, with four eggs, found on May 29th; the nest was still intact on June 15th, but its subsequent history is not known (P. D. Kirby). Three birds were seen at Locality “A”, Minsmere Level, on May 7th but none subsequently (Report of R.S.P.B., 1950, p. 20); four were found on a small grazing marsh farther up the coast on May 1 6th and two at the same place on May 17th and i8th. One (or two) were seen by Easton Broad on June 26th (P. D. Kirby, A. E. Vine, P. Westall). Derbyshire. The first occurrence of the Little Ringed Plover in Derbyshire was on May 30th, 1950, when two were seen by members of the Repton School Field Club on a shingle bank of the R. Trent; subsequently a nest was found which held three eggs on June 3rd and four on June 5th. Two eggs had hatched on June 28th and a third hatched the following day ; the fourth egg did not hatch. It is not certain if any of the chicks reached the free-flying stage and no birds were seen after July 20th (Peter Gordon et al. per W. K. Marshall, see also Orn. Rec. for Derbyshire, 1950, pp. 116-117). Yorkshire. Three, probably four, pairs nested at the site where breeding first occurred in 1948. Eggs were seen of two pairs ; young of three pairs; another pair behaved as if with young. Fledged young were seen for the first time (Y.N.U Committee for Orn. Rep., 1950, p. 71). THE INDEX OF HERON POPULATION, 1951.* BY W. B. Alexander. (Elclward Grey Institute, Department of Zoological P'ield Studies, Oxford). The number of heronries on which reports for 1951 were received at the Edward Grey Institute was 190 or 17 fewer than in the previous year. Of these 140 were in England, ii in Wales, 15 in Scotland and 24 in Ireland. The Rev. P. G. Kennedy has again supplied figures for 19 heronries in 9 counties of Eire, G. des Forges for 8 in Sussex, A. G. Parsons for 6 in Cornwall and R. G. Pettitt for 6 in Norfolk. *A public.'ition of the British Trust for Ornithology. VOL. XLV ] INDEX OF HERON POPULATION, 1951. 65 Counties or larger areas from which particulars of all known heronries have been received include Cheshire and S. Lancashire (from A. W. Boyd), Staffordshire, Worcestershire and Warwick- shire (from C. A. Norris), Cambridgeshire, W. Norfolk and. W. Suffolk (from A. E. Vine), Huntingdonshire (from C. F. Tebbutt), Bedfordshire (from K. Piercy), Essex (from G. A. Pyman), Dorset (from J. R. M. Tennent) and Glamorgan (from R. F. C. Zamboni). The writer has collected data for all known heronries in the Thames drainage area with the assistance of members of the Oxford Ornithological Society and the Middle Thames and London Natural History Societies. Four heronries hitherto unrecorded have been reported. One in Tipperary with i6 nests reported by S. C. Finch-Davies and one in Tyrone with 5 nests reported by Miss M. F. Burges are both said to be ancient. One in Arran with 3 nests reported by A. M. Grogan and one in Caernarvonshire with 2 nests reported by L. N. Larsen have both been in existence for at least 10 years. As explained in previous reports of this series it is considered that the most reliable method of obtaining an index figure for the year is to compare the number of nests in those heronries counted in 1951 with the average number in the same heronries in years when the Heron population was standard (1928, 1936, 1937, 1938 and 1939). We have such averages for the standard years for 128 of the heronries counted in 1951 and these total 2,731 nests. In 1951 the same heronries contained 2,721 nests or almost exactly 100 per cent. As the percentage in 1950 on this basis was 91 this gives an increase in the breeding population of 10 per cent. Another method of estimating the change is by comparison of the numbers of nests in 164 heronries which were counted both in 1950 and 1951. In 1950 these totalled 2,887 nests and in 1951, 3,185. This gives an increase of 10 per cent., which would be equivalent to an index of loi. Judged by either of these samples therefore the population is now back to standard for the first time since 1939. The winter 1950-51 was ag’ain, on the whole, a mild one; at least in England. Mr. J. H. Willis kindly informs us that the coldest month at Norwich was December, 1950, with a mean temperature of 33.5°F., and that this was the coldest December for 50 years, with snow on the ground most of the month. But January and February were unusually mild. Thus after four mild winters the Heron population has at length recovered from the effects of the severe winter of 1946-47. Though this is the average condition in the British Isles as a whole the accompanying table shows that the position is not the same in all parts of the country. The samples for some of the areas are comparatively small and it is probably unwise to place any reliance on changes of less than 10 per cent. Ignoring smaller figures we see in the last column that in all regions of 66 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. England and Wales, except the North-east, there was an increase of from lo to i8 per cent, on the previous year, that in Scotland and Ireland there was little change, and that in North-east • England there was a decrease of lo per cent. From the fourth column we see that in Eastern and North-east England the population is still more than 20 per cent, below standard, that in South-east England, the Midlands, Wales, North-west England and Scotland the population is approximately standard, and that in South-west England, the Thames Valley and Ireland the population is now from ii to 22 per cent, above standard. The above conclusions are based on all counts of individual heronries in each region that we have received and it is probable that in some cases the sample is not properly representative. Comparison of the populations of areas in which all known heronries were counted in 1951 with populations found in the same areas in similar previous counts are in some ways more satis- factory. It must be borne in mind however that it is never possible to be sure that such counts are complete since there is ample evidence that heronries of considerable size have frequently remained for many years unknown to ornithologists. The comparison of the populations of areas in which all known heronries were counted in 1951 with those found in the surveys of the same areas in 1950 and in 1928 is shown in the table below. It will be seen that in all these areas except the West Midlands and Dorset there has been an increase since the previous year, and that in all the areas but Essex, Dorset and Glamorgan the population is now considerably larger than in 1928. Area. No. of nests {and of heronies). 1951 1950 1928 Cheshire and S. Lancs. ... 269*(7) 229*(8) 170(6) Staffs., Worcs. & Warwick 229*(9) 233(9) i74**(ii) Hunts., Beds., Cambs., W. Norfolk and W. Suffolk 360(15) 298(18) 2o6**(io) Essex I57***(i3) I5I***(l2 ) 223(7) Thames Drainage Area ... 405(16) 356**(i7) 24i***(i3) Dorset 88(3) 96(3) 137(3) Glamorgan 18(2) 14(2) 20(2) Total for sample areas in England and Wales 1,521(65) 1,371(69) 1,164(52) +5 nests +6 nests -(-7 nests * = Single nest included in the total but not counted as a heronry. In conclusion we must again thank all those whose co-operation has made this report possible and ask all readers who can obtain figures of occupied nests in heronries in 1952 (preferably between April 15th and May 10th) to send the information as soon after- wards as possible to the writer at the Edward Grey Institute, Department of Zoological Field Studies, Botanic Garden, Oxford. VOL. XLV.] V O * TT* -S g> !;i^ oo '-O o^ ^ H O CO • ^ ■5^ o O o m cr. H CO •> a^ 10 0 CO 0 m 0 H MD o^ 00 CO 0 CM H 10 CO CO CO CM m H CO H H M 10 H 00 H J>s 0 m H H H C3 0 CO +j cn cc3 0 Ji -t-> 0 CO Uh Q (/) Cornwall, where the coast runs north and south. Here we watched on eight daj^s, on six of wliich the wind was between soutli and east and the coasting movement was almost exclusively southwards, and on two of which the wind was northerh^ and the coasting •movement was almost exclusively northwards. The birds arriving at Gwennap Ilead from either direction split up into two groups, those continuing on out over the sea and those turning along the coast. As this division often took place a short distance before the birds reached the clih's; it was not possible to count both groups accurately front the sarhe place. In Table 2, therefore, we have given only a general indication of vehich movement was the stronger (sec note ii for the terms used). If the directions taken by the birds are compared with the vdnd directions, it will be seen that Sky-Larks tended to set out over the sea chiefly with a following wind, or when to turn along the coast would have given them a following wind. Conversely, they tended to turn and follow the coast when this brought them head on to tlie v/ind, or when tlie sea crossing would have been against the wind. In addition, more set off out to sea in sunny weather with a light wind, than in fog or with a strong wind. Hence the coasting movements of the Sky-Lark occurred chiefly rvhen conditions were less favourable for migration, and in particular with an adverse wind. Further, big movemicnts ' of Sky-Larks, perhaps the main ones, occur at night (Clarke 1912). Perhaps, therefore, the eoasting movements, which are the main phenomenon seen by the field observer, are only a small and unimportant part of the migration of the species.. Movements of Chaffinch Chaffinches were migrating on all suitable days from October 13th to November ist, but not between October 8th and 13th, although two cla3's (9th and loth) seemed suitable. The movements of the Chaffinch were similar to those of the Sk^^-Lark but less complex, and we have therefore shown all of them on one map. Fig. 4. The birds travelling west along the north Cornish coast were seen at Hudde Down going west, at Cape Cornwall and Cam Gloose going south, and at Gwennap Head going south, then turning sharply east with the coast, while at Carn-Du two Chaffinches coasting east there left the coast and struck out over Mount’s Ba\' E.N.E. The route round the Land's End peninsula was therefore the same as that taken by coasting Sky-Larks. As in the Sk\7-Lark, also, there was a coasting movement in the opposite direction, the birds travelling 90 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOI.. XLV. Fig. 4. Movements of Ch.\ffinches, both those co.\sting from north CO.VST AND THOSE COASTING FROM SOUTH COAST. west along the south coast and turning north at Gwennap Head, and continuing north past Cam Gloose and Cape Cornwall. Further north at Pendeen Watch, one party left the coast and struck out N.N.W. over the sea, a route also taken by Sky-Larks and Starlings, but many other parties turned and followed the coast cast, and temporarily even south-east. This was with a strong south-east wind, but even so it was a remarkable direction to be taken by birds presumably destined for Ireland. Coasting Chaffinches took off over the sea far less often than Sky- Larks. On October 25th, with an east wind, there was an unusually heavy passage south past Cam Gloose, and three parties, involving over 150 birds, broke away and went out W.N.W'., being followed a long way without changing direction. Even on this day, however, most parties kept on south, though several cut south-west across Whitesands Bav towards Land's End, a sea crossing of 3 to 4 miles, which we did not see them undertake on other da^’S. The only other day that we saw Chaffinches taking off in the direction of Ireland was October 30th, after a hold-up due to bad weather. In still tine weather just after dawn, three parties, involving at least 120 birds, circled up from roosting places near Cape Cornwall and went straight out to sea between W.N.W. and north-west. A little later, near Cam Gloose, small flocks of Chaffinches appeared from the south coasting north, and most of these set off out to sea between W.N.W. and N.N.W. , in all ten parties totalling 72 birds leaving between 08.20 and 10.35, while three parties totalling 20 birds continued coasting north, and two individuals coasted south. In similar weather at dawn on November ist, many parties started by circling up, but all then coasted south ; none went out to sea. We apparently saw many fewer Chaffinches migrating than have been reported coasting west in north Devon. Should this conclu- sion be confirmed in other seasons, it may be suggested that many of these coasting west in Devon are destined for Ireland and have already taken off over the sea before getting so far .south as Cape Cornwall. We .saw no Chaffinches take off south over the sea. On fine davs VOL. XLV.] VISIBLE MIGRATION AT LAND’S END 91 with a light wind, many of the parties coasting south to Gwennap Head rose high on reaching the cliffs, and went some way out to sea, but all eventually turned back and coasted east, though some did not turn until well off shore. The Chaffinches coasting south and then east in this way presumably cross the Channel later, probably at night, as found by Clarke (1912) at the Eddystone. As, however. Chaffinches crossing the sea by day sometimes do so at a great height, it is possible that a diurnal passage over the Channel has been overlooked. On any one day, the coasting movement of Chaffinches was wholly or almost wholly in the same dii'ection, though a very few individuals occasionally flew in the opposite direction for at least a short w'ay. The data for Cape Cornwall and Gwennap Head in Table 3 show that the coasting movement was nearly always against the wind. With an east or south-east wind the birds coasted south, turning east at Gw'ennap Head, and with a northerly wind they coasted north, having turned from the west at Gwennap Head. To this there was one exception, since on October 19th with a light north- east wind, all the birds coasted south then east. Table 3 also shows that the movement south from the north coast was much larger in size than that north from the south coast. The maximum passage northwards, in very favourable weather, was 75 in the hour, the maximum passage southwards was ten times this figure. On October 26th, with a strong south-east wind. Chaffinches were coasting south at Cam Gloose, but at Pendeen Watch, only four miles to the north, the movement was north-east up the coast, then south-east round the headland and on east. 120 passed in this way in an hour. Further observations are needed to interpret this. Chaffinches on passage roosted each evening in large numbers a little inland of Cape Cornwall, and we often saw a coasting migration start from here. On this day, the birds evidently left in two direc- tions from. these roosts. As Chaffinches cross the sea mainly at night, or in high flights by day, it is more obvious than in the case of the Sky-Lark that the coasting movements seen by the observer are an unimportant frac- tion of the migration of the species. Movements of Starling We saw the first Starlings migrating out to sea on October 14th and small parties left on most of the following days, but the passage was not large until October 25th, and much the largest flocks were seen on October 30th and November ist, our last days. The move- ments of the Starling, set out in Fig. 5, were much simpler than those of the other species, as there was little coasting. We saw most departures from the west coast, between Land’s End and Cape Cornwall. Big flocks came from inland about dawn and went straight out to sea W.N.W. or north-west towards Ireland. Later in the morning, smaller flocks came down to the coast, some of them flying straight out, others turning and coasting (usually *)2 BRiriSH BIRDS. M.V. Fig. 5. ^Movements of St.-uietxg. north) for a sliort wa\’, others settling temporarily and then either taking off over the sea or moving fnrtlier along the coast. The coast- ing movements were rather indehnite and were not easy to dis- tingnisli from feeding movements of resident flocks. On October 30th, a peak day at Cape Cornwall, one j^arty of 5-10,000 liirds left ont to sea at 07.25, another flock of 1,000 at 07.40, while between 07.40 and 07.45 three more flocks, eacli of several hundred birds, came from inland and turned north up the coast. I ’udweiMi 0S.20 and o().2o, another 15 jiartios came from inland down to the coast and turned north, 500 in one flock near the beginning and later jiarties of 25 to lio birds, once 300, in all 1,800 birds. Another 500, in six flocks, passed in the next half-honr, but the movement then fell off markedly. Likewise on November ist at Cape Cornwall, a flock of about 3,000 left out to .sea at 07.20, and in the next 40 minutes ir more jiarties, totalling some i,boo lu'rds, came down to the sea from inland, all in this case !ea\'ing out to sea about north-west, though two partii'S coasted a short w^ay south before doing so. .\t Gwcnnap Head, the Starling movement was on a smaller scale than at Cape ('ornwall. 'I'hus between 08.40 and 09.40 on October 30th, when 13 ))arties iiu’olving about 1,000 birds ]iassed at Cape' Cornwall, only seven parties involving ibb birds passed at Gwenna]) Head. This difference is probably due to the fact that the Starlings mostly fly W.N. W. or north-west from inland, hence few would reach Gwennap Head, in the south-west corner of the ]icninsula, except those travelling along the south coast. Combining our observations for all days at Gwennap Head, we saw ten parties arriving from the east along the coast, flve of which set off ont to sea W.N.W. or north-west while the others turned north up the coast. In addition, we saw two parties of 50 birds come coasting dovai from the north, join up, and set out south over the sea. They were followed a long way, and did not change direction, so were presumabl}.’ bound for Spain. This was on October 17th. Three days eariier another small party headed south out to sea, but then turned and coast('d \oL. XLV.J VISIBLE MIGRATION AT LAND’S END. 03 cast. Clarke (iyi2) recorded a southerly passage at the Eddystone but only at night. At Pendeen Watch, where we saw one tiock of .Starlings take off in tlie normal direction just west of north-west, in the direction of Ireland, two others (on different days) set out N.N.E. and N.N.W. respccti^•ely, presumably making for west Wales or eastern Ireland. More obscrx'ations are needed here. Starlings, like Sky-Larks, were also seen coming in from the sea at right angles to the coast, north-east or east at Gwennap Head, east at Cape. Cornwall, and E.S.E. or south-east at Pendeen Watcli. The numbers involved were far smaller than of those setting out, the flocks usually consisting of under 50, often under 10, individiuils. Once, however, soon after dawn, about 1,000 birds came in from the sea together, in a straggling front extending for about half a mile. These birds appeared 15 minutes after a flock of some 3,000 had set off, at a time when the coast was clear but there was mizzling rain out at sea. W^e sometimes saw part of a sea-going party break off and return to land, and others presumably did so further off shore. 'I'he returning parties often alighted in the fields. This Ruckzug was exactl}^ comparable with that seen in the Sky-Lark. Other migrating species Live other small passerine species were seen travelling along the coast occasionally, but it was clifficult to be sure whether they were migrating, or mereh' local residents. 'Phese were the Goldfinch [CarducUs cayduelis) and Linnet (C. ennuahina) in flocks of six to 30 birds, the Meadow-Pipit {Antkus pratensis) in parties of seven or under, chiefl}^ in the first half of our stay, the Pied Wagtail {Molacilla alba yarnilii), usually travelling singly, in twos or threes, and the Reed-Bunting {Emberiza schccniclns) , of which one and then two were seen on October 23rd. Some of these coasting parties were almost certainly migrating, as we saw otb.ers taking off out to sea, as follows: Goklfinch, 25 out south-east from the Lizard on October loth, and five possibly out W'.N.M'. from Gwennap Plead on October 17th ; Linnet, parties of four, 14, 20 and 30 out south-west from Gwennap Head on October 14th, and parties of six and nine out south-west and a party of ten out W.N.M'. from Gwennap Head on October 17th ; Meadow-Pipit, small parties out south, sometimes with Sky-Larks, from Gwennap Head on several daj'S in the first half of our sta^', the maximum being 17 birds in one morning; Pied Wagtail, two coasting west which then took off south-west, from the Lizard I^oint on October loth, and three out M'.N.W. from Gwenna]') Head on October 17th. These four species, like Sk\’-Larks, dropped low down over the water when setting off seaward. We also saw small parties of Swallows {H iruiuio nislica) and House- Martins {Deliclion ttrbica), the largest flock consisting of nine birds, usually coasting against the wind, and once drifting southwards out to sea from Gwennap Head. A late Swift {A pus apus) coasted south past Cape Cornwall on October 13th. 94 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. At 10.15 Oil October 23rd, a Heron {Ardea cinerea) set off south over the sea from Gwennap Head, circling, flapping and gliding at a moderate height above the water, until lost to sight a long way out. Clarke (1912) recorded this species passing south at the Eddystone at night. Finally at 10.35 on October 15th, we saw a Buzzard (Btiteo buteo) set off S.S.E. from Carn-Du, disappearing into mist when some distance off shore, so we cannot be sure that it was migrating. We also saw a number of uncommon passage migrants along the cliffs, including a Snow-Bunting {Plectrophenax nivalis), a Richard’s Pipit {Anthus richardi), several Ring-Ousels {Turdns torqnatus), several Black Redstarts [Phcenicurus ochrurus), a Short-eared Owl [Asia flammeus), several Merlin [Falco crsalon), and a Pink-footed Goose {Anser fahalis brachyrhynchus). Further, both Fieldfare (Tiirdus pilaris) and Redwing {T. musicus) appeared on the cliffs several days earlier than we saw any inland. These records are of no special interest, except in suggesting that the coastal route is used by other, including nocturnal, migrants, and details will appear in the Annual Report of the Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservation Society. Gaps in our knowledge We would stress that we watched regularly only round Gwennap Head and Cape Cornwall (with Cam Gloose). The arrows on our maps for other places are based on very few observations, and movements almost certainly occur there in directions additional to those observed. Pendeen Watch, Carn-Du and the Lizard would particularly repay further study, as would many localities further east. We have, however, carried the problem a stage further, and hope that this paper will stimulate others to take part in the exciting sport of migration-watching. There are large areas of coast and many inland localities concerning which nothing is yet known, and where the pastime might be pursued with both profit and enjoy- ment. We would stress, too, that the biggest gap of all may be the migrations that we cannot see, because they occur either at night or at too high an altitude by day. Visible migration may, in fact, be only a small and unimportant part of the total migration of the species studied in this paper, in which case the coasting movements which have attracted so much attention may give a misleading im- pression as regards directions taken, times of movements etc. of the main migatory flights. The real problem for future research is perhaps “ invisible migration Summary I. Sky-Larks coasted west along the north coast of Cornwall, turned south round the Land’s End peninsula and then east, and they continued on east at least as far as the Lizard. Others coasted west along the south coast, turned north round the Land’s End peninsula and up the west coast but have not yet been traced further. Both groups included birds which took off over the sea south in the VOL. XLv.] VISIBLE MIGRATION AT LAND’S END. 96 direction of Spain and W.N.W. in the direction of Ireland. 2. Chaffinches had similar coasting movements in both directions, but probably took off over the sea chiefly at night, though some- times by day in the direction of Ireland. 3. Sky-Larks chiefly took off over the sea in fair weather and often with a following wind. Both Sky-Larks and Chaffinches coasted mainly against the wind. 4. Starlings took off W.N.W. from the west coast of the Land's End peninsula, coming from inland. A few set off south. Coasting movements were rather indefinite. 5. Migration was seen most commonly in sunny weather with a light wind, and least in fog, heavy rain, or strong wind. It was commonest in the first two hours after dawn, the peak time varying somewhat with the species. The behaviour when starting off, and when crossing the sea, is described. References Allen, X. V. (1944). " Migration of Chaffinches and other birds on tlie south-west eoast.” Brit. Birds, 37 : 212-213. Bannerman, D. a. (1944). “Chaffinch migration on the south-west coast.” Brit. Birds, 37 : 177. Clarke, W. E. (1912). Studies in Bird Migration. London. Vol. I, csp. pp. 221-237, ■252-267, 280-323. Goodbody, I. M. (1950). “ Sky-Lark migration in S.E. Ireland.” Bril. Birds, 43 : 265-271. Hartley, P. H. T. (1945). The Cor>iwall Bird Watching and Preservation Soc. Ann. Rep., 15 : 13, 15-16. Holt, E. G. (1950). “ Autumn migration along the Bristol Channel.” Brit. Birds, 43 : lluRRELL, H. G. (1944). ” Chaffinch migration in the south-west.” Bril. Birds, 38 : lo-n. Lack, D. and E. (1949). “ Passerine migration through England.” Brit. Birds, 42 : 320-326. Lowery, G. H. (1946). “ Evidence of trans-Gulf migration.” Auk, 63 : 175-211. Ruttledge, R. F. (1938). “ Bird-migration by the overland route between Killala Bay and Galway Bay.” Brit. Birds, 32 : 130-135. Simms, E. (1950). “ Autumn bird-migration across the South i\litllands of England.” Brit. Birds, 43 : 241-250. Tait, W. C. (1924). The Birds of Portugal. London, pp. 52-53. Wood, J. D. (1950). “ Further notes on passerine migration through England.” Brit. Birds, 43 : 274-278. (96) '1'Able I. Influence of \\'eathek on Movements i.ight Liglit, ^\'t■ather Dates in October Number passing in best hour Sky-Lark Chaffinch Starling (out to sea) Sunny 9. 10, 13; 14, 19, 23, 24, 30, i.Xl heavily Light Strong Strong Strong Strong NOTES 229, 124-f , 70 8o; 1 16, 193, 404, 215, (— ) Average 179 8, 10, II, 14, 7, 16, 15; 16, 18 10, 6, 12 . Average 11 25 75 17 124 21,22,20, 51,43,11, 28 12 Average 29 27; 29, 31 o, 9, o 12 18 (i) I or Sky-Lark and Chaffinch all migrants Mere counted irrespective of direction, but for the Starling only those setting off out to sea. (ii) (o) Means none seen but too early in the season for migration to be expected. Such cases have been excluded in calculating the averages. (iii) On I. XI we counted only for about half an hour around dawn, too early for Sky-Larks. Table 2. Sky-Lark Movements at Gwennap Head Fog (once oi’cfcast ) ShoM-er>- Sunny Showery Heas y rain Heavily overcast (o, o), 100, 79, 120, 46, 433, 75, 400-h Average 179 (o, o, o), o, 2, o Average i 788 8 o, o, 30, 15 Average ii o, o, 6 (o) (O, 0,0), 35, 9, 50, 150, 6000, gCCK) + (o, o, o), o, o, o 450 100 O, O, 49b, .SCO O, O, o (0) Date 9.x 12.X 14. x 1 7.x 15. X nj..\ 20. X 21. X 22. x 23. x 24. x 30.x "'ind Coming from N. and outs, or coasting E. Direction Strength Peak hour .Most left Coming from E. and In from out W.N.W.or coasting N. sea N.E. Peak hour Most left Peak hour S.E. S.E. S.E. N.N.E. None (fog) N.E. W. W. N. N.E. E. N.W. Mod. Strong Mod. Strong Light -Mod. Strong Strong Light Light Light Tot.vl 220 18 f'4 49 10 34 24 o 3 f>7 283 7 779 More out S. Back N. More coasting Mi.xed Coasting E. .Mixed Out S. Out S. Coasting E. Out S. o o JO 93 o 91 f) 51 40 150 70 185 (not noted) -Alixetl Out W.N.W; Coasting N. Coasting N. Coasting N. Out W.N.W. Out W.N.W. Out W.N.W. bgf) 5 o 6 0 1 o o o o 32 72 20 136 NOTES : (i) Ihe peak hour vas not always the same for each direction, lienee totals do not always correspond ivith Table i. (ii) When most birds left in one direction, this only is given ; “ mixed ” means that con- siderable proportions left in both directions ; “ more ” means soiiie in both directions but a preiioiKlerance in one. (iii) Visits normally from about 08.15 hours (sun-time) but On October 20th only in late morning. Table 3. Chaffinch Movements .\t Gwennap Head and Cape Coknw.vlj. Date Wind Direction Direction of coasting movement N umber in peak hour 13.X. S.E. S. 100 14. X S.E. S. E. 79 17-X x.N.i;. \S'. N. 8 19.x N.IL S.-E. 120 23.x N.E. W.-N. 23 24.x L. S.-E. 433 25. X !•.. S. 788 -2f,..\ s.i:. S. 30 28. X S.E. S. 30.. X N.W. W.-N. 75 I.Xl s.w. S. 400+ NOTE; Two directions are fiiveu v.Iu-it the observations were made at Gwennap Head, as the birds turned there, but only on*' dirct t'on at (.ape CoiTi\\alI where the coas»t runs nortii and soutli. Biitisli Birds, Vol. xlv, PL 2], Shore-Lark [Evemophila alpeslris). Male after feeding the young. Svaipa, Swedish Lapland, July 4th, 1942. [Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). ritish Birds, \’ul. ,\1\', I’l. 2'2. Shork-I.akk (lircwnl^hihi dlpc.^lvix). I i'I'KR: M m.ic o.\ tiii-: i ook-out nkar xkst. Svah-a, S\vi:msn I. M’l.AN'i), Jury ,|tli, k)4J. I.owKR : Nkst \M) hggs. Svaira, Swkdish I.ari \m>, ,M \y j^nl. (Pliolo‘;:tif^ln‘(/ hv I’. ( ). S\v whkrc;). I 1 I I British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 2.3. [’hotomicrographs of material in castings of Shetland Wren [Troglodytes t. zetlundicus). Upper ; Various arthropod remains, showing a piece of insect COMPOUND EYE IN CENTRE. Lower : 1’art of Apterygotan (?) mandible. British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 25 Photomicrographs of material in castings of Shetland Wren {Troglodytes t. zetlandicus) . I’ppER ; Piece of wing of a hymenopterous insect. I,ower : Sub-costal vein from fore-wing of a chalcid wasp. British Jhrds, \’’ol. xiv. Pi. 2C>. I’llOTOM!CROGRAI>HS OK MATERIAL IN C\STINGS OK SlIETLAMI WrEN ( J i'o<;lod\ii's I. icilcindiciis). I'PRKR : I’lHCE OK Myri(lpO(f ANTENNA. I.owiiR ; I’robable Tlivsuiim-an ari’ENdacik. British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 27 Pemai.i: B.l.vck Kkdstart {P/ucniaini? ocJin/rus) with Cinnamar .Moth {llvp:nril(i jcicnlurcf). {PliofOiii'aphed by J'iRic Moski.ng). (See pai.H' 102). AIarsh-Warkler (Acrocephalus palustris) feeding young Cuckoo {CucuIhs canoriis). The food is a Snout Moth (Hypciia pyobosciiialis). {Photographed by Eric H os king). (See page 102). (97) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XXXVII. THE SHORE-LARK. Photographed by P. O. Swanbi^kg (Plates 2I-2J) VVe are once again indebted to Mr. Swanberg for a series of plates, this time of the Shore-Lark {Ereinophila alpcslris). The pictures were all taken on a field near Svaipa in Swedish Lapland (Lat. 66° lo'N.) and show very well the bare stony nature of the nesting ground. Mr. Swanberg states that on the breeding grounds tlie species is “ astonishingly watchful and cautious and the nest is therefore difficult to find. As a winter visitor to Britain the Shore-Lark lias a \’ery restricted distribution. The Handbook describes it as an “ annual autumn to spring visitor, L. coast from Yorks, to Kent. Along S. coast occasional ; elsewhere very rare.” Over a fairly long period records would, no doubt, be found to conform general^ to this picture, but over a short period, such as the post-war years, it would appear that only in E. Anglia lias this species been a regular annual visitor. The fact that some wintered in north Kent in 1948-49 was considered an unusual event {antea, vol. xliii, p. 116). In that winter, however, they seem to have been more widespread than usual : three were recorded in Sussex in the autumn of 1948 {Sussex Bird Report, 1948, p. 6) ; a party of eight wintered at Gibraltar Point, Lines. {Report of Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., 1949, p. 16) ; there were several in Northumberland, including a party which reached 21 at its miaximum seen on various dates from October, 1948, to April, 1949 {Orn. Rep. for Xorthumberland and Durham, 1948, p. ii8, 1949, p. 112) ; and one at the Isle tU' May on October 30th, 1948 {Scot. Nat., 62 : 99). In Yorkshire {Y.N.U., Committee for Orni- thology Report, 1948, p. 57, 1949, p. 8) there were several at Kilnsea and Spurn', the maximum being 29 in November, 1448 ; this party wintered and some birds were beginning to display by March Kjtli, 1949. It is to be noted that Mr. Chislett {loc. cit.) says of these records ” Authenticated records of the Shore-Lark of recent 3’ears in Yorkshire have been extremely few. I know of only three records in the past ten 3'ears.” All this suggests that in certain parts of its winter range in Britain this species is a ^■isitor only in favourable years, d'here is some evidence that the current winter, 1951-52, may be a good year. We should be interested to hear whether readers have found it so. Inland occurrences are verN’ rare. It was recorded in Nottinghamshire in 1945 ; a second record for the same count3' {Report on the Birds of N ottinghamshirc , 1946- 1949, p. II ) is placed in square brackets as the bird was onty heard in flight with Sk3'-Larks ; it may be significant, however, that the date of this occurrence was Januar3^ 30th, 1949. j.D.W. (98) “ CASTING ” BY SHETLAND WREN NESTLINGS. BY E. A. Armstrong and W. H. Thorpe, E.R.S. On the day when young Shetland Wrens {T roglodytes t. zetlandicus) left their nest on Fetlar small quantities of a rufous-brown paste were noticed on a boulder under the entrance. Some of it was scraped off and later examined under the microscope. It was found to be composed mainly of arthropod remains in a triturated condition. Beyond reasonable doubt this material was voided orally by the young Wrens and fell directly on to the boulder. Unfortunately the situation of the nest on the inner side of an over- hanging turf on a bank prevented direct observation of what trans- pired at the entrance so that it is not known whether the matter was ejected by the chicks directly out of the nest, whether it fell on the threshold and was then dislodged, or whether some was transferred from the beaks of the young to the beak of the parent. The first two possibilities would seem most likely, but once or twice as the bird flew from the nest after feeding the chicks, it seemed that some matter, not resembling a faecal sac, was visible adhering to its bill ; although observations were made at a distance of a few feet the bird’s movements were so quick that it was difficult to be certain of this. Four days before the young fledged the female was seen to fly down the slope and pick up a morsel two or three feet below the boulder on which the castings were found, and two days later she hopped out of the nest to almost the same spot, picked up a tiny brownish object and flew to the wire of a fence some 20 yards away where she apparently wiped it off, or, less probably, ate it. She frequently wiped off Fecal sacs on this wire. It would have been possible for a morsel of the paste to have fallen from the nest to the place from which the bird picked up these objects. Thus one or other of the parents may have occasionally carried off some of it. That any was produced more than four days before the 3^oung fledged is doubtful. Apart from two or three days after the nestlings hatched white Fecal sacs were regularly removed in the usual way. The young, which were already able to fly, left the nest when it was examined at 11.24 G.M.T. on June 22nd, 1950, but returned to it in the evening to roost. They were fed there as before. The brown paste was collected that evening. Among the prey fed to the young during the day was a centipede, two moths (apparently noctuid) and two green caterpillars, a daddy-long-legs (Tipulid) and, probably, a stone fly. It will be noted that microscopic examination of the material revealed the remains of such organisms as these. When mounted in Fuparal and examined under the microscope the paste was found to contain occasional quartz grains, probably from the sandy soil, and a great deal of calcium carbonate. Since Molluscs and Crustacea were absent from the material carried in by the parents, (the organisms consumed by the young Wrens were not such as to provide great excess of this substance), one can only VOL. XLV.] “ CASTING ” BY WREN NESTLINGS, 99 suggest that it may have originally formed the shells of molluscs and, reduced to powder, been picked up by the Wrens while search- ing for prey. From the eight day nestling Great Tits {Parus major) were given beakfuls of sand by their parents (Kluijver 1950), Perhaps, therefore, the Wrens intentionally brought this mineral matter to their chicks although they were not seen to visit the nest without prey. The nest was only a few feet from the sea and some yards from a stream frequented by the foraging Wrens which were seen poking into crevices in its banks near the water. By far the greater part of the paste consists of remains of arth- ropod skeletons ; in regard to much of the material it is difficult to determine the organisms to which the fragments belong and to make a thorough examination would be a very laborious task. Never- theless, many of the remains can be identified with sufficient certainty to give a fairly clear picture of the food which had been brought to the young birds. Firstly, wing-scales derived from moths are very abundant in the castings. Clusters of them appear entangled in delicate mem- branes which probably represent the remains of the skins of insect larvae. Some of these skins show bristles which seem to belong to lepidopterous larvae, and here and there are to be found remnants of the mandibles of such larvae. There is also what appears to be the head capsule of a small moth. Next to Lepidoptera the Hymenoptera are the most obvious constituents. It is possible to identify with certainty the remains of front wings of a Chalcid wasp and there are also a number of pieces of compound eye which probably belong to Hymenoptera. Segments of the abdomen of an adult caddis fly (Trichoptera) of some small species can be identified with fair certainty. Other fragments which show traces of spiracles probably belong to a coleopterous larva. Various heavily sclerotized plates apparently- come from some small Coleopteron, possibly a weevil. There are also a large number of objects which look like the limbs and appen- dages of a small Thysanuran as well as some pieces which suggest remains of small stone flies (Plecoptera), but it is not possible to be certain about these. Apart from insects one finds numerous structures which are, apparently, jaws of a small Chilopod (centipede) and other objects which can be identified with considerable probability as Myriapod antennee. There are also the remains of what appears to be the abdomen of a small spider or phalangid as well as tarsi of the same. No remains of Diptera have been identified in the castings — neither can any fragments of wood lice or other isopod Crustacea be traced and there are no indications of molluscs having been eaten by the young Wrens. The absence of crustacean and molluscan remains is not surprising since, as mentioned above, no such organisms were noted among the prey brought to the nest; but as quite a number of winged insects were seen in the parents’ bills it is loo BRITISH BIRDS. [\OL. Xl.V. reiiiarkahle that no reiiiains of Diptera were identiliable. Tiic foraging and breeding behaviour of these Wrens is discussed else- where (Armstrong in press). 'I'lic paper by 'I'ucker (1944) on tlie ejection of j)ellets 1)V passerine and other Ihrds is well known fmt so far as the writers are awan> no n'X'iew of such Ixduu'iour by nestlings lias been publislied. Kvetls (1932) mentions the ejection of insect remains by a Niglitingale {Lnsciniu niegarhyncha), Whitethroat (Sylvia communis), .Secigi'- Warbler [Acrocephaliis schceiiobcBiius) Grassho])per - \\'arl)l('r [Locustella ncvvia), Pied Wagtail {Motacilia alba) and \\’heatear [CEnanthe ccnauthc). The chicks were taken from the nest at nine days and kci)t for some weeks, but the age at which tliey first ejected pellets is not mentioned. Probably aviculturists could i)ro\ ifle further information. MilkT (1950) refi'rs to a nestling ('alil'firnia Shrike (Lanins hidovicianns gambcli) which on its third day disgorged a pellet containing parts of dermestids, the muscular digestive tracts of snails fed to it earlier the same day, and the femur of a grasshop])er. Young i hack-collared Jkirbets (Lybius torqiialus) “ cast ” chitin and the ])ips of fruit (Skead, 1950). })hotograph of Rooks (Corviis fnigilcgiis) by Kosking (i()4h) shows the parent seizing a casting from the beak of a nestling. Possibly a pellet containing beetle cl'.tra beside the nest of a Short-eared Owl (Asia flammcus) (Armstrong and Phillips, 1925) was voided by one of the owlets. It may be appropriate to mention here some puzzling informa- tion sent to one of us (lvA..V.) in regard to the behaA’iour of Kuropean \\'rens {Troglodytes I. troglodytes). In 1(148 he received h'tters independently from Mrs. (f. A. IMorris of St. Albans and Mrs. T. Silva of Sevenoaks, Kent, describing the peculiar ])rocedure thc'y, and others with them, had observed at Wrens’ nests that summer. Mrs. Morris wrote that she and a friend had rc])catedly watched “a white substance the size of a small marble ” being remowal by a parent Wren from the mouths of nestlings. 'I'he nest was watched from the time it was built until the yoimg tledged and thoemox al of the white substance was lirst .seen to take })lacc about 10 days before the chicks left the nest. The procedure took place “ many times an hour.” As the nest was close to a window the birds were some- times watched from a distance of only a few inches. 'I'he examing before the young flew they were seen to defecate out of the entrance. The other observer, Mrs. .Silva, wrote that she and two others watch- ing with glasses from a distance of 12 feet, .saw Y’ren nestlings ]>a.ss what they took to be white faecal sacs to the imrents, using tluar beaks. She lirst noticed this behaviour on J une 14th ; the young left on June 18th. She says, ” I saw it happen three times in two minutes and every time I watched, it occurred freciuently.” 'i'hcre is no mention of a chick being seen to jiick uj) a liecal jx-llet which had been already voided. 'I'liis is strange if the objects passed were really faecal sacs. On the other hand, if the substance “ CASTING ” BY WREN NESTLIN(iS 101 \’OL. XIA'.J ^\■as iiulii^vsliblc material “ cast ” or, 'illy, it is odd that it bore so close a resemblance to becal matt<'r, and nnaccountal)le that defecation in the ordinary manner should not be noted at all. lloth corres- pondents answered detailed queries but the problem of what really occurred has not ticcn resoh'cd. ^'oung Crowned Hornbills {'J'ochis alboterminatus) \\ill pick up duug and drop it from the aperture of the nest (Moreau and Moreau, 1940) and a Willow- Warbler {Phyllo- scop2is tvochilus) has been obserc^ed to lift a sac from the nest and drop it on the rim (Tucker, 1941) but we know of no record of any passerine regularly picking up faeces and passing it to the parent in its beak. References Armstro.ng, E. -\. (inpre.ss). The Wren. Collins, London. Armstrong, It. A. (in press) “ The behaviour and breeding biology of the Shetland Wren.” Ihis 94. Armstrong, E. A. and Phillips, G. W. (1925). ‘‘ Notes on the nesting of the Short-eared Owl in Yorkshire.” Bvit. Birds, 18 ; 226-230. Bl.'.ir, K. H. and Tucker, B.Yt (1941). “Nest sanitation; with additions from published sources.” Brit. Birds, 34: 206-215, 225-235, 250-255. Evetts, K. E. (1932). “ Pellets ejected by insectivorous birds.” Brit. Birds, 25 ; 33^- IIosKiNG, Ir. AND Newberrv, C. (1949). More Birds of the Day. London. Kltujver, H. N. (1950). ” Daih' routines of the Great Tit. Pams in. major J..” Ardea. 38; 99-135- Miller, A. 11. (1950). Chapter in JJfe Histories of North American Wagtails, Shrikes, Vireos and their allies by A. C. Bent. {Bull. U.S. N^at. Mas., 197 : i6ril 26th, 1942, were probably Northerners (M. Neal Kankin). Co. ljioNii(;.\L. — Carrickart : a Hock of 150 Northerners on .\pril 23rd, 1943 (M. .Neal Kankin). \.\GLKSKv. Malltraeth : a Hock of c. 400 Northerners from .\pril 13th, 1930, to the end of the month, by which time numbers had dwinclled to 22 (Davifl Jenkins). f.ANCASHiKK. — i\lr. JC. Hardy re])orts that from 1929 to 1942 he made annual observations at as.sembly grounds in an area of S.W. Lancs., including Walton Sewage Karin, Eccleston Mere and fields near Halewood. He found Hocks assembling at the end of March, increasing up to c. 400 by mid-April (once Soo) and then declining rajiidly at the end of the month. Mr. E. E. Preece has sent records from Halewood, a wintering ground, where in April, 1949. Northerners generally outnumbered Southerners, at least 20 still being present on yVpril 30th. Mr. K. .\tkinson reports a flock of c. 300, apparently all Northerners, near Manchester, on .\pril 29th, 1951. CniiSHiKE. — Mr. E. Hardy refers to assembly grounds at Storeton and Jlcols in Wirral. There are many other w intering places in Cheshire to which there is a fresh inHux, usually in .Vpril and mainly of Northerners; among these haunts are a group of fields at Newbridge Hollow, near Altrincham — in use for over 40 years — and fields at Partington, Whitley Reed and Appleton (A. W. B.) . Leickstkrshire.-- Mr. M. K. Howarth has sent us a summary of observa- tions at a large aerodrome in S.Mb I.eics. This is a wintering area, but when the races arc distinguishable in April, Northern birds outnumber Southern by three to one. His paper appears in The Birds of Leicestershire ami Rutland, Report for 1950, pp. 13-15. Warwickshire. — Flocks of Golden Plovers appear at Castle Bromwich aerodrome in mid-March ; in April, 1949 and again in 1950 a proportion of the birds has been identified as Northern. Sixteen were present on April 30th, 1950. Some Northerners were also identified at Baginton in April, 1930 (R. W. M. Lee, M. J. Rogers). Somerset.— iMr. .\lan T. Rees has supplied records of Golden Plovers seen on the Lansdown Ridge, near Bath, in 1947-1950. He has no figures for .\pril but gives evidence of marked passage in Mareh and again in October, with some birds apparently wintering. REVIEWS. IJrttv-h Bird Books : .hi Index to British Ornitholoev, i.|8i /'» ././>. igp'^. By Raymond Irwin (J.oudoii, Grafton ix. Co., K)5J. 03/-). The title of this book gives a very inadeipiate idea of its contents since it indexes and classifies, not only books, but chapters in books, scientific papers and articles in magazines and new.spapcrs. It thus constitutes a guide to the literature of British ornithology, not merely to books on the subject. It is divided into five parts, the first of wdiich contains general literature classified in 20 sections, which deal re.spectively with Bibliography and History ; Periodicals; .Early Works to .A.H. iSoo; Handbooks and Reference Works (since iSoo) ; Taxonomy, Classification and Nomenclature ; Biology and Evolution ; Anatomy, Physiology and Plumage ; Economic Ornithology ; Ecologj' ; Breeding 13iology, Display, Habits and Behaviour ; Nests, Eggs. Incubation and Pledging ; Migration, Ringing ' and Bird Observatories : Flight ; Territory ; Song ; IHiotography ; Protection and Nature Rcservi's ; Bird Watching ; Game Birds aiul Wild Eow ling ; and I'alconrv. Most of these sections appear to include most of the more imporfant papcr.s on the topics wdth which they deal, inchuling articles published in .\merica nr in Europe, and they will obviously be valuable as guides to students. But we think the section on Periodicals, which is said to be “ a select list of periodicals in constant use,” is most unsatisfactory and misleading. No less than nine VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 107 of the sixty journals listed expired over 50 years ago. hour American journals are included, but not a single one published in any European country. 01 nine local ornithological societies in England which publish annual reports on the birds of their area only one is included, and of a further 22 Societies whicli publish an annual bird report only eight, whilst several natural histor}- journals which only rarely contain anything on birds are nevertheless included. The second part of the book is geographical and lists the literature' dealing with provinces of the British Isles in 14 sections. Each section is headed with a list of some of the principal libraries, museums, nature reserves and local societies in the area. Here again the treatment is unequal. Of the societies in the south-west Bristol and Cornwall are noted as producing annual reports on birds but there is nothing to show that Devon, Lundy and Somerset also do so. We have also noted some important omissions from some of these sections, e.g., Evans’ account of Cambridgeshire birds in the Victoria Histor\- and Blathwayt’s list of the birds of Lincolnshire in the Lines. Nat. Union Trans., 1914, which are the latest lists for those two counties. Part III contains a systematic list of British birds with references to papers or chapters on individual species or small groups of related species and to works in which there are photographs of these species. This seems likely to prove much the most useful part though the references are preponderantly to works published in Britain, many of the sections not containing a single reference to any Continental papers. Part IV is an index of authors with titles of their works and is stated to provide “ a complete list of all material relating to British Birds, including many items not appearing in Parts I-III.” Unfortunately this claim is not borne out on examination. The two articles which we have noted as missing from Part II are not in this section either, and here again there arc hardly any references to books on birds on the British list published abroad. Part V contains a very full index of subjects, species and places and there are Appendices giving addresses of natural history societies and supplemen- tary literature published in 1949 and 1950. Obviously this work will be of great value to all serious students of British bird life, but we think it would have been much more useful if it had concen- trated on the more recent literature and not attempted to cover again the field already covered in the " Geographical Bibliography of British Ornitholog}',” it might then have been produced at a rather lower price, for we fear the present price will prevent its purchase by many who would find it useful. W.B.A . Sexual Behaviour in Penguins. By L. E. Richdalc. (University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, Kansas, 1951. U.S. $6.00.) Mr Richdale here presents the results of ten years intensive held work (up to 1946) on the Yellow-eyed Penguin (Megadyptes antipodes), undertaken at a number of colonies situated within about 20 miles of his home at Dunedin, New Zealand. During the last four of these yeai's nearly 700 visits were made, many of them overnight or longer, at all seasons of the jear. (Each visit, if I am correctly informed, entails a hair-raising descent of the cliffs to the foreshore below, made with the help of sundry remote but reasonably secure pieces of wire and old bedsteads.) Penguins may be caught, and handled judiciousl}', fur e.vamination, weigh- ing and ringing. Mr. Richdale’s rings are numbci'cd in four places, and the figures are large enough to be legible through a telescope at 1 20 feet. Between four and five hundred birds have been marked to date. The individual for- tunes and relationships of 88 males and g6 females are here pursued over r arying numbers of years, through 292 matings. The author must at times have felt almost overwhelmed by the mass nf accumulated observations at his disposal. 'I'he material is presented in ten chapters, each dealing with a particular jiart of the reproductive cycle. Each chapter is completed by a useful summary', and also contains a discussion of comparable phenomena in other species of penguins, as well as in less closely related birds. Here the author has drawn upon his own concurrent 108 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. experience with the Erect-crested and Little Blue Penguins, the Royal Albatross and other petrels, and also upon a wide variety of modern studies of reproductive behaviour in birds. His general method and approach remind one especially of Mrs. Nice’s “ Studies in the life history of the Song Sparrow,” to whose distinguished author he makes generous acknowledgment. An interesting aspect of the book is the attention it focuses on ” the pre-egg stage,” the period between the birds’ arrival at the breeding place and the commencement of actual reproduction — a particularly long and notable ])eriod in many penguins and petrels. It is not easy to explain why such birds as the Fulmar, for example, begin to haunt prospective breeding sites two to six months before the egg is laid ; or what the adaptive value may be of .spending such a period or longer at a breeding colony, without actually breed- ing at all, as happens in a proportion of cases. ]\Ir. Richdale’s account throws new light on the importance of this phase, not only in such generally accepted matters as establishing territory, and pair-formation, but in building up the bond between mated birds, until it is strong enough to withstand the long severe strain of the breeding season without breaking ; and possiblj* most of all in establishing the social community as an entity, and at the same time the position and membership of the individual birds and pairs within it. IMr. Richdale has since written important studies of the pre-egg stage in Buller’s Mollymawk (1949) and in the Albatross family (1951), both of which have actually seen publication ahead of the present work, and are issued by him at 23 Skibo Street, Kew, Dunedin, S.W.i, New Zealand. The book is a mine of interesting information, and one must be careful not to give a false impression by picking out odd points at random. My eye was caught, for example, by the conjecture that mated pairs of petrels, etc., may keep in contact while they are at sea outside the breeding season (p. 71) ; and by the fact that the gay head plumes and patterns of penguins in general serve for species-recognition and have no function in courtship (p. 75). The annual cycle of body weight is most interesting (p. 96 ct seq.) : there is a fall in weight before egg-laying, a slight rise during incubation and the early feeding of the young ; but as the two chicks grow bigger the parents’ body-weight appears to drop on account of the heavj^ demands then made on them. Once the young have departed, the parents’ weight shoots up and reaches a peak at the onset of the moult. They must then stay ashore fasting for a month and a half, which brings them to the lowest point in the cycle, after which they can recuperate once more during the winter months. In the matter of determination of clutch size we learn that a female, who lost her mate when the chicks w'ere already large, had grave difficulty in meeting their minimum requirements unaided ; and the author comments that ” it is obvious that one parent cannot feed two young successfully,” thus providing an important instance among sea birds of Lack’s general conclusions on this interesting subject. The outstanding importance of the book is the source it provides of original and co-ordinated observation. As it becomes known it will make an increasing contribution to our general understanding of reproductive behaviour in birds. The author has successfully accomplished his difficult task of presenting the great mass of detail in a form available to others, and it is no doubt through them that its full worth and significance will gradually emerge. The University of Kansas Press deserve a word of praise for their skill and competence in producing it. Not only arc the binding, paper, printing and illustration of first-rate quality, but, to the best of my knowledge, the text is entirely free from editorial or printers’ errors. V.C.W.-K. LOCAL REPORTS : SEVERN PROVINCIC Ornithological Notes, Bristol District, 1950. Ed. H. H. Davis. (Proc. Bristol Nat. Soc., xxviii, pt. II, pp. 1 77-192). This is the fifteenth of a series of annual reports covering N . Somerset and S. Gloucestershire ; this issue includes some records from Steep Holm in tlu' Bristol Channel. As the area includes the New Grounds this report incorpor- VOL. XLV.l REVIEWS. 109 ates the important observations made there under tlie auspices of the Severn Wildfowl Trust. Amons the scarce species recorded but not previously mentioned in our pages we note a Firecrest at Blagdon on December loth, a Niglrt-Heron at the New Grounds on September 4th and two Water-Pipits — New Grounds, Glos., February 25th, Blagdon Res., Som., October 29th — the second of wdiich was seen on the same day as a Rock-Pipit ; records from other parts of the country (see below) suggest that these two races migrate together. Other notes amplify what has already been published in our pages. There is, for instance, an additional record of a Hoopoe (Doynton, Glos, .Vpril 4th-Toth) ; while two more records of storm driven Gannets [cf. antea, vol. xliv, p. 314) and records of Manx Shearwaters far up the Severn cstuar}' give further evidence of the effect of the mid-September gales ; a Red- crested Pochard at Cheddar on September 24th may have been an escape [cf. p. 105). Among the geese at the New Grounds were an adult pair and an immature Lesser White-fronted Goose, January-March, and a single adult again in December, as well as a family party of five White-fronts of the Greenland race till March and two parties at the end of the year. There is also a report of 127 Pintail off the New Grounds on December 30th. Most of the other figures for ducks come from the Somerset reservoirs, where Teal were unusually numer- ous at the end of December. Records of more local interest include the second Black-throated Diver for the area — this bird, incidentally, arrivmd at about the .same time as those reported [antea, vol. xliv, p. 30) in Berkshire and the ^Midlands — a spring record of Curlew-Sandpiper, several Glaucous Gulls and many records of Buzzard which is stated now to be resident over a wide area in N. Somerset. J.D.W. Cheltenham and District Naturalists’ Society : Ornithological Report, IQ4S- 1950. Compiled by L. W. Hayward. This short cyclostyled document is, we understand, intended to be the fore- runner of a more ambitious report on that part of Gloucestershire not covered by the Bristol report. We welcome this first step towards filling one of the important remaining gaps in the series of county reports and are glad to note that sugge.stions are made for special study of locally distributed species. This report records the breeding of both Marsh-Warbler and Buzzard in the area during 1950, and there is a record of a Red-necked Phalarope at Hewletts reservoir during the phalarope invasion. J.D.W. The West Midland Bird Report, No. 17 (1950). Ed. C. A. Norris. With 450 members and 99 contributors to its report the Birmingham and \V'est Midland Bird Club may justly claim to have provided a first-rate ornithological organization for Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Stafford- shire. One of its activities has already been reviewed at length in our pages [antea, ^•ol. xliv, p. 421) ; another, described in this report, is the operation of a Heligoland type trap at a rickjmrd in S. Birmingham where 456 birds of 17 species were caught in a year. The Club has also taken a big part in the study of visible overland migration. There is no special report on this subject but observations are recorded under species headings in the classified notes. Particularly detailed work has been done in the Tame valley in N. Warwick- shire by INlessrs. G. A. and M. A. Arnold. It is of interest that they noted a large immigration of Starlings from October loth, “ with the peak from October 22nd to early November,” an observation that fits in well with records made elsewhere and mentioned in our pages [antea, vol. xliv, p. 247). Redwings also appeared first on October 23rd and for this species the period October 2oth-24th seems to have been a peak elsewhere in Warwickshire. Fieldfares, on the other hand, were not noted in the Tame valley until October 28th, though movement was noted in Birmingham on the 23rd. Other notes add to published data on the effects of the September gales : there are two records of Manx Shearwaters, one in Warwickshire on September i6th and one in Staffordshire on the loth; a Leach’s Fork-tailed Petrel at Bartley, Warwickshire, is an addition to the published list [antea, vol. xliv, p. 314), but the date, Novem- ber 25th, is much later than the others ; it also appears from the classified 110 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. notes that the inovenieiit of Common and Arctic Terns on September 17th was more pronounced in Warwickshire and Staffordshire than our report {antea, vol. xliv, p. 318) suggested. Mention has already been made in our pages of some of the unusual species reported in this area, such as Hoopoe, Greenland White-fronted Goose, Ferruginous Duck, Black-throated Di\-er and Great Snipe. There are several records of rarer waders from the Staffordshire reservoirs, a Temminck’s Stint on .\fay nth, a Kenti.sh Plover on September 13th and a Dotterel on August 24th, the last at about the same time as a party was recorded at London airport. Seven Grey Plovers in September may also have been part of a larger movement . 'these reservoirs are now important centres of observation and it is therefore useful to have Mr. Rogers’s summary of records of passing migrants, waders and waterfowl at Bellfields (= Belvide), a reservoir which has been watched with some regularity for a number of years, ft is claimed that Bellfields has “ more records of Water-Pipit than any other locality in the British Isles", and the fact that nine were recorded in 1949 lends substance to this view, (elsewhere in the report are records of both Water- and Rock-Pipits, the latter from all three counties. Species w'hich are spreading in the area include Pied Flycatcher and Buzzard; the latter we arc informed in the introduction is now' nesting in Warwickshire as well as Worce.stershire, though the classified notes for the former county arc, perhaps intentionally, \ague on the point. Tw’o pairs of Ravens nested in Worcestershire and the MMod-Lark was recorded in Warwickshire " for the first time for many years.” Mention must also be made of a remarkable story of a Tawmy Owl w'hich, for no apparent reason, uprooted and carried off white wooden plant labels in a garden at Studley College, Worcs. J.D.M’. OUSE PRO\TNCK SiifJoUt Bird Report for J950 : Supplement to vol. vii, part II of Traiisaclioiis of the Suffolk Naiiiralisis’ Society. Price 5s. The I.oivestoft and North Suffolk Field, Naturalists' Club : Fifth Annual Report (1950). Great Yarmouth Naturalists’ Society : First Annual Report (1950). Until comparatively recently Suffolk was an ornithologically neglected county, occasional records from wiiich were published by Norfolk ornithologists. Then the late Dr. C. B. 'ficehurst published an excellent account of its birds. I faring the last few years the I.nwestoft Club has published annual records from the north-ea.st of the county and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has published details of observations on its two coastal sanctuaries, Minsmere and Ha\ ergatc Island. Now' we welcome the first annual report covering the whole county, which has been edited by Dr. P. R. Westall. Apart from a brief introduction and a list of contributors it con.sists entirely of annotated notes on species recorded during 1950, w'hich totalled 203, with six more in brackets not fully authenticated or probably escapes. A brief account of the status of each species in the county precedes the records of observations for the year. The Avocct is undoiditedly Suffolk’s star bird at present and the R.S.P.B. provides a statement showing that at least 2 1 pairs nested and that on August 13th at least 79, and possibly 85, birds (adults and young) were present. As a very minor point we note that though the R.S.P.B. statement begins by recording the first arrival on March i8th and ends by recording two still present in the first few days of October, individual records quoted later show that one w'as seen on March 12th and one on October 29th. Rare visitors recorded include a female Red-crested Pochard on Easton Broad from February i8th to March ist, a Red-necked Phalarope in breeding plumage at Minsmere from May 24th to 28th and a Yellow'shank, also at Minsmere, on August 26th. A Great Grey Shrike seen at Akenham on May 19th is only the second recorded for this month in Suffolk. Three pairs of Black Redstarts nested at Lowestoft, of which fuller details are given in the local report . As far as is known this is the fir.st occasion of their VOL. REVIEWS. Ill doing so since 1944. A photograph of a female at a nest with five young forms the frontispiece of that report, in which ornithology occupies 29 of the 42 pages. Special features include a review of the migratory movements in spring and autumn and lists of birds found dead on the tidemark. The area covered by' the Yarmouth Society is stated to be that within ten miles of the Haven Bridge, so that the Suffolk half of it overlaps that covered by the I.owestoft Society. In this first report, however, nearly all the records are from the Norfolk half, and most of the observations recorded relate to birds. The most interesting occurrences are dealt with in special notes by Iv. Harrison. As at Lowestoft three pairs of Blaek Redstarts nested in \'armouth in 1950, these being the first records for Norfolk. The breeding, or attempted breeding, of Pintail at Breydon in 1949 and 1950 has ah'cady been recorded in our pages. The colony of Common, Sandwich and Little Terns on Scroby Sands again had a bad season, nearly all the eggs and chicks being washed away by high tides and storms. Photographs of the nests of Pintail and Black Redstart are included in this report of 27 pages. W.B..A. Cambridge Bird Club Report, 1950. 'Phis 2.|th report maintains the high standard of recent years and indicates that members of the club have again been acti^'C in the field. The bulk of the report, 16 pages, contains observations on species in .systematic order from Cambridgeshire, western Norfolk and southern Lincolnshire (Holland) ; the Suffolk Breckland, from which numerous records have appeared in the past, being now covered by the Suffolk report. The chief rarity recorded was the Yellowshank at Peterborough sewage farm on May i6th already reported [antea, vol. xliii, p. 405). A Dipper seen by a stream in the w'inter 1949-50 is the first record of the species in Cambridgeshire. A valuable introductory sectioir of five pages deals with general topics, includ- ing an outline of migratory movements as affected by the weather, particularly a great westerly passage of Sky-I.arks and other species towards the end of October. Tlie sewage farms at Cambridge and Peterborough were under constant observation and the latter proved the more attractive to Terns in the autumn though less attractive than Cambridge to the majority of waders. A useful account of the bird haunts in the fens and round the Wash is also included. W.B..A. I ! imtingdonshire Fauna and Flora Society Annual Report, 1950. The third annual report of this society contains a section of seven pages on birds, compiled by C. F. Tebbutt from the notes of an increasing number of obseiA’crs. A Spotted Redshank identified on September 17th provides a new record for the county and a Pied Flycatcher on October 24th is the first recorded for many years. W.B.A. \VAIJCS Montgomeryshire Field Society: Report and Notes, 1950. (Lion. Sec.: Miss |. MacNair, Lower Garth, Welshpool). This is a comparatively new report and is particularly welcome as it breaks entirely new ground. At present it can only be described as a slender report, much of its limited space being necessarily devoted to other aspects of Natural History, but at least a beginning has been made and in this issue Mr. W. ]\I. Condry gives suggestions for local faunistic work which rvould repay study in future years. Whatever the limitations of space we think it unfortunate that in many cases the records do not include localities or even dates. In the case of a cock and hen Golden Oriole this may have been intentional, but there is no means of telling whether they were a pair ; but a report of a Red-breasted Goose " seen with two Barnacle Geese among a flock of White-fronts ” should surely be accompanied by more data if future workers are to decide w'hether this was an escape or a truly wild bird. A Great Grey Shrike at Llansantffraid on March 6th is beyond its normal range and is an addition to those previously reported for the winter of 1949-50 {antea, vol. xliv, p. 109). The increase in the numbers of Pied Flycatchers is maintained. A report of a Blackbird eating a wasp is of interest in connexion willi recent notes in our p.ages. We 112 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. must also mention a story of a family of Wrens who left their nest on a wet day and were helped to return to it in the evening by means of a stepladder. Though the ladder was moved the Wrens climbed it again on the following afternoon. It was then replaced by the nest and used twice before the nest was finally abandoned. J.D.W. LETTERS. VISIBLE MIGRATION IN THE MEDITERR.\NEAN To the Editors 0/ British Birds Sirs, — We are hoping to collate information about visible migration over, and on the shores of, the Mediterranean. Very little has been published on the subject and no doubt a good many unpublished records, especially those made on voyages, are in existence. If any one would be so good as to communicate such records to us, he may rest assured that full acknowledgement would be made in the event of publication. W. B. Alexander and R. E. Moreau. Edward Grey Institute, Botanic Garden, Oxford. THE WAY MIGRATION TAKES PLACE To the Editors 0/ British Birds Sirs, — Mr. Hinde’s conclusions on the way in wEich migration takes place, in his “ Further Report on the Inland Migration of Waders and Terns ” {antea, vol. xliv, p. 329) and Dr. R. J. Raines’ subsequent letter have interested me considerably. It seems that the old controversy of migration on “ Broad fronts ” versus “ Routes ” has now been replaced by one of “ Broad fronts ” versus “ Broad fronts with associated hnes of concentration.” Mr. Raines favours the latter and in this I would hke to support him. During the spring of 1951 I was stationed at Cuxhaven, on the mouth of the Elbe in north-west Germany, and was able to study the massive migration that took place from mid-February until the end of May. I am still analysing a great number of observations, but in a general account ‘‘ Spring Migration in North-West Germany — 1951” pubhshed in The Sea Swallow for 1951, I wrote as follows : ” From early March, a great migration of other species started, the birds travelling north-westwards on a broad front between Hamburg and the sea. They probably extended much further than this, certainly out to seaward as far as Heligoland. At the same time, the migrants tended to concentrate in certain parts of this broad front . . . hence the old controversy of broad fronts versus narrow fronts for migration.” These concentration hnes were (i) towards Hehgoland, (2) following the Friesian Islands, (3) following the coastline of the German mainland. As an ex- ample of the latter concentration line— on April i st during one hour’s observation on the coast 2,312 migrants flew over, but duilng the same hour another observer watching from a tower in Cuxhaven, two miles inland along the Estuary, saw only 22 migrants travelling in the same direction, and this type of observation was repeated many times on a similar scale. As regards individual species, the Grey-headed Wagtail (Motacilla flava thunbergi) is a good example of a species that concentrates into a narrow front on migration. Large numbers follow the Friesian Islands, while during three days’ observations in May, 198 individuals were seen on a stretch of land about a mile long between Cuxhaven and the coast. At the same time only 1 7 were seen on the Oste marshes, w’hich are ten miles inland along the Elbe. On the Pinnau marshes, a further 20 miles inland on the same estuary, I never saw a single Grey-headed Wagtail during two spring migrations. We have only to remember how seldom this race of Yellow Wagtail occurs in Kent, in comparison with the large number that follow the adjacent coast-line of the Continent, to realise that this is a bird that ” concentrates.” Jeffery G. Harrison. WANTED— An assistant at Skokholm Bird Observatory from mid-May until mid-October. Board and Lodging provided but no pay. Suitable for student awaiting National Service or University term. Apply to the Warden, Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. SKOKHOLM BIRD OBSERVATORY. — Accommodation is available for visitors from mid-March to mid-October on this bird island. Apply for particulars to the Warden, Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. AUTHOR’S MSS. carefully typed. Ornithology a speciality. Hilton, 20, South Drive, Cheam. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, new and reconditioned, a good range at reasonable prices. Approval allowed. Lists from Hatton Optical Co., Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, repaired, cleaned and adjusted. Send your instrument for estimate by return. Hatton Optical Co., Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. SHETLAND. — Comfortable small hotel in one of the best fishing and bird localities in Shetland. Own 35-acre island, uninhabited, with 22 nesting species, ranging from Eiders and Black Guillemots to Storm Petrels. Accessible sea-bird colonies. Terms guineas. Vacancies May and June. Henderson’s Hotel, Spiggie, Scousburgh, Shetland. BOOK SERVICE.— Out of print and rare ornithological works will be searched for and reported on. Natural History books bought. Please address communi- cations to Book Dept., British Birds, 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. BRITISH BIRDS, BOUND VOLUMES.— The Publishers have now available only five sets of bound volumes. Nos. I to 12 and the Index to these 12 volumes. The charge is 30/- each volume and 10/- for the Index I or £10 for the complete set of 12 volumes and the Index. In addition they will consider the purchase of back volumes (bound or unbound). A VERY LIMITED number of copies of the work Glossarium Europae Avium by Harriett I. JORGENSEN and Cecil I. BLACKBURNE are available from H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., at 12/6 each. BRITISH BIRDS BINDING. The Publishers are now able to undertake the binding of Volume XLIV at a charge of 8s. 6d. per volume. This charge also applies to any earlier volumes which subscribers wish to have bound. The parts to be bound should be sent, with remittance please, to British Birds (Binding), 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. LONDON BIRD REPORT NO. 15, 56 pages, illustrated. Obtainable from Hon. Sec., London N.H.S., c/o British Museum (Nat. Hist.), Cromwell Road, London, S.W.7. or through W. H. Smith & Son, Ltd. Price 2s. 6d. BUZZARD, Curlew and Raven all nest within a mile of the house. Why not study them in comfort from the Bancyrhyd Guest House, Newport, Pern.? 4-berth caravan also available till 31st July. Special terms for early visitors. « SUFFOLK COAST. Close to Minsmere and good centre for Walberswick and Havergate. Comfortable beds and good food. Reference books. Terms very moderate. Miss M. S. van Oostveen, Hill Cottage, Westleton, nr, Saxmundham. ESSEX BIRD WATCHING & Preservation Society. Copies of the Annual Bird Report for 1950, price 2s. 8d. post free, may be obtained from the Hon. Sec. at 171, Victoria Road, Romford, Essex. HEBRIDEAN CRUISES. 12 and 14-day Cruises by comfortable 56ft. Motor Yacht to Western Isles and Lochs. Inclusive Fare 25-40 gns. Also 8 day cruise (May only) 13-18 gns. Write Blue Water Cruises Ltd., 68, Gordon Street, Glasgow. MR. & MRS. D. A. T. MORGAN, M.B.O.U., Hunt’s Barn, Knodishall, Suffolk, will welcome a few ornithological paying guests. Separate Sitting Room avail- able. Garage for I, parking space for 4. Bicycles on loan. Packed lunches a speciality. Handbook for reference. Ideal centre for Walberswick, Minsmere and Havergate. I mile Leiston Station. Terms £5 5s. p.w., 15/- per day inclusive. Printed in Gt. Britain The Riverside Press, Ltd., Twickenham, Middx. Published by H. F, & G. WITHERBY, LTD., 5 Warwick Court, W.C.I. BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST BRITISH BIRDS PURCHA3E0 EDITORS. E. M. Nicholson and ^ Q ADD W. B. Alexander - A. W. Boyd*^ P. A. D. Hollom - N. F. Ticehurst - J. D. Wood Contents oe Number 4, Vol. XLV, April, 1952. Page. Notes and Display of the Magpie. By Derek Goodwin Little .-\uks in Britain, 1948-1951 . Compiled by D. E. Sergeant Studies of some species rarely photographed. XXXVIII. The Redwing. Photographed by R. Chislett, M. D. England, P. O. Swanberg and G. K. Yeates. The Fieldfare. Photographed by M. D. England, Gosta Hikansson and C. W. Teager Notes : — Song-Thrush nesting in a Monkey-Puzzle tree (K. R. Chandler) Persistent nest-building in the Blackbird (M. T. Myres) Wheatear gatherings in spring (R. G. Pettit and D. V. Butt) Five Wrens in succession at one nest (C. K. Mylne). Courtship display of House-Martin (R. G. Adams). Displacement activity of Oyster-Catcher (D. G. .Andrew) Reviews : — Proceedings of the Xth International Ornithological Congress, Uppsala, June, 1950 Cornwall Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, 20th Annual Report, 1950 Twenty-third Report of the Devon Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, 1950 Report OH Somerset Birds, 1950 ... The Mid-Somerset Naturalist Society, First Report and Reference Book, November, 1949 — January, 1951 Report of the Natural History Section of the Wiltshire Archceological and Natural History Society, 1950 Report on Dorset Birds, 195,0 The Sussex Bird Report, 1950 The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist, 1950 The Essex Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, Report for 1950... London Bird Report, No. 15, 1950 Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of Oxfordshire, Berkshire ana Buckinghamshire in 1950 The Middle Thames Naturalist, 1950 The Lincolnshire NaUiralists' Union Transactions for 1950 Derbyshire Archceological and. N.H. Society : Ornithological Record for Derbyshire, 1950 Leicestershire and Rutland Ornithological Society Report for 1950 ... The Liverpool Naturalists’ Field Club : Proceed ings and Notes for 195c) Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, Committee for Ornithology , Report for 1950 N.H. Society of N orthumberla nd, Durham and Newcastle-upon- Tyne : Ornithological Report for ic^^o Larne Islands Committee of the National Trust : Ornithological Report for 1950 ... ... 113 122 134 135 135 136 137 138 138 139 1 40 142 M3 144 144 M-5 146 147 M7 1 4<8 149 149 149 149 L'io '.50 I.")' I. “52 152 BRITISH BIRDS . . Number 4, Vol. XLV, April 1952. ^ ^ NOTES AND DISPLAY OF THE MAGPIE. BY Derek Goodwin, (with text illustrations by R. Gillmor). In July, 1949, 1 acquired a juvenile female Magpie {Pica pica) which was fixated on human beings and when adult regarded me as her mate. This bird’s behaviour inspired closer observation of wild Magpies for comparative purposes, but I was unable to do any prolonged watching of individual wild birds. By 1951, a certain amount of rather scrappy data had been gathered, and m the hope of studying the subject more fully three more young Magpies were taken and hand-reared. Unfortunately a series of mishaps put an end to these hopes. The old female was accidentally killed, the tamest of the three juveniles was killed by a cat, and the other two joined forces with a family of wild Magpies that visited the garden for food, and eventually disappeared with them. Since then study has been confined to intermittent observations on wild birds and on three captive birds now in the Regent’s Park Zoo, two at least of which are reacting socially to humans. These notes seem, however, worth publishing to amplify The Handbook’s remarks on the above subjects. They are in no sense a comprehensive or detailed analysis of the bird’s notes and display, but may perhaps prove of value as an outline for anyone contem- plating a thorough study of the subject. The difficulties of using letter combinations to convey an idea of the notes of any bird except Cticulus canorus are obvious, but in making an attempt I have followed the suggestions on this subject in the preface to The Handbook, except that here “ ch ” at the end of a word or syllable has the same sound as in the Scottish word “ loch.” Notes. (i) The Chattering Notes. The well-known harsh rattling chatter is primarily an alarm note, but is at times apparently used as an expression of anger or violent protest. As with the alarm note of the Jay {Garrulus glandarius), and probably most other birds, it is chiefly given when the impulse to flee is apparently inhibited by curiosity or aggressiveness. A panic-stricken Magpie (such as a wild one caught in a trap) does not chatter but makes its frantic efforts to escape in silence. Tame Magpies that are reacting socially to man often chatter if seized in the hand and a wild bird did so when its mate, with whom it was fighting, held it down on its back. Sometimes 114 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. each phrase of chattering is prefaced by two longer notes “ Skah ! Skah ! Cha-cha-cha-cha ! ” In the tame female this always indi- cated the sudden appearance of some alarming object. In some birds the chattering is higher in pitch and less loud than in others. Two tame birds known to be females had such quieter and higher pitched chattering, but this may have been coincidence. (2) The Harsh Double Note. A harsh bisyllabic “ Shrak-ak ! ” often repeated at short intervals, but never run together to suggest a chatter, appears to be given when the bird is ill at ease, but has no concrete visible object on which to focus its alarm, for example by a bird that has been disturbed at night, or put into a strange enclosure. Probably given in a more definite context in a natural state. (3) The Appeal Note. This is based on the hunger-call of the fledged young and has numerous variants. Most typically it is an eager-sounding two- syllabled “Cheeuch ! ” or three-syllabled “Cheeuch-uch ! ” which although hard to describe is (in typical form) unlike any other note and will be easily recognisable to anyone who listens much to Magpies. Shorter, lower-pitched, more or less monosyllabic versions of this note are very frequently used. Apart from its fundamental use as a juvenile call for food this note is used as a greeting between paired birds, by the female when begging her mate for food, and by a tame bird at the appearance of its owner. Probably, like the appeal note of the Jay, it is used whenever any emotional or physical need not involving alarm or anger is felt, and the more constant variants are used in slightly different circumstances, but further information on these points is needed. {4) The “ T church” Note : (a) Aggressive form. A throaty, explosive, almost snorting, “ Tchurch ! ” which is jerked out as head and tail are jerked up and wings slightly lifted (see under “ Wing-flirting Display ”). This note is often used by tame birds towards human beings, and accompanies apparently aggressive display and often actual attack. I suspect it is correlated with sexual and/or territorial rivalry. It is almost always heard at the ceremonial gatherings, whose implications are, I think, primarily sexual. (b) Peaceable form. A soft, gentle “ Tchurch ” is often given by tame birds when “ talking ” to people for whom their feelings appear to be entirely affectionate or submissive. It is also frequently heard from wild birds that are in company with their mates. The difference between the aggressive and peaceable “ Tchurch ” notes is similar to that which is conveyed in the one human word “ Hallo ” when spoken in furious anger and utmost affection. VOL. XLV.] NOTES AND DISPLAY OF THE MAGPIE. 115 (5) The “Tchuk ” Note. A short, explosive (but not loud) “ Tchuk ! ” with a suggestion of a guttural click in it. Given by tame birds (sometimes) when spoken to, and almost certainly indicative of sexual feeling. Accompanied by a quick downward bow of the head, upward jerk of the tail and the wing-flirting display, the last usually at low intensity. Heard from wild birds at ceremonial gatherings. Probably homologous with the guttural clicking notes of jays {Garrulus, Cyanocitta, Aphelocoma, Psilorhinus) and crows {Corvus sp.) although bearing only slight aud- ible resemblance. From tame birds only heard from those known or believed on good presumptive evidence to be females, but too few specimens have been studied to deduce anything from this. (6) The Nest-call, A prolonged, hoarse, “throaty” call, often continued for about half a minute or more without intermission, not harsh or sharp enough to be described as a screech, but loud and with an intense urgent tone. This was often uttered by my tame female, always at the nest-site. If when nesting, she caught sight of me at a distance she would at once fly to the nest-site and give this call. She appeared to utter it with lowered head and somewhat raised tail and to be mandibulating nest-material whilst so doing, but as she never gave it when I was at or near the nest-site with her I never got a clear view of her calling. One of the tame Magpies at the London Zoo (almost certainly a female) who has no apparently suitable nest-site in her aviary, often flies to a high comer and gives this call whilst clinging to the wire, with head usually somewhat lowered, and tugging, pushing, and pecking at the wire whilst calling in a way suggestive of great emotional tension. Twice I have seen her give the wing-flirting display whilst uttering this call. This bird is fixated on people and she flies up to her comer and gives this call (sometimes) when I move away from the front of her aviary after she has spent some time “ talking ” and displaying to me. Both Mr. John Field and I have heard this note from wild Magpies in the nesting season, but without being able to see what was taking place. The evidence suggests that its function is probably to call the mate to the nest-site and/or to stimulate it. to join in nest- building. For this reason I have tentatively named it the “ nest- call”, but observations on its use between normally paired-birds are necessary before there can be any certainty of its function. (7) Screaming. A loud, hoarse, screech, suggestive of the alarm-screech of a Jay, but less harsh and cutting. This is often uttered when the bird is handled. Apparently expresses fear, but perhaps not necessarily any great degree of it. Trapped wild Magpies are often silent when handled, and a tame bird may scream loudly and yet the moment it is released show no further signs of fear and not even fly off the hand that held it. 116 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. (8) The Protest Note. My tame female would utter a soft protesting “Tsraee,” a little quiet note “dying away” in a pathetic manner. She did this if I pushed her away from anything she was meddling with, or otherwise thwarted her. The same note, rather more intense and loud, was given by a juvenile when approached threateningly by an adult. Other Notes. A variety of soft, low-pitched notes, with an oddly submissive, conciliatory tone were given by my tame female when she was perched close to my face, particularly in response to my talking to her in an affectionate tone. These notes are frequently used between pairs of wild magpies, particularly when at or near the nest-site. They are certainly expressive of affection — though they may well also have some more definite function. Possibly these sounds are really low intensity versions of the appeal note. A deep, low, note, suggestive of a person trying to say “ halloo” without sounding any consonants, is uttered by most tame Magpies I have seen. It is given with similar, but less intense, posturing to that accompanying the aggressive “ tchurch.” Owing to its lack of “ magpie accent ” I at first thought the bird was in fact trying to talk, but am now more inclined to think the note innate. Mimicry. As is well known, tame Magpies often imitate the human voice and other sounds. Rather surprisingly they can copy human whistling as exactly as a Jay. But I have not personally seen any Magpie that had anything like the repertoire of the average Jay, Starling {Skirmis vulgaris) or Reed-Warbler {Acrocephalus scir- paceus). I have never heard any recognisable copied note from a wild Magpie although among the medley of low-pitched notes and phrases which juvenile and first autumn birds at least will sit and ‘‘ warble ” for half an hour at a time, I have heard notes that I could not identify as minor variants of any of the innate Magpie- notes known to me and which may well have been imitations of other birds, or attempts thereat. It is of course hardly necessary to say that with the Magpie, as with other birds, the notes uttered being audible expressions of emotional states, it often happens that intermediate utterances are given as one emotion is superseded by another. The same is true of display and posturing. Display. As is weU known, the Magpie, under most conditions of social and sexual excitement fluffs out its plumage in such a way as to increase the amount of white visible (Stubbs 1910). It also usually holds its wings with the secondaries slightly spread, and somewliat flattened in a dorsal plane, so that they present, to one looking down on the bird, two rectangles of brilliant colour. A frightened Magpie shows relatively little visible white plumage. VOL. XLV.] NOTES AND DISPLAY OF THE MAGPIE. 117 (i) Wing-flirting. The bird, usually with head somewhat lowered, suddenly lifts its folded wings so that the ” squared ” secondaries are, together with the rest of the wing, raised forward at an angle of about 30 to 40 degrees above the back. As the wings are lifted they are fluttered, and may be slightly opened. This wing-movement is usually accompanied by a forward bow of the head and upward movement of the tail, but these may be hardly perceptible. The ‘ tchuk ’ note, the peaceable “ tchurch,” or some version of the appeal note is generally uttered at the moment of displaying. The head feathers are more or less erected, this appearing in Pica and Cyanopica to be a sign of peaceable, if sexual, intention. In very low intensity versions of this display all the above movements may be httle more than " suggested ” and of course aU intermediate forms occur. Fig. I. — " Wing-flirting.” The usually less conspicuous head and BODY MOVEMENT HAS NOT BEEN INDICATED. 118 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. This display is used by birds of either sex towards their mates. It is often given, apparently spontaneously, when the two are foraging near each other, but more especially by a bird perched or foraging alone when its mate rejoins it or appears in sight. It is also given, commonly at very full intensity, by paired (or pairing ?) birds at the “ceremonial gatherings” as they perch close to one another in couples. At one such gathering near Staines on January 30th when all but four of the original 14 birds had dispersed, the male (?) of one pair furiously attacked and drove the other pair from the top of a hawthorn bush. It then gave very intense wing- flirting display and its mate at once joined it and they stood near each other giving this display. The male then climbed dowm through the branches until it was in a very typical site for a nest, where it again gave the wing-flirting display at great intensity, on which the female (?) at once climbed down to it and they displayed together several times before climbing back to the bush-top. This apparent site-selection was repeated several times in the next half hour. My tame hen Magpie usually greeted me with this display. After a pair of wild Magpies had fought one another (through exasperation at being unable to get at a captive Magpie they wished to attack) and broken apart, one of them approached the other and gave this display, after which they stood for some time with their heads close together, blinking and uttering the soft affectionate notes. (2) Aggressive Wing-flirting. Differs from the peaceable form in that the wing movement is relatively slight, with no fluttering, the tail is jerked upward far more vigorously, and the feathers on the head, especially on the crown, are depressed. As the tail is jerked up there is an accom- panying upward movement of head and body and the aggressive “ Tchurch ” is uttered. Occurs often at ceremonial gatherings. Is used towards me by a tame male Magpie, who attacks me fiercely if given any opportunity. Also used towards some strangers by my tame hen Magpie, apparently in threat, although she never actually attacked them. May be a sexual display that only turns to hostility if its object gives an inappropriate response. (3) The Tilting Display. Bird approaches with its secondaries displayed as described. It tilts its body, slightly raises the further wing (without unfolding it) and switches its tail towards the object it is displaying to so that it forms an angle of about 130 degrees with the body. The bird holds its head high and utters low, monosyllabic notes. This display was used towards me by my tame female, but as she used it even more intensely towards other people it may be in part an intimidatory display. Lorenz (1931) describes this, or a closely similar display, as the courting display of the male, so it is possible that its use by my tame female was induced through lack of a suitable sex partner. VOL. XLV.] NOTES AND DISPLAY OF THE MAGPIE. 119 Fig. 3. — Tilting display, as seen from directly above, (from a photograph). just as unpaired female pigeons {Columha and Streptopelia) often show male behaviour. I am uncertain whether Stubbs's (1910) description of a display in which “ every few seconds the head feathers are rapidly erected and depressed, and the tail uplifted and opened and closed like a fan ” refers to this or some other display. 120 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. (4) Aggressive Display. Very similar to (3) above, but the feathers on mantle are lifted and as the tail is switched sideways the lateral feathers on the near side are spread. Used when threatening or attacking another Magpie (sometimes). The bird approaches with head lowered and held forward — in readiness to lunge in and then dodge away — and has an indescribably malignant appearance. (5) Begging. The wings are lifted high at the shoulders and fluttered, the bird standing high on its perch (in the more intense versions) and giving the " cheeuch ” call loudly. The juvenile’s appeal for food, also used by female begging food from male and by tame birds — some of which, at any rate, seem likely to have been males — towards their ovuier when eager for food. Probably used in other circumstances where some approp- riate action on the part of the mate is desired (just as a male Jay may beg in juvenile fashion to entice his mate to the nest-site), but I have so far seen no instances that could not have been interpreted as desire for feeding. In low intensity versions begging may be confused with the wing-flirting display, and it is possible, though I think unlikely, that they are versions of the same behaviour-pattern. Fig. 4. — Begging — most intense version. VOL. XLV.] NOTES AND DISPLAY OF THE MAGPIE. 121 Blinking. A rapid and frequent drawing of the nictitating membrane over the eye is common when the bird is in a state of socially-induced excitement, whether sexual or aggressive. The tame female did this particularly when affectionately “ talking ” to me, and would often finish by drooping her head forward with the short velvety head-feathers erected, and drawing the membrane across rather slowly, holding it over the eye for a second or two so that one could plainly see the brilliant orange patch at its upper comer that merged gradually into the greyish-white of the rest of the membrane. Even to the human eye a couple of feet away this sudden show of brilliant colour was startling. Fig. 5. — Tame female drooping head and displaying nictitating MEMBRANE. (FrOM A PHOTOGRAPH). 122 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Bowing. The quick downward bow, accompanied by an upward jerk of the tail, is perhaps primarily a balancing movement, but, hke the homologous body-and tail-jerking movements of other passerines, it is indulged in whenever the bird is at all excited. Hammering, Billing of material, etc. Hard hammer blows on the perch with the closed bill are used in moments of nervous tension, particularly when the drives to escape or attack are inhibited. It is of course, primarily a feeding move- ment, and is used in this connexion to open acorns, nuts, etc. Pecking at twigs and other objects, the holding and “ fingering ” of such things as bark, twigs, etc. in the bill are common in moments of sexual or affectionate excitement. Whether these are derived from feeding or nest-building movements, or both, I would not like to express any opinion. References. Lorenz, K. (1931). " Ethologie Sozialer Corviden,” Journal fiir Orni- thologie, Ixxix : 67-127. Stubbs, F. J. (1910). “Ceremonial gatherings of the Magpie." Brit. Birds, iii : 334-336. LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1951. Compiled by D. E. Sergeant. Introduction. In the two winters 1948-9 and 1949-50 an unusual number of Little Auks {Alle alle) visited the British Isles. Most noteworthy was a “wreck” (i.e., a widespread destruction of the species on land) in mid-February, 1950, probably the most extensive in the country since that of Jan. -Feb., 1912. This paper reports the recent visitations, particularly the wreck (of which no complete account has been published). From the data collected the status of the Little Auk as a winter visitor to British waters is revised. Many individual records have been published already in county and local reports, magazines and newspapers ; where possible these references are acknowledged. Other records were sent in to the Editors of British Birds and to the writer, some spontaneously and others as a result of appeals for information published in this magazine and in the Bulletins of the British Trust for Ornithology. Thanks are extended to all who participated ; it is, as usual, an invidious task to select the few from the many, but I am indebted particularly to Dr. Bruce Campbell, to Major R. F. Ruttlcdgc for a report on Ireland as a whole, to Mr. A. G. Parsons who made VOL. XLV.] LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1951. 123 strenuous enquiries in the south-western peninsula ; and to Mr, A. E. Vine who lent his experience in interpreting meteorological maps. Normal Status of the Little Auk in British Waters. The Handbook records the Little Auk as “an irregular winter visitor .... most frequent north and east Scotland and eastern England, but occurs all coasts “. It should, however, be stressed that Little Auks occur every winter, only the numbers being irregular. The waters from the Shetlands southward down the North Sea represent the southernmost part of the regular wintering range on the European coast, and the numbers at sea are probably always small when compared with those further to the north, as in the latitude of the Faeroes, Iceland, and Norway, north from the waters round Stavanger. (See Salomonsen 1944, for example). Thus, for the Shetlands, G. T. Kay states {in litt.) “ Some winters we have them in large numbers and less in others. For instance, in the open sea area between the islands of Whalsay, Out Skerries, Fetlar and Yell, there may be seen a few hundreds some winters and perhaps two or three thousands in others. These birds keep to the open tidal waters where the feed is plentiful, and rarely come into sheltered harbours. The few that come into Lerwick harbour are almost invariably in a dying condition.” For the Orkneys, G. Arthur writes “ I receive a few Little Auks every winter during storms.” For the east coast of Scotland, the most complete statement still comes from Gray (1871) who wrote that Little Auks were there regularly every winter, and were well-known to the fishermen about 20-30 miles off the Fife coast. Gray had himself shot birds here in several winters. The frequent reports at the present time from the Isle of May doubtless denote a similar distribution. As more intensive watching develops in winter along the east coasts of England and Scotland, more frequent reports will probably come in {cf. those from Cley in Norfolk, cited on p.124). However, it must be borne in mind that the numbers seen from the coast will not represent the true picture of abundance, since Little Auks in the North Sea do not habitually come close inshore. We have no good account of the distribution of Little Auks in winter in the North Sea nor of their movements. However, that their numbers may sometimes be great can be deduced from reports from watchers on the north-east coasts. In November, 1948, a large-scale passage northwards was seen along the Northumberland and Durham shore, one watcher counting 3,500 birds in 8 hours. [Naturalist, 830, p.130, 1949). Mr. G. W. Temperley [in litt.) has made clear the significance of this movement ”... We frequently witness such northerly passages, no doubt caused by the N.E. gale sweeping the birds, engaged in fishing in the North Sea, up against the coast when 124 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. they can only escape being driven inland by following the shore in a N.N.Westerly direction, only a few degrees off the wind.” Should the gales be strong and the birds weakened, a wreck will result — a typical wreck from the north-east. An interesting point arises from these observations : the birds do not travel before the wind, that is, they do not (apparently) travel down through the Straits of Dover into the Channel. However, there is much scope for observations made at sea from all round the British Isles. There are very few records from the coasts of the west of Scotland, and observers on the usual Atlantic steamer routes have failed to report Little Auks in the “western approaches ” (see, for instance, Rankin and Duffey, 1948). Yet there are frequent reports of Little Auks from the west of Ireland and from Scilly. One can only surmise that the species is thinly scattered in these waters, and has a distribution fairly close inshore. These generalizations may be made clearer from the accounts of the two winter visitations. The Winter of 1948-49. Details of Little Auks recorded are set out in Appendix i, p.130. Most noteworthy was the large passage of birds seen from the north- east coast of England, and the probable significance of this has been mentioned. The number of birds stranded or blown inland was comparatively small, so that there was no real “ wreck ” ; how- ever, the pattern of the visitation was essentially the same as that of the great wreck of Jan-Feb., 1912. In both cases, strong north- easterly gales forced the birds to the shore ; in the year of the wreck, however, the weather was severe and the birds probably emaciated, so that they were destroyed. (See Witherby, 1912). On the north-west coasts the numbers were unusual but probably smaller. There are the records of numbers from north-west Scotland, and single but indicative records from Galloway and from the western Channel. One may surmise that the initial wave of birds which reached the Shetlands and Sutherland coast was deflected into two streams, the larger entering the North Sea and the smaller passing down the west coast and gradually tailing out. It may be said that the history of past visitations to the west coast is not at all clear, owing to the paucity of records from the islands of Scotland and from western Ireland. The Winter of 1949-50. This winter saw a great wreck from an unusual quarter — the south-west. However, this did not come till mid-February, and it was prefaced by an influx of Little Auks all round the coasts, in relatively small numbers. (See Appendix 2). We may summarize this as follows : an influx in Orkney was recorded in November and the first half of December. At the same time, isolated birds cropped up in the North Sea (Northumberland and Norfolk) and the Channel (Hants, and Sussex). It is noteworthy that almost all VOL. XLV.] LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1951. 125 these southerly birds were reported as healthy. The Ringwood (Hants.) bird was released at sea and flew off actively. On the other hand, birds found inland during the February wreck were MORE THAN 50 BIRDS RECORDED 20-50 m 1 MILES 5-io □ NUMBERS UNKNOWN INDIVIDUAL 139 128 9 (I 10 Distribution of Little Auks after the wreck of February, 1950. Records from February qth and later are included. Shading shows DENSITY OF RECORDED BIRDS BY VICE-COUNTIES. NUMBERS REFER TO VICE-COUNTIES, NOT TO BIRDS. 126 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. invariably emaciated and rarely survived longer than a day. Some significance is attached to this difference in the condition of wrecked birds and those that occur at other times. The Wreck of February, 1950. Details of the wreck are given in Appendix 3, p.131, and its extent shown on the accompanying map. (p.125). The wreck took place between February 8th and about the 17th, during a period of west- south-westerly gales and rain. On the 8th there were reports from Somerset, on the 9th from Co. Cork, Berks, and Hants. ; the largest number of birds was blown inland on the loth, and the destruction was widespread on the loth and nth, followed by a lull and a second wave on the i6th and 17th. The general picture built up from the records is as follows : A large body of Little Auks was wintering at the time in the “Celtic Sea” area, off the south-west of Ireland. When the gales began, these birds were driven down upon the coasts, and many went ashore in Cork and Cornwall. Others pushed up the Irish Sea, the Channel and the Bristol Channel ; indeed, the Bristol Channel appears to have acted as a trap in the manner of a gigantic duck- decoy, for a glance at the map shows a concentration of birds at its head. One may visualize the birds staying in the water until nearly driven upon land, when they fly up, to be caught by the wind in their weakened state and whirled inland. Thus stragglers reached eastwards as far as Cambridgeshire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. There is a graphic description of a party coming down on the wet surface of a concrete road near Bristol on the nth, evidently mistaking its surface for that of the sea. A similar miscalculation has been reported before (Murphy and Vogt, 1933). There are few certain records of fresh destruction after about February 20th, except from the north-east of Scotland. However, it is difficult to guess the age of dead birds, reported as fresh, but kept in natural cold-storage for much of the time between death and finding. Extent of the Wreck outside the British Isles. In spite of a considerable search, no data have come to hand from other European countries. No observers could be found to give information from Brittany and Normandy, where birds must have occurred, as in the Channel Islands. In south-west Norway there were about the usual numbers of Little Auks about the outer parts of the fjords (Dr. H. Holgersen), and there was no wreck on the Danish coast (Dr. F. Salomonsen). No information could be gleaned from Portugal {per R. Dunt), so we have no idea if the wreck extended at all southward of the Channel. VOL. XLV.] LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1951. 127 Meteorological Conditions. There were severe, but not extraordinary, gales at the time of the wreck. The monthly summary of the Meteorological Office’s weather reports for February reads : “A series of depressions moved over or close to the British Isles, giving substantial squalls of rain, with flooding in many areas. Gales occurred at times.” This is the familiar Atlantic weather. In more detail, the daily charts show deep troughs of low pressure moving across regularly from the Grand Banks area to the southern half of the country, giving gales from the west -south-west. These gales started about the 3rd of the month, and the most severe was that of the loth at Bournemouth (K. B. Rooke), with 50 m.p.h. gusts. There was then a lull from the 12th to the i6th, and a last depression-cum-gale on the i6th and 17th, after which things became quieter. Thus the time and extent of the wreck coincided well with the gales, except for the initial time-lag before the birds started to reach south-western shores. This suggests that they were initially some distance offshore, and took some days to become drifted in to land. The Winter of 1950-1951. There were a few records from the Irish Sea and English Channel, as follows : I, Shanklin, Isle of Wight, oiled, Jan. i8th, 1951. I washed ashore, L’Etac, Jersey, Sept. i8th, 1950 (K. Lecocq). -I, exhausted, Aberystwyth, Jan. i6th, 1951 (D. G. Sansbury). Little Auks were evidently widespread during the winter, but from the few records it appears that they were thinly scattered. In this winter a notable migration and wreck occurred on the New England Coast (Dorothy E. Snyder, Massachusetts Audubon Magazine, Jan., 1951). Possible Causes of Little Auk Wrecks. We must conclude, it seems to the writer, that there was an \musually dense body of Little Auks off the south-west of Ireland in February, 1950, which was finally destroyed by the gales only after an initial catastrophe which weakened them. Wrecked birds are always emaciated, being considerably underweight and with their body-fat lost ; it is impossible to say whether they were emaciated and weakened before being blown ashore, or whether the great loss of energy during the flight produces this appearance. However, it is noteworthy that stray Little Auks brought to the coasts or inland at other times than the wrecks are rarely so thin, and usually appear more active. This suggests that the birds involved in a wreck are in some way weakened at sea, presumably by starvation. 128 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Commonsense considerations make it unlikely that seabirds, so well fitted as the Little Auk to spend the entire winter on the high seas, should be unable to ride out gales even of severe strength. Large wintering concentrations of Little Auks ride out each winter on the “Tail” of the Grand Bank, and off southern Greenland, areas with stormy reputations. The behaviour of Little Auks during a gale is described by Rankin and Duffey (1948, p.39), from which it is clear that the approach of a ship disturbs the birds more than high winds and seas. A suggestion here put forward has been made previously by Murphy and Vogt (1933). It is that Little Auks are weakened first by starvation, due to a failure of their planktonic food-supply. Their food, in open seas away from the ice-floes, consists largely of the planktonic crustaceans of northern seas, especially the large copepod Calanus finmarchicus and pelagic amphipods, which appear to be picked out from the surface waters. (A Little Auk has the same aid to “hawking” as a Swallow {Hirundo rustica) or Nightjar {Caprimulgus europceus), namely a rim of stiff hairs on either side of the mouth). These crustaceans are widespread in the surface waters of the North Atlantic. One must remember, however, that a diving bird can feed only in the top few feet of water, as deep as it can dive — in contrast to a whale or herring (which takes roughly the same food). Moreover, such a small species will have a high metabolism, in spite of its insulation of fat and close feathering, and so will need to feed frequently. Thus if the plankton is scarce, or migrates down to depths which the birds are unable to reach, they must either starve or move quickly to richer waters. Now, not enough is known about the density of this plankton in surface waters in winter and during stormy weather, since these are the most difficult times for oceanographical research ships to operate their nets. However, it is known that in summer, the density increases northward from the tropics to the Arctic, thus supporting much richer stocks of fish, whales and plankton — and fish-eating birds. (See Jespersen, 1930). And the Little Auks mostly remain in high northern seas during winter, which suggests that they continue to find good feeding there and not further south. Another suggestive line of evidence is that wrecks do not occur in the more northern wintering areas, e.g., the Norwegian coasts and Newfoundland, but only at the southern edge as in Great Britain and New England. We may thus attribute this wreck of 1950, and others, tentatively to a failure of the food supply of a large body of Little Auks well south of their normal range, in warm ocean waters to which they do not spread in most years. VOL. XLV.] LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1951. 129 Should this be the true story, it still does not tell us what brings the Little Auks south at all, to seas which we have assumed to be less suitable feeding grounds. There are in some years movements far to the south, especially well-recorded on the American side. Thus a great wreck took place down the eastern American seaboard as far south as Florida and Cuba in 1932 (Murphy and Vogt, 1933), and in 1936 a flight took place as far as Florida under good weather conditions (Sprunt, 1938). Even in the second flight, few of the birds were seen returning north. On the European side birds have been recorded from the Azores (specimen in Natural History Museum), and from Portugal and the western Mediterranean (Witherby, 1941). These irruptions remind one of the movements of the lemming, which, after years of high population and consequent shortage of food, irrupts southward, usually disastrously. It may be that the Little Auk’s southward flights are also caused by a food shortage in its normal wintering grounds on one side of the Atlantic or the other. But of this we have no evidence as yet. It is worth mentioning here, that another auk, Briinnich’s Guillemot {Uria lomvia) experiences southward irruptions, as from the Hudson Bay south into the Great Lakes region, and from the White Sea into Finland (Salomorisen, 1944). It is hoped that further observations at sea round the British Isles, and co-operation between ornitholo- gists and marine biologists studying the planktonic animals of the surface waters, may give us a clearer imderstanding of this mystery — the mass suicide of the Little Auk. Summary. 1. Unusual numbers of Little Auks were present in British waters during the winters, 1948-9, and 1949-50 2. In 1948-9, Little Auks were present in large numbers around the Shetlands and northern Scotland, and down the North Sea, and in smaller numbers off north-western Ireland. North-easterly gales drove them close to the east coast, but did not cause any large-scale destruction. The pattern of this movement is regarded as similar to that of previous destructions under the same weather conditions, as in Jan. -Feb., 1912. 3. In 1949-50, Little Auks were probably scattered thinly all round British coasts. In February, 1950, a large body, coming from the Celtic Sea area some distance offshore, was wrecked in the south-west of Ireland and Great Britain and at least as far as northern France. Birds were blown as much as 250 miles inland. 4. A wreck such as this is attributed to the influence of prolonged gales acting on birds already weakened. It is tentatively suggested that such birds are south of their normal range, in relatively warm waters poor in their planktonic food animals. Possible reasons for the periodic southward movements are discussed. 130 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. References. Anon. (1912). “ The Little Auk Visitation of 1911.” Scot. Nat., April, 1912. Clarke, W. E. {1895). “On the Recent Visitation of the Little Auk to Scotland." Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist., April, 1895 ; 97-108. Gray, R. (1871). The Birds of the West of Scotland. Glasgow, 1871. Jespersen, P. {1930). “Ornithological Observations in the North Atlantic." Dana Oceanographical Reports, 2, no. 7 ; 1-36. Murphy, R. C. and Vogt, W. (1933). “ The Dovekie Influx of 1932." Auk, 50 ; 325-349. Rankin, M. N. and Duffey, E. A. G. (1948). “ Birds of the North Atlantic ..." British Birds, Supplement, July, 1948. S.'VLOMONSEN, F. (1944). The Atlantic Alcidce. Goteborgs. Vet. o Vitt- Samh. Handl. B, 3(5), 138pp. Sprunt, a. (1938). " The Southern Dovekie Flight of 1936." Auk, 55. 85-8. WiTHERBY, H. F. (1912). “ The 1912 wreck of the Little Auk." Brit. Birds, 5 : 282-6, 309-11, 337-8. Appendix i. — Records of Little Auks in the Winter of 1948-9, Shetland. — Large numbers off Sumburgh Head, the southernmost point, December, 1948. Many gull-eaten corpses later picked up on Fair Isle- (K. Williamson, Fair Isle B.O. Report for 1948). North Scotland. — Records of dead birds from Inchkinloch, Loch Loyal, Jan. 28th, 1949 ; Strathmore, Ben Hope, 28th ; near Tongue, about same time — all Sutherland. (Dr. I. Pennie, in Hit.). East Scotland. — i Feb. 24th ; i, March 4th ; 2, March 23rd at Isle of May. (H. F. D. Elder, Scot. Nat., 62 : 105). One dead at Kinloch Rannoch, Perths., Feb. 5th. (P. A. Clancey, Scot. Nat., 61 : 128) Northumberland and Durham. — Oct. 28th, 4 at Whitburn ; Nov. 7th, 6 seen in flight, Druridge Bay, 3,500 counted off Whitburn ; dead birds Nov. 17th, Marley Hill (14 miles inland), Nov. 20th, Cross Hill Farm, Blagdon Estate. {Naturalist, 830 : 130, compiled by G. W, Temperley). Yorkshire. — One off Teesmouth, Nov. 6th ; parties of up to 30 flying north near Filey Brig all morning, Nov. 7th, and on the same day individuals at Swillington Ing, Blaxton and Southowram ; 3 flying past Scarborough, Nov. 8th. Stranded birds found at Baildon and Haworth, Nov. 8th, Otley Chevin, Nov. 9th, near Penistone and Hull, Nov. loth, and near Halifax, Nov. nth. (Y.N.U., Committee for Ornithology Report, 1948, p.74). Lincs. — Passage along coast in 2nd week Nov. ; some picked up, Nov. nth between the Humber and Boston. {Lines. Naturalists' Union, Transactions, xii : 125). Staffs. — One caught alive, Clayton, Nov. 7th. {North Staffs. Field Club, Transactions and Annual Report, 73). West Coast : Ireland. — " The winter of 1948-9, one of violent storms, caused a wreck which was widespread. Specimens were obtained in many widely separated localities. Little Auks were adjacent to Tory Island off Donegal through that winter and up to about January 20th." {Irish Natura- lists' fournal, 10 : 55 and R. F. Ruttledge in litt.). Scotland. — Remains of one on Rockcliffe Marsh, Kirkcudbright, Jan. 20th. (J. S. Douglas and N. A. Redfern). English Channel. — One, flew on board a naval ship, Nov. 25th., position 49° 32' N., 3° 40' W. {R.N. Bird-watching Society’s Report, Sea Swallow, 1948-9). VOL. XLV.] LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1949. 131 Appendix 2. — The Winter of 1949-50. Orkney. — An influx in unusual numbers in November and the first half December. (G. Arthur, in litt.). North Sea : Northumberland. — One, Whitley Bay, Dec. nth {Natura- list, 834 ; 124). Yorks. — i nr. Gorple, Nov. 8th ; 5 in Filey Bay Nov. 15th, and 5 stranded, 20th : several reported Spurn Head, Nov. 23rd. One dead Grosmont, Nov. i6th. {Report of Committee of Ornithology, Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, 1949). Norfolk. — Cley Beach, Sept. 7th, Nov. 15th and 2 Dec. loth, nth, 15th. {Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists’ Trust Report for 1949). Channel : Kent. — Dungeness, Nov. 20th {Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist, 7:5). Hants. — One Ringwood, Nov. i6th (D. G. Lowndes and Miss V. Goodwin), and one, Hurst Castle shingle spit, Nov. 27th. The second record may have been of the same bird, which had been caught and released near here. Appendix 3. — The Wreck of February, 1950 : detailed records of Little Auks by Vice-Counties. The number of the vice-county is placed in brackets after the name to facilitate reference to the map. Channel Islands : Jersey. — Altogether 8 birds washed ashore at L’Etac, N.W. coast, Feb. nth. (K. Lecocq). Guernsey. — 2. One exhausted, Perelle, P.O., nth; one alive Kings Mills, Castel, nth. (E. Enevolsen and C. Carey). SciLLiES (i). — "Some about in January as usual ” (Major Dorrien-Smith) ; nothing unusual reported from other observers in Feb. (A. G. Parsons). Cornwall (2). — Total : Order of hundreds. Recorded as follows : — North Coast. — 4, Holywell Bay, 12th (G. L.-B.) ; i, Hayle, 13th (A. G. Parsons) ; i, Tregorden, 13th (T. J. Willcocks) ; i, Trevone, dead, 27th (W. S. Watts) ; many blown inland, Bude, nth (Mrs. F, E. Carter, R. B. Treleaven). South Coast.—~i off Penzance harbour, i6th (J. E. Beckerlegge) ; 6 dead, Praa Sands, 17th (H. B. Sergeant) ; remains of ca. 40, sands between Loe Bar and'Poldhu Cove, March (A. G. Parsons) ; i, Mawgan-in-Meneage, Helford River, Feb. 13th. South Devon (3). — Total: 7. 2, Newton Ferrers, nth (O. D. Hunt); i nr. Kingsbridge, nth (G. Holt) ; i, Buckfast, 15th (B.M.C.) ; i, Crediton, 13th ; i, Ottery St. Mary, dead, 15th (Dr. R. R. Traill) ; i, St. Giles-in-the-Wood, 14th (B. G. Lampard-Vachell) ; i, locality unknown, sent to Natural His- tory Museum, 13th (Miss R. M. Caley). (All records per F. R. Smith). North Devon (4). — 15 recorded, i, Barnstaple, nth (H. S. Joyce) ; 14, Braunton, Georgeham and Saunton, loth. (Dr. F. R. E. Wright). Somerset (5 and 6). — Total recorded : ca. 20. i. Woodspring Priory, nr. Weston-super-Mare, nth (W. L. Roseveare) ; i, nr. Weston, 8th (Miss L. Garrod) ; i, Nyland Bridge, Cheddar, dead, 12th ; i nr. Blagdon Reservoir, freshly dead, nth (Bernard King, H. H. Davis) ; i, Tickenham, nr. Cleve- don, very dead, March nth (H. H. Davis) ; 16 exhausted or dead within 5 mile radius, Burnham on Sea, Feb. 9th-i2th (E. G. Holt). Wilts. (7 and 8). — 8 recorded. One Britford, found dead, Feb. 13th (W. A. Chaplin), one Wilton, nth, released later in Christchurch Harbour (Mrs. Newton Dunn) ; one, Broadchalk, near Salisbury, nth (T. B.W. Jeans, Field, March nth, 1950) ; one Pitton, nr. Salisbury, morning 13th, ringed and released at Bournemouth (R. Whitlock, Field, March i8th, 1950) ; one Sutton Verney, Warminster, undated (C. E. Riches, Times, March 9th, 1950) ; one Little Avebury, dead, Feb. nth (Miss D. Hiskins) ; one Burbage, Feb. 12th (T. McGahey, reported in Wiltshire Gazette) ; one Biddestone, nr. Chippen- ham, Feb. loth, seen to drop into a puddle, died following day (C. Rice). (All per Mrs. E. Barnes). 132 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Dorset (9). — ca. 10 recorded, i, Tincleton, iith and another in area (F. M. Pilkington) ; i, Cerne Abbas, iith (Lady Mary Eastman) ; i, Warmwell, 12th, [per Mrs. M. S. Hamilton) ; i, Rampisham, dead, 13th (W. C. Sanson per R. F.-D.) ; several Langton Herring on the Chesil, mid. -Feb. ; and i Friar Waddon, {per H. R. A. Cornish) ; i, Motcombe, mid. -Feb. (R. N. Winn all) ; i, Shaftesbury area, {Dorset Daily Echo, Feb. 17th) ; i, Bridport Golf Course, very dead, March 8th {per R. F.-D.) ; remains Chesil Beach near Bexington, April (H.R.A.C.). {K\\ per K. B. Rooke). Isle of Wight (10). — i, Boscombe, Carisbrooke, dead, i6th {The Times, 28/2/50) ; 3 in toto, central Isle of Wight (E. W. White). Hants (mainland) (ii and 12). — i, Barton-on-Sea, Feb., flying strongly (Mr. Thomas). (All Hants records per E. Cohen. Total 4). Sussex (13 and 14). — Total recorded : 7. i, Brighton, alive, 9th (Miss K. M. Bayne) ; i, Easebourne, nr. Midhurst, killed on telegraph wire, nth, (Miss M. R. Morley) ; i, Horsham, alive and healthy, 12th (D. L. Dunkin) ; I, West Dean. nr. Chichester, 12th, released 10 days later at Pagham (K. O. Murch) ; decayed body Cuckmere Haven, March nth (D. D. Harber) ; i dead, Pett Level, April 14th (F. M. Firth) ; one, Sidlesham, nr. Chichester, alive 1 2th, died 13th (Miss J. Stacey). Herts. (20). — i recorded, between Gaddesden Row and Redbourn, adult alive, loth {Field, April 29th, 1950). Middlesex (21). — One, King George VI Res., Staines, found dead, un- known date, Feb. (G. Stewart per C. B. Ashby). Berks. (22). — 3 recorded : i. Curridge, i, Horris Hill, both near Newbury, exhausted, 9th (L. R. Lewis) ; i, Radley nr. Abingdon, exhausted, 12th. (R. van Oss). Bucks. (24). — i recorded, loc. unknown, 17th, sent to Natural History Museum (J. J. Dibley, per M. Banks). Cambs. (29). — 2 recorded, i, Litlington, 12th (H. A. Course) ; i, Shippea Hill, nr. Littleport, 12th (A. E. Vine). Beds. (30). — i recorded, Luton-Markyate road, dying, nth (P.S.B., Bedfordshire Naturalist, 1950, p. 45). Northants (32). — 2 recorded, i loc. unknown, received Leicester Museum, 15th (A. E. Williams) ; i loc. unknown, given to R. E. Burton, 17th. Gloucester (33 and 34). — A flock of 12, Bristol, nth (F. Wilcock, Field, April 15th, 1950) ; one, Stroud, undated, probably during main wreck {per A. J. Harthan). Worcester (37). — 3 recorded and others reported, i, Tenbury Wells, exhausted, 12th {Tenbury Wells Advertiser, Feb. 24th, per E. G. M. Goodwin) ; I, Hipton Hill, nr. Evesham, nth; i, Kemerton, between Tewkesbury and Evesham, alive 13th and numbers reported from Bredon area {Evesham Journal, 17/2/50). Warwick (38). — 2 recorded, i, Tredington, exhausted, 12th (E. A. Simms) I. Weethley, nr. Alcester, nth. Glamorgan (41). — ca. 8 recorded, i, Merthyr Mawr, alive, loth (sent to Nat. Mus. Wales by C. J. S. Nicholl), and i same loc.,-i2th ; i, Newton, alive, loth ; I, Southerndown, dead, 12th (sent to Nat. Mus. Wales by G. B. Dobbins): I, alive, Cardiff, nth; i, alive, Cadoxton, Neath, 13th (sent to Nat. Mus. Wales by D. J. Hopkin). (Mostly per Colin Matheson). Pembroke (45), — i mainland record and several, islands, i, Haverfordwest - — Dale road, alive 13th (T. Davies, per J. H. Barrett) ; remains of at least 13, Skokholm Neck, early April (Leighton Park School N.H.S. in Skokholm Bird Observatory Report for 1950). Cardigan (46). — 6 recorded, all picked up on 2 miles of coast, Aberystwyth, Feb. to May (D. G. Sainsbury). Merioneth (48). — 8 recorded : 3, Talsarnau ; 3, Aberdovey ; i, Corwen ; I, Blaenau Ffestiniog ; dates not given. (T. G. Walker). British Birds, \ ol. xlv. PI. 29- Redwing {Turdus m. musicus). Adult with food for young. Swedish Lapland. {Photographed by Ralph Chislett). Redwing (Tuvdus in. nmsicus). At nest. Swedish Lapland, June 3RD, (Pholographed by V. O. Swanhekg). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 31. Redwi.xg {'I Urdus m. ivusicus). In a typical nesting site. Swedish Lapland. {Photographed by Ralph Chislett). British Birds, ^'oI. xlv, PI. 32 Redwing (Turdus m. mnsicus). Adult at nest. Dovrefjell, Norway, 1950. (Photographed by M. 1). JtNGLANu). l-5ritisli Birds, ^"ol. xl\', PI. 33 -a o in W H < W 1^6 a rj (-1 "O ^ O Q Cii “CX, 53 w • ! I t I'l’i’iCK : RicnwiNG [lurdus musicus] in wintkk. I )oksi-;t. {P/iotoi^ra hv K. ^’l•:ATK.s.) I,()\vKi-i : Imki.dfakk ['I'urdits f>i!(ii’is). Adui r at nkst. (Ioti.a.nd. July 7T11, 1947. [Photographed by (Iosta Hakansson). British Birds, ^’ol. xlv, PI. 35 i f Fieldfare (Tiiydns pilaris). Adult at nest. Dovrefjell, Norway, 1950. {Photographed by i\I. D. England). I I Fieldfare {Turdus pilaris). In winter. Essex. {Photographed by C. W. Teager). VOL. XLV.] LITTLE AUKS IN BRITAIN, 1948 TO 1952. 133 Anglesey (52). — 5 recorded : i, Caerwen ; i, Beaumaris ; i, Llanfaethlu ; I, Bodorgan (T. G. Walker) ; i unknown loc. (Mr. Plews, per Prof. R. J. Pumphrey). Yorks : West Riding (64). — i, Shipley Glen, exhausted, loth {per R. F. Dickens) . Northumberland (68).^ — i, Longstone, Fame Islands, 3rd, oiled; pres- umed same bird, Monk’s House, Seahouses, 5th ; dead on Fames gth. {Fame Islands Ornithological Report for 1950, and E. A. R. Ennion). Westmorland (69). — i recorded, Orton, nr Kendal, ca. 17th. {W estmorland Gazette, Feb. 24th, 1950, per K. E. Burgess). Isle of Man {71).— i recorded ; King William’s College, S. end of island, loth {per Manx Museum). Kirkcudbright (73). — i recorded : Glenlochan, Loch Ken, dead in loch i8th (Mrs. J. D. Williamson). Angus (90).- — i recorded, Dunninald Estate, nr. Montrose, freshly dead, i6th (J. de B. Stanseld, Field, March 23rd, 1950). Banff (94). — i recorded during wreck : Macduff, dead, 14th ; also i ex- hausted, Bridge of Marnoch, March ist (W. H. Maxwell). Caithness (109).- — 2 shortly after wreck ; i, Sandside Head, Reay, 26th; I, Skail, between Thurso and Reay, 26th (James Gunn, per Dr. I. Pennie). Ireland. — “ From the numbers of specimens sent to me or reported or sent to the Irish Museum in Dublin there is no doubt that it was the severest and most widespread wreck of recent years. In many cases I had reports or specimens sent to me from far inland, both in maritime counties and from inland counties — of which the following produced records : Carlow, Kildare, Offaly. Other counties from which I had reports or received specimens were : Galway and Mayo (some from far inland), Clare, Waterford, Cork, Donegal, Wexford, Wicklow. There is no doubt that Mayo, Galway (as is usual in years of wrecks) and especially Cork were the counties most affected. In matter of numbers, Cork produced far the greatest total, but that may be because on the S.W. coast of Cork there is a useful band of people who take an interest in wild birds. All the same there seems to have been a veritable accumulation on the S.W. Cork coast.” ”. . . . The date of the finding of the majority . . . was about Feb. 15th. My records show severe gales in the, week ending iith — worst on 9th and loth. Little Auks were found between Feb. loth (Cork, Galway, Mayo) and Feb. 20th, when 3 were found dead on Eeragh Island, Co. Mayo, which had died probably 2-3 days previously.” (Major R. F. Ruttledge, in litt.). Details of the Cork birds are as follows : — recorded from Baltimore, Castle- haven, Aghadown, Lissygriffin Lake, Goleen ; reported from Drimoleague, Clonakilty, Midleton. Total ii, all stranded gth-ioth. (J. E. O’Donovan, B. O. Regan, Irish Naturalists' Journal, April, 1950). Nine, in or near Goleen; hundreds reported from cove three miles to east ; 13 seen in 3 small coves. (J. Glanville). The total order of numbers must therefore have been very great on this coast. Additional records will certainly come to light from the southern and south- western counties. It is felt that a complete citation will be of value mainly for county records ; the main trend of the wreck is sufficiently clear from the records already given in this appendix. More information would still be of value from observers in poorly covered areas, such as the western Highlands and islands, for the winter 1949-50 and subsequent winters. (134) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XXXVIII. THE REDWING. Photographed by R. Chislett, M. D. England, P. O. Swanberg AND G, K. Ye AXES. THE FIELDFARE. Photographed by M. D. England, Gosta Hakansson and C. W. Teager. (Plates 29-36), Apart from the Brambling [Fringilla montifringilla) , of which we have already published a series of plates (vol. xliv. Plates 1-7), the Redwing {Turdus musicus) and Fieldfare {T. pilaris) are the only two passerines which winter in numbers throughout the British Isles but do not remain to nest. The Redwing, it is true, has attempted to nest on more than one occasion, but that does not alter the fact that comparatively few of our readers will have had the opportunity to see either species breeding. For that reason, quite apart from their intrinsic merit, the accompanying plates will be welcome. From the photographic point of view the pictures taken in England (Plates 34 (upper) and 36) are perhaps more unusual than the others and show both species in typical attitudes with which British observers are familiar. The pictures of Redwing come from Swedish Lapland, Norway and Iceland. The bird shown in Plate 33 belongs, presumably, to the Iceland race, T. m. coburni, and it is interesting to compare it with the typical form shown in Plate 32. The fact that the Iceland bird does not appear appreciably darker may well be due to differ- ences in the lighting, but its breast markings do seem to be “clouded” or “very heavy and dark,” as described by observers at Fair Isle and the Isle of May {Scot. Nat., 61 : 136 ; 62 : 103). It must, however, be stressed that only at the Bird Observatories is it usually possible to make racial distinctions of this kind and that not all specimens of the Iceland race are so clearly marked. The Fieldfare has comparatively recently extended its breeding range to Switzerland, and attention may be drawn to a paper in Nos Oiseaux (vol. xxi, pp. 149-159) where details are given of its present range and habitat preferences in that country. A more striking extension of range — to Greenland — is the subject of a paper in Proceedings of the Xth International Ornithological Congress, reviewed elsewhere in this issue (p. 139). We might add that there was a very heavy movement of both species, as well as other Turdidee, at the end of October, 1951, Redwings being reported in “ immense ” numbers at Fair Isle from October 27th to 30th. We have received a few reports on this movement, which seems to have been specially marked in north Scotland, and would welcome further notes. J.D.W. (136) NOTES. Song-Thrush nesting in a Monkey-Puzzle Tree. — In connexion with the note (antea, p. 287) on a Mistle-Thrush {Turdus viscivorus) nesting in a' Monkey Puzzle tree, it may be of interest to record that on May 6th, 1946, at Oxted, Surrey, I found a nest of a Song-Thrush (T. ericetorum) in a Monkey Puzzle. The nest contained four eggs and is the only one I have found in such a situation. K. R. Chandler. Persistent nest-building in the Blackbird. — With reference to Mr. John Southern’s note (antea, vol. xl, p. 52) on persistent nest building in the Blackbird (Turdus merula), it may be of interest that during 1950 I found six nests of this species which 1 believe to have been built by the same pair of birds, in a garden site occupied yearly for the last ten years. Of the nests. Nos. i, 2, 3, 4 and 6, were within a circle of radius 13 feet and of these Nos. 2, 3 and 6, were in the same extensive tangle of ivy on a wall and were within a circle of radius 3I feet. Nest 5 was 18 yards away in the fork of a hazel. The first nest was found on March 23rd and was mud-lined. The first egg was laid on the 26th, and the third on the 28th. The nest was next looked at on April 2nd, when it contained only one egg. The second nest, the young of which flew on May 4th or 5th, was not found until April 23rd. By regarding the fledging and incubation periods as 14 days each, the first egg was laid on or about April 3rd. The third nest, containing one deserted egg, was found on May 28th. The fourth nest (in lilac) was found being incubated on May 31st. It was still occupied on June 4th, but had been deserted by the nth, when it contained one egg (cf. nest i). The fifth nest was found on June 20th, with young two or three days old, so its first egg was laid about June 6th. This means that the fourth nest was probably deserted on the afternoon of June 4th or the following day and suggests rapid nest-building of the fifth nest. The latter was found empty with one young (aged about four days) dead near by, on July ist. The last nest was found with young about two to three days old on July 2ist. They flew about August 4th. In all, two nests fledged, one more hatched, and another two were partially incubated. The cause of desertion of Nest 3 is unknown and a long gap occurred before the building of the next nest either between Nest 2 and 3 or 3 and 4. Nests i and 4 lost two eggs from the clutch and Nest 5 its young. The cause of these losses is a mystery. It is interesting that in the fifth, and possibly also the second, nest the first egg was laid one or two days after the desertion of the previous nest. Mr. Southern’s Blackbird began rebuilding the day after deserting, in four out of six cases. 136 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. This behaviour is in marked contrast to that of the individuals reported as rearing four or so successful broods from the same nest. M. T. Myres. Wheatear gatherings in spring. — During the spring of 1949, behaviour not recorded in The Handbook was observed on three occasions amongst Wheatears [Qinanthe oenanthe) on the West Suffolk Breck. The best example was witnessed on April 21st on a heath near Elveden. A female was seen in flight low over the ground, pursued by two males. Two other males joined in the chase and all five birds alighted together. Immediately a succession of fights broke out, male versus male, in an indis- criminate manner. The aggressor, or sometimes both birds simultaneously, rushed at his opponent head on, but they rarely struck each other as one usually flew away pursued by the other. Once away from the neighbourhood of the female the males quickly returned and joined the group, soon engaging in another fight, often with a different partner. During these fights there was excited calling. While fighting was in progress a fifth male joined in. It eventually chased the female away in flight and fed with her quietly. With the disappearance of the female the party broke up. Similar behaviour was observed elsewhere on April 2ist and 24th, 1949. R. G. Pettitt and D. V. Butt. [We have submitted this note to Mr. P. J. Conder who has made the following comment: “It seems to me that this describes the usual sort of chasing that occurs on migration when the density of migrants on a particular area of ground is high. Rooke [Ibis, vol. 89, p. 206) has described this sort of chasing for the Robin [Erithacus rubecula) and 1 have seen and recorded it in Wheatears [Ibis, vol. 91, p. 651). I have never been able to interpret such displays as courtship. If it were a courtship display one could only interpret it as being of the communal type such as one finds in Ruff's [Philomachus pugnax) and Blackcocks [Lyrurus tetrix). But the wheatears are very rigidly territorial, as are other Turdidce. Any suggestion that the males were fighting for the female must also be rejected : Robins, Redstarts [Phoenicurus phoenicurus) and Wheatears all tend to treat females at first in the same way as males and drive them out. A persistent female is accepted in the territory eventually. I would therefore suggest that this behaviour is typical of the chasing that occurs when the density of migrants is high and when the birds tend to be very mobile. There is a constant intrusion of individual distances or territories that causes chases involving many birds.” It may be of interest in connexion with Mr. Conder’s remarks to record an observation by Mr. R. W. Hayman who found 24 Wheatears assembled on a football pitch in Richmond Park on April 8th, 1951. Fifteen were still present on the following morning and unusual numbers were present in the London area at that time. — Eds.] VOL. XLV.l NOTES. 137 Five Wrens in succession at one nest. — At the beginning of April, 1950, at Dalhousie Castle, Midlothian, two Wrens (Troglodytes troglodytes) were found dead under the window of a wooden garage which had not been used for some time. They were both removed. On April 9th, when a third was found dead in the same place, an examination of the building revealed a half- built nest in a space running right through the wail in a dark corner. It was presumed that the birds had found their way in past the nest while building and been unable to find the way out again, after being attracted to the light at the window. The entrance to the nest from outside was therefore blocked with a piece of wood, firmly wedged to avoid further accidents. By the night of April iith, the wood had been removed, and two more Wrens, the 4th and 5th to occupy the site, were in posses- sion, and the nest was almost completed. It was not, however, eventually finished or used in that season, but appeared to be an ordinary “cock” nest. This case is particularly interesting in view of the fact that only the cock Wren is supposed to build in the early stages, so that even presuming the final pair disturbed on the nth were a cock and a hen, the previous three should all have been cocks. Unfortunately the three dead birds were not sexed ; but the two birds first found together (date not recorded, but “several days” before the discovery of the third) were both fairly fresh, and it seems more likely that they were a pair than two cocks occupying the same site in such quick succession. C. K. Mylne. [We have submitted this note to the Rev. E. A. Armstrong who comments as follows: — “There are not enough data for this episode to be interpreted. It should be noted, however, that female Wrens occasionally help to build the outer structure of the nest and also that they are sometimes attracted to the male while he is building. He may lead a female to a partly-constructed nest. Thus it is not very remarkable to find a male and female active at an incomplete nest. Moreover, there is, perhaps, the possibility that Wrens had been accustomed to roost communally near the nest-site. As a rule Wrens are able to find their way out of enclosed spaces though they are sometimes caught in eel-traps hung up to dry. It would seem to me most probable that a female was attracted to the first male and when they penetrated beyond the nest 'into the garage they were unable to return, and that the third bird found dead was another female who had been keeping company with the male — for two females will associate with a male early in the season. Presumably the territory was soon occupied and the male com- pleted the nest while accompanied by another female. Males will titivate and repair nests made by previous owners of a territory.” — Eds.] 138 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL.XLV. Courtship display of House-Martin. — As few accounts of courtship display of the House Martin {Delichon urbica) have been published the following" may be of interest. On July 26th, 1950, at Lympstone, Devon, a male was seen on the ridg'e of a roof, walking" in the usual shuffling" manner to and fro over a few inches, uttering" its twittering" song continuously and at the same time holding its wings low and well off the body, showing the white rump to the utmost. The head of another bird could be seen on the other side of the ridge, and occasionally the male leaned towards it. Both took flight, circling over the house, the male swinging down towards the roof each time he approached it and uttering a short burst of song. He alighted again, resuming his singing and display, the other bird, almost certainly a female, quickly joining him. As he continued this display he occasionally turned his back to her, exposing his rump to the full, and when he faced her she gently pecked at his beak. After another brief flight they came down to the roof again and during more display he put his beak to hers, the female clinging vertically to the steep side of the ridge-tile as she leaned away from him. On previous occasions when I have seen rather similar display the male has been perched on the ridge of a roof or on a telephone wire, the wings being fluttered rapidly as they were drooped beside the body, while the female has circled near by in the air. Now and then the male has flown out to her, soon returning to the perch to resume his singing and display. Billing is of frequent occurrence when both birds of a pair are sitting in a partly built nest. I once saw a male clinging to the wall near the shallow beginnings of a nest and singing, pausing once to reach over to the female, which was sitting in the nest, and touch her beak with his. R. G. Adams. [An account of display in this species by D. W. Bishop [antea, vol. xl, p. 54) resembles that given above in some particulars. There are also records of coition at the nest-site [aniea, vol. xli, pp. 310-311) and on the ground [antea, vol. xlii, p. 356). — Eds.] Displacement activity of Oyster-catcher. — The following notes on the behaviour of a family of Oyster-catchers [Hcematopus ostralegus) were made at a reservoir near Edinburgh on June iith, 1950. I was standing at the edge of a ploughed field in which a pair of Oyster-catchers, which I knew to have nearly fledged young, were calling anxiously, when suddenly a young bird trotted out of the long grass surrounding the field, in full view of where I stood only 50 yards away. There was a moment of horrified silence; then one of the adults flew up and, landing on the back of the young bird, forced it down out of sight amongst the furrows. The other adult, without any further preliminaries, flew up and alighted on the back of the first bird, apparently attempting to mate. VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 139 The first part of this performance had every appearance of being' a conscious attempt on the part of what was presumably the female bird to push the young" bird into cover. In this it was signally successful, for it took me some time to locate the young- bird which had moved to the extreme end of the furrow, a good hundred yards from the point where it had forcibly disappeared. The attempted coition by the second adult, the presumed male, would appear to have been a form of “displacement activity” — the misdirected outcome of the two conflicting- emotions of fear and family protection — and this particular form of emotional outlet may have been stimulated by the preceding “attack” on the young bird which, being made from the rear, rather resembled the act of coition. D. G. Andrew. REVIEWS. Proceedings of the Xth International Ornithological Congress, Uppsala, June, 1950. (Almquist & Wicksell, Uppsala, Sweden, 1952. Price Sw. Kr. 35, or £2 8s. 3d. Obtainable direct from Prof. S. Horstadius, Zoologiska Institutionen, Uppsala). This eagerly awaited Report of 662 pages contains the whole of the valuable and in many cases extremely interesting papers read at the Uppsala Congress, which was of outstanding importance because it brought together the results of a vast amount of research which had been going on disconnectedly in many countries cut off by war and post-war difficulties during a dozen very busy and fruitful years, and also because the excellence of the organisation and handling of the agenda led to an exceptionally high standard of contribution and to a remarkable amount of progress in the focussing of some of the main problems. Although nothing has been wasted on frills (or even on cloth binding) the work is inevitably expensive on account of its many photographs, maps, diagrams and bibli'ographies as well as its sheer size, but it is an almost indispensable reference work for those who wish to appreciate the pace and nature of recent advances in ornithology, and the extent of ornithological leadership in the development of the biological sciences. Indeed some of those who strove during that hectic week of June two years ago to keep abreast of the flood of good things which poured out often in two or more places and in two or more languages simultaneously may well be excused for finding that they now begin to understand for the first time what it was all about. With the exception of Sweden, Great Britain sent much the largest national contingent to the Congress (73) followed by the U.S.A. (35), Netherlands (33) Denmark (32), Germany (30) France (20) and Switzerland (15). Apart from Dr. Wetmore's Presidential Address on Recent Additions to our Knowledge of Prehistoric Birds, and two small sections on Regional Faunas and miscellaneous matters, the papers are arranged under four main headings, each introduced by a careful survey of the present position of science in the particular branch. The first on Evolution and Systematics is opened by Dr. Ernst Mayr’s paper on Speciation in Birds which forms a most illuminating brief review of the remarkable developments and changes of approach which have occurred during recent years in this branch of ornithology, and which have led to a reduction in the total of recognized world genera of birds from about 4,000 to about 1,500-1,700 and in species from 19,000 to 8,600. Both in Dr. Mayr’s paper and in others of this section stress is laid on the importance of ecological factors in modern taxonomy. Dr. R. Drost opens the next section with a review of the Study of Bird Migration in which again there have been remarkable developments since 1938. These are briefly summarized with a full list of references. Among interesting 140 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. papers in this section is an account (in German) of Dr. G. Kramer’s experi- ments at Wilhelmshafen with movable mirrors in an aviary, indicating the important part played in orientation by light from the direction of the sun. Three papers describe the Swedish ringing station at Ottenby and another the vast diurnal migration of birds of prey observed at Falsterbo on the southern tip of Sweden. A report of the Round Table Conference on Bird Ringing summarises the conclusions reached and contains a useful list, com- piled by Dr. W. Rydzewski, of all bird-ringing schemes known to be in current operation, based on 26 different countries, and in some cases covering more than one. Dr. N. Tinbergen’s review of Recent Advances in the Study of Bird Behav- iour deals with perhaps even more remarkable advances in knowledge than have been shown in the other main fields ; fortunately he has now published a much fuller survey in The Study of Instinct to be reviewed in our next issue. Papers on Inheritance and Learning in the Song of the Chaffinch by H. Poulsen and one in German on the capacity of birds to distinguish numbers by O. Koehler may also be mentioned. The introductory review to the last main section is a paper on Population Ecology in Birds by Dr. D. Lack, and the section contains reviews from a series of countries (from Iceland to Hungary) of some of the remarkable recent changes in bird distribution due to a warmer climate, particularly in spring and autumn. There is also a most interesting account (pp. 515-526) by Dr. Salomonsen of the accidental mass immigration of Fieldfares from Norway into Greenland in the second half of January, 1937, their subsequent suc- cessful establishment of breeding colonies there. Dr. Gross describes how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service treated 790,314 eggs of Herring Gulls with an oil emulsion spray which;, prevented them from hatching and thus reduced the numbers on islands off the Maine coast by 70 per cent, during the four years 1945-49, with the object of eliminating their excessive pressure on terns and other breeding birds and upon fisheries and other human interests. P. O. Swanberg’s researches on Food Storage, Territory and Song in the Thick- billed Nutcracker are also described and illustrated, bringing out the astonish- ing fact that these birds not only hide large quantities of nuts underground after fetching them as far as 6 km., over several weeks in the autumn, but that they successfully find and dig out these hoards daily in the winter even when covered with up to 18 inches of snow, with a very small percentage of mistakes. The relatively speedy issue of this well-produced work adds to the debt which ornithologists owe to its Editor, Professor Sven Horstadius the General Secretary of the Congress, and to his colleagues of the Swedish Ornithological Association. E.M.N. LOCAL REPORTS : PENINSULA PROVINCE. Cornwall Bird Watching and Preservation Society, Twentieth Annual Report, 1950- About 20 pages of the report are devoted to “ General Bird Notes for 1950 ” followed by three further sections of general notes under the headings “ The Walmsley Sanctuary, Tregorden and Camel Estuary,” " The Cornish Seas,” “ The Scilly Isles.” There is incomplete cross-referencing from the main section to the Walmsley Sanctuary section, but none to the other two sections. Thus to obtain the complete picture of a species in the area covered by the report, reference has to be made to 3 or 4 different sections. The more unusual bird notes include : — Chough, there is no evidence that any broods were reared. Golden Oriole in Scillies in May. Two Crossbills in Falmouth in January. A late Snow-Bunting on April 9th, and several in September and October. The increase of House-Sparrows recorded in the last Report is said to have been maintained in a most spectacular manner. Tawny Pipit on October 13th and 22nd at St. Columb Porth. Water-Pipit, VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 14i 2 on Marazion Marsh on March 30th, and one on April 5th. Nuthatches reared a brood in the wall of a house. Woodchat Shrike seen on June 5th. No winter records of Chiffchaff are given. Yellow-browed Warbler on October i8-2oth. Breeding records of Garden-Warbler near Gweek and Antony. St. Germans. Desert- Wheatear on August 29th. A female Common Redstart on March 3rd and a male and female on March 4th are reported from the cliffs at Bude without mention of any evidence of identification. House-Martin, at Tresco on the remarkably early date of February 19th. Hoopoes on February 21st (unusually early), twice in May and one August. Immigration of Barn-Owls into West Cornwall on a considerable scale is recorded in January based on numerous records of daylight hunting ; some 10 birds were later found dead, probably of starvation (thus supporting a suggestion in the Dorset report that the exceptional numbers seen in daylight in many parts of S.W. England east to Hants, in 1949/50 were related to scarcity of nocturnal prey, and not solely to abundance of Barn-Owls). Two or three Rough-legged Buzzards are recorded. Marsh-Harrier present at the end of 1949 remained till January 19th. Spoonbills wintered in both seasons on the Tamar where an immature remained all summer. Purple Heron on Scillies in April. Night- Heron reported several times in March at Came Creek and one in May at Marazion Marsh. Three Bitterns in winter. Whooper Swans wintered in both seasons. Seven Barnacle Geese in March. Great Shearwater on Scillies crossing on August 26th, and on September i6th a shearwater with dark under-parts is recorded as a Sooty. Fulmars bred at a number of places. Great Northern Diver wintered in Mounts Bay area. Black-throated Diver seen in March. Birds whose appearance agreed with that of Rock-Dove bred in two localities, in a cave and a rabbit burrow on a cliff. Black-tailed Godwit wintered in both seasons on the St. Germans river, and its tributaries. About 9 records of Grey Phalaropes between August and November. A bird on November 21st with " a long, slender slightly curved bill ” is rather surprisingly recorded as a Red-necked Phalarope. An American Pectoral Sandpiper on Camel Estuary on October i6th. Wood-Sandpipers at four localities in August-September, up to 4 birds to- gether. Details of a reputed Greater Yellowshank, accepted in the Report under review, have been submitted to British Birds and rejected. Spotted Redshank on November 26th. Kentish Plover in August. Up to 5 Avocets on the Tamar between January ist and March 19th ; one on the Helford river in September. Several Black Terns in September/October. Little Gulls in January- April, and September-November. Scandinavian Herring-Gull on January 2nd. Glaucous Gulls in February, March and October. Three Pomatorhine Skuas on September 17th at Newquay, and one in the Scillies on May 29th and September 9th. About 70 Little Auks reported “ wrecked " in February. A short article on Roseate Terns in the Isles of Scilly records the re-establishment of a definite colony of 6 pairs on Annet in 1950, where a pair or two have been observed annually since 1946, as well as pairs on other islands. Unfortunately, as we learn from another part of the report, a fire smouldered for a week in July, 1950, burning out a considerable area, in which the Roseate Terns were breeding. There is also a table of arrival and departure dates of Cornish breeding migrants, and a page is devoted to the weather of the year. In addition to the General Notes, there is an important paper (12 pages) by Lt.-Col. and Mrs. B. H. Ryves on “ The Breeding Habits of the Spotted Flycatcher.” This account condenses 30 years’ experience under the following headings: — Arrival and Departure of Birds; Voice and Song ; Courtship and Nest-site Selection ; Nest-Construction ; Eggs and Incubation ; The Period of Young in Nest ; Double Brooding. It concludes with a detailed account of intensive work on two pairs in 1950. Casual visitors to the county might be able to make some observations on the following points, on which notes are requested. 142 BRITISH BIRDS. [vol. xlv. (1) The number of breeding House-Sparrows, House-Martins, Starlings and Reed-Buntings in known areas. (2) The sites used for nesting, together with any information as to increase or decrease. (3) Accurate counts of Choughs, with localities ; a census of these birds is wanted. (4) The sites of Starling roosts, and the nature of the roost, whether in reeds or shrubs, etc. P.A.D.H. Twenty-third Report of the Devon Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, 1950. The main part of this report consists of records for 1950 (50 pages). For recording purposes the county is split up into 8 areas, while a ninth area. West Somerset is also covered by the records, although from the title of the Report one would expect it to refer to Devon alone. The Report includes a map showing clearly the bounds of each area, and an initial preceding each note indicates the area in which it was made. The great majority of the notes have local significance, but there are also some few notes on calls, food and behaviour. Among the more unusual birds are : Golden Oriole, a pair for 6 weeks in June/ July near Newton Abbot, and a male on June 4th near Hartland Point. Two Twites in October. Crossbills in Jan- uary, March and May at Minehead (Somerset). Blue-headed Wagtail at Minehead in May and September. Great Grey Shrike in March and December. Pied Flycatchers bred near Chagford and on E. Exmoor (Somerset). A Firecrest in W. Somerset in February. Seven wintering records of Chiff- chaffs. A Yellow-browed Warbler on the remarkable date of March nth. Dartford Warblers in two localities on several dates. A roost of about 2,000 Redwings in rhododendrons. Hoopoes in May and June. A Marsh-Harrier in March. Four nests of Montagu’s Harrier hatched on Dartmoor where a Kite was reported in January. Spoonbills were present throughout the year except in June, up to seven in December on the Teign, Tamar and Tavy estuaries. A Bittern on December 28th. Whooper Swans wintered on Tamar Lake in both seasons and w’ere seen elsewhere in January and Decem- ber. Long-tailed Ducks at the beginning and end of the year, spread over 5 months and three localities. Eiders were also seen in three localities, in Febru- ary-March and December, maximum 13 together. An important breeding record is of a Storm-Petrel incubating a fresh egg in S.E. Devon in a hole also containing a badly stained egg presumably from previous year ; the report states "it is apparent that breeding may have taken place regularly un- detected.” Fulmars were proved to breed on Berry Head, as last year, and Scabbacombe. Two Great Shearwaters on September 6th seen on a crossing from Lundy to Bideford. Twenty Black-necked Grebes were reported at Dawlish Warren in February and 28 there in December. Two winter records of Black-throated Diver. About 30 Black-tailed Godwits wintered on the Exe estuary in both seasons. An American Pectoral Sandpiper was on Porlock marsh (Somerset) September 2oth-October 7th and one at Wembury October 7th-i5th. {antea, vol. xliv, p. 252). About a dozen records of winter- ing Common Sandpipers. A Wood-Sandpiper in October at Wembury. Spotted Redshanks were recorded in all months except May and June. Five winter records (January, February, December) of Greenshank from three localities, maximum 7 birds together. A Kentish Plover wintered on the Exe Estuary from the beginning of the year to March 26th and one from October 7th to December 31st ; 2 reported at Fremington in September. About 10,000 Lapwings in the Braunton district at the end of the year. Avocets wintered on the Exe and Tamar estuaries in both seasons (5 in Jan- uary, 7 in December). A reported Pratincole is square-bracketed. Black Terns were seen in spring and autumn. A juvenile Sabine's Gull at Woola- combe on September 22nd {antea, vol. xliv, p. 256). Little Gulls in February VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 143 and March. An assembly of gulls at Erme Mouth in January included 2,000 Great Black-backs. Glaucous Gulls were seen at Slapton on April 30th, and Plymouth May 7th ; an Iceland Gull was seen at Wembury on April 22nd, and another at Plymouth on May 7th. Kittiwakes bred Scabbacombe, Berry Head and Lead Stone (Torbay). Twenty-one " wrecked " Little Auks recorded. A Spotted Crake was found dead at Braunton in September. Several reports of Black Grouse from each of four out of the eight Devon recording areas ; it would be interesting to know whether the bird is increasing. In most cases of rare or difficult birds some evidence of identification is given, but in a few instances, for example immature Black-throated Diver, immature Glaucous and Iceland Gulls, it is not even mentioned that full details have been supplied, though in the case of two of the gulls details were published in our pages, (vol. xliii, p. 409) and attention might be directed to this. Such a statement not only strengthens a reader’s confidence in the record, but emphasises to contributors the need for careful note-taking and for sub- mitting these notes in detail. The Report appears to mention all the species recorded in the area during the year, yet trivialities have in the main been avoided. We prefer this treatment to the practice in some reports of omitting entirely an unspecified number of the species of regular occurrence. Several rarities in the Devon report which are reprinted from the Lundy Field Society Report 1950, have been omitted from the present review. In addition to the Records, there are migration reports on Wheatear, Swallow, House-Martin and Swift. For House-Martin, there are phenomen- ally early dates ; February 19th and 20th and March 9th, but the observers’ names unfortunately are not given. Reports of this species seen on March ist and caught on March 2nd come from a non-ornithologist. Attempts to trace the course of arriving Swifts included a motor boat patrol some distance out to sea, but the lack of success there, and shore observations, suggested that the birds were crossing the Channel too high to be seen. Separate reports are also made on a census of Nightingales (totalling about 63 birds,, although rather incomplete and apparently not confined to singing males) ; Black Redstarts (showing a minimum of 45 birds) and an enquiry into the habits of Spotted Flycatcher giving observations mainly on arrival, song, breeding and food. The last two enquiries are being continued. The list of members totals some 400 names. P.A.D.H. Report on Somerset Birds, 1950. Most of this report is occupied by Notes (20 pages), separated under each species into the district in which the observation was made. A map is in- cluded, which shows the limits of these districts of which there are seven. We extract the following ; — Crossbills in W. Somerset in January, March and May, and 6-10 at Wins- combe in June. Water-Pipit at Blagdon on October 29th. Blue-headed Wagtail at Minehead in September, and a Waxwing there in January. Pied Flycatcher spreading on Exmoor. Firecrest at Blagdon on December loth and Dunster on February 19th. One or two wintering ChifEchaffs. Half-a- dozen or more records of wintering Black Redstarts. Four Swallows on February 25th. Hobbies in 2 localities in May or June. Rough-legged Buzzard in November. Common Buzzard still increasing and spreading. Bittern in December. Bewick’s Swan in both winters, maximum 23. Red- crested Pochard at Cheddar reservoir on September 24th. Ferruginous Ducks at Durleigh reservoir on January 2nd and 4th, and at Cheddar on December 26th. 20-30 Goldeneye at Blagdon and Cheddar reservoirs in January/Feb- ruary. Two Long-tailed Ducks at Durleigh reservoir in January. Two Gannets fishing in Blagdon reservoir on September i8th. Black-throated 144 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Diver at Blagdon in February/March. Great Snipe at Blagdon on December 27th. Grey Phalaropes in 5 localities. About 2,000 Knots on Steart Flats in January. American Pectoral Sandpiper at Porlock, September 22nd to October 4th. Several wintering Common Sandpipers, and one Green Sand- piper. Several records of Black Terns in spring and autumn, including parties of c. 70 and 46 on May 13th. Remains of an immature Sabine’s Gull at Cheddar in September. Little Gull at Durleigh in February. Immature Glaucous Gull on the river Avon in February/March. About 25 Little Auks recorded in the February “ wreck.” A number of these records are duplicated in the Devon, Mid-Somerset and Bristol reports, and some have already appeared in British Birds. The report also contains 3 pages of arrival and departure dates of migrants (including a House-Martin on March 29th), and a list of some 130 members. P.A.D.H. The Mid-Somerset Naturalist Society- — -First Report and Reference Book, November ig^g- January ig^i. This new society is centred in Bridgwater and the first report is intended to be ” a small handbook which will be a guide to both local and visiting natura- lists and also to beginners.” About half the Report is devoted to birds : ” Introduction to Bird Report ” by D. H. Perrett, “ Items of Outstanding Interest ” (3 pages), “Systematic List ” (10 pages), and “Observations on Sheld-Duck” byD.H. Perrett. The area covered is rather loosely defined as the “district consisting of the Central Somerset plain, with the well-wooded Blackdowns and Quantocks to the south and west, and the Mendips to the north and east, extending to the sea at Brean Down.” A map of a much wider area, printed in the Report, gives no clearer idea of the area covered, nor shows all the features mentioned above ; in fact it serves to emphasise that several records (e.g. from Dunster, Minehead, Weston-super-Mare) are outside the area indicated. One object of the Report is stated to be “ to give a list of birds definitely identified in our district since the formation of our Society in the autumn of 1949 ” which seems difficult to achieve until the district is specific, and calls for co-operation with the county ornithological body already covering the area. At the same time, if the county body were offered the records in the same form as published in the Report under review, we can understand that it would find them of little value, lacking as they do in most cases either date or locality, and often both. The systematic list is a status summary ; for example : — “ Raven. Resident. Local and chiefly confined to coastal areas.” The “ Items of Outstanding Interest ” often add nothing of con- sequence, for example “ Raven. Two fledglings found in nest.” Rather worse than average is “Greenland Wheatear arrived late March and remained until November loth” — a statement evidently badly expressed or erroneous, probably both. Better than average is “ British Black Grouse seem to be increasing in numbers.” The short article on Sheld-Ducks records that in 1950 numbers at Steart were at a low ebb in January, rising to 800 adults (and about 1,000 young) in June. Thereafter, unlike the habit of this bird in some other localities, adults in- creased steadily in numbers to 1,800 in September and 2,400 in October, and decreased from mid-November to under 100 by the end of the year. As in the rest of the report, few exact dates or figures are given. P.A.D.H. CHANNEL. Report of the Natural History Section of the Wiltshire Archceological and Natural History Society, 1950. (Reprinted from the Wiltshire Archcnological and Natural History Magazine, Vol. liv, June, 1951)- Thirty pages of this report are devoted to birds, with 54 contributors. The more interesting items in the systematic notes include : A Raven over Marlborough Downs in March. Resident Starlings were showing yellow or VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 145 mainly yellow bills by December 25th when flocking birds still had completely black bills. Crossbills bred near Redlynch. Cirl Buntings in several localities, and two breeding records. It would be interesting to know the points on which an apparently silent party of Tree-Pipits were identified, on the excep- tionally late date of October 22nd. White Wagtail on May 27th. Twenty- three pairs of Red-backed Shrikes were located in the neighbourhood of Redlynch, “ a remarkable increase from the two pairs in the same area in 1949.” Dartford Warblers showed an increase, and apparently Stonechats also. Several Hedge-Sparrow nests contained dead nestlings on April 26th, following snowfall. Hoopoes on two dates in May and one June. A pair of Long-eared Owls bred. Buzzards bred in several parts of the county. Two winter records of Bitterns. Long-tailed Duck in October. Several pairs of Curlew probably breeding. A Golden Plover of the Northern race in April. A number of Black Terns in May, also recorded in October. A dead Little Gull on February 26th at Savernake. Six Great Black-backed Gulls at Larkhill in December. Eight Little Auks in the early part of the year. Red-legged Partridge reported from three localities ; Quail from five. Over six pages are allotted to lists of arrival and departure dates of migrants, although most of the information appears to be of little consequence. A report is made on a two-year Redwing and Fieldfare enquiry, giving some information on autumn arrival, winter distribution and habits. The obser- vers were asked to take the same walk once a month, on a specified date, and to note numbers and behaviour. No intensive observation was undertaken. A largely negative account is given of autumn migration across high ground at Marlborough. P.A.D.H. Report on Dorset Birds, 1950 — (Reprinted from the Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society, Vol. 72, pp. 149-172, 1950) (Ed. by Dr. K. B. Rooke). This report consists of two pages of introduction, a map of the county divided into 19 areas to which records are related, followed by 20 pages of closely printed notes, which repeatedly show evidence of careful and critical consideration. “ No undue emphasis is placed on rare or unusual events. So little is known about normal occurrences that even the common species offer plenty of scope for investigation.” The introduction also states “ The fact that current activities are uncovering more problems than they solve is a measure of our ignorance.” ; it is an indication, too, of the progressive and questing spirit of the Dorset Field Ornithology Group. Some of the species regular in the county have been omitted altogether from the classified notes ; we would have preferred to see a list of them. For example not everyone reading the report will know whether records of Red-legged Partridge are too commonplace, or non-existent. The following are taken from the report ; Eight pairs of Ravens reported breeding on the coast. Several records suggest considerable spring and autumn migration of Goldfinch. A few pairs of Crossbills bred. A late Brambling on May 7th. Only two winter records of Chiffchaff (January and December). Dartford Warbler increased decidedly. No Whinchat breeding records. Stonechat is now quite common again. At least 20 Black Red- starts noticed between October 7th, 1949, and March 20th, 1950. Two Hoopoes in May. A Long-eared Owl in June. Seven breeding pairs of Peregrine, which had been reduced to one pair by end of war. Buzzard now stationary or decreasing, suffering widespread and shameful human persecution. Of several very pale Buzzards, some ” may have been B. lagopus, but feathered tarsi not seen, the only certain field-character distinguishing Rough-legged from exceptional examples of the Common Buzzard.” One, probably two, pairs of Montagu's Harrier bred. Three records of Bitterns in winter, and several Whooper Swans. Brent Geese, extremely scarce in recent years, were only reported twice. A number of Sheld-Duck counts are given. Only two Garganey records. Drake Red-crested Pochard on December 24th, 25th and 146 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Janua^ 15th, 1951. Long-tailed Ducks in January and November. One Eider in Studland Bay in January and three in March. Shags bred in Port- land. Still no evidence of Fulmars breeding, although frequenting cliffs in three or four areas in June. In Poole Harbour Black-necked Grebes reached 43 in January, about 40 in December. Black-tailed God wits present in every month of the year, with a maximum of over 600 in February. The increase and expansion of the Curlew breeding population evidently continues. Two Wood-Sandpipers in September. Spotted Redshanks seen in July and December, and only three Greenshank records. Two Little Ringed Plovers recorded on May 3rd for the first time in Dorset. A Kentish Plover in August. In April Golden Plovers of the Northern race were recorded for the first time in Dorset. Four records of Black Terns in autumn. A few Arctic Terns in June and July at Abbotsbury. Four pairs of Great Black-backed Gulls nested on Chesil near Abbotsbury. About 13 Little Auks were found, mainly inland, from February nth onwards. Casual visitors to the county should note that information is requested on exact localities (writh six figure map reference) of proved or suspected breeding, date, numbers, and habitat of ; — Corn-Bunting, Cirl Bunting, Wood-Lark, Tree-Pipit, Meadow-Pipit, Yellow Wagtail, Wheatear, Stonechat, Sand-Martin, Curlew, Woodcock, Redshank. Inland information is required on the following points for all species of gull : — feeding habits, distribution and roosts, and seasonal changes in these and in numbers, and age-ratios of the inland flocks. P.A.D.H. The Sussex Bird Report, 1950. (Ed. by C. G. des Forges and D. D. Harber). About 65 observers contributed to this report which contains 21 pages of notes. The objects of the Report are stated to be first, to record the unusual, and secondly to record deviations from the picture painted by J. Walpole Bond’s A History of Sussex Birds, or to give statistical confirmation, where possible, of statements contained therein. Notes which refer to habits and behaviour are not generally admitted. " In cases of doubt we usually apply this test : could the incident recorded equally well have happened in any other county ?” Consistent with their admirably clearly defined policy, the editors usually exclude a record of “an uncommon but regular breeding species being found nesting in a haunt in no way unusual to it. Such records are liable to suggest an extension of the bird’s breeding range without any justification.’’ Thus the report is strictly confined to events regarded as significant within the county, and species for which such notes have not been received are omitted. We extract the following ; — Several records of Crossbills in March and April from three localities. Practically no records of Bramblings. An Ortolan Bunting in October. Richard’s Pipit in October. Tawny Pipit in September. Water-Pipit on the Cuckmere Old Channel in March, and again in December. A Blue- headed Wagtail and a “Sykes’s type’’ in May. Great Grey Shrikes in February and May. A pair of Woodchats in May. Five Chiffchaffs seen in February at Eastbourne and Chichester may well have been wintering, as was certainly the case with a bird of one of the northern races at Pagham in January. Dartford Warbler in spring. About 5 Black Redstarts reported wintering in the early part of the year and 3 at the end of the year ; birds were seen in 5 localities in the breeding-season. White-spotted Bluethroat at Thorney on September 4th. Hoopoes in 4 localities in spring. Buzzard recordeil several times in summer in central Sussex. Marsh-Harrier in January, April ami May. Osprey in August. Spoonbills in January, February, IMarch, April, May, October and December, spread over four localities, up to 3 birds together. A Bittern in December. Several Whooper Swans were recorded in both winters, Bewick’s in March and December. Brent Geese were not recorded as winter- VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 147 ing at Pagham or Chichester Harbours and relatively few were seen, apart from an easterly passage off the mouth of the Cuckmere of perhaps 1,000 during an hour or so on April 7th. Common Eiders were again recorded a number of times, in January, February, September, October, November and December ; the bird on September 19-21 is the only county record for this month. Shag in September. Gannet in all months except February and March. Leach’s Petrel and Manx Shearwater in September. Cory's Shear- water on Novembir 19th off Langney Point, and a Sooty Shearwater there on October 6th. Fulmars in May and June, and in April a bird was put off a cliff at Seaford. Several records of Slavonian Grebe and Red-necked Grebes. Two records of Black-throated Diver. Twenty or thirty Black-tailed Godwits wintered early in the year in Chichester Harbour, but none at the end of the year ; numbers reached a maximum of c.550 in mid-September. Great Snipe at the Midrips on September 30th. Red-breasted Snipe at Thorney October i5th-22nd. Many records of Grey Phalaropes in September or early October. Red-necked Phalarope at Thorney on September 5th and Pett Level September 30th and October 14th. Some very early Little Stints were seen in the first half of April. Three Temminck’s Stints in the autumn. Spotted Redshanks in all months except January, June and November. Little Ringed Plovers seen in a number of localities besides the general area where 4 pairs bred. A pair of Kentish Plovers in June. Dotterel in August. An Avocet in April and 10 together in June. Black Terns in greater numbers than usual in spring. Gull-billed Tern at Shoreham on September 17th. Roseate Tern in July. Several Little Gulls in spring and late autumn. Mediterranean Black-headed Gulls in September, October and November. Iceland Gulls on March 25th, April 2nd and 20th and May 8th- 1 8th. Black Guillemot at Langney Point on November 8th. Four “ wrecked " Little Auks in February and one seen in December. Spotted Crake in October. P.A.D.H. The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist for 1950. Twenty-three pages are devoted to birds, mainly in classified notes. Among Sussex items which do not find a place in the Sussex Bird Report for 1950, we notice the following : Golden Oriole in June, Richard’s Pipit in April, Marsh- Warbler in June and July, Bewick’s Swan in January. Fulmars at Cliff End (Pett) in May. June and July. About 180 Great Crested Grebes off Pett Level in December. Immature Black-throated Diver (without description) in December. The report also includes notes on that part of Kent lying west of Dungeness. The Kent notes are not separated from those of Sussex, but include ; — Shore-Lark in December. House-Martin on December 3rd. Green Woodpeckers outside breeding season extending in coastal area into bushes far beyond the limit of trees. Dotterel in August. About 6 pairs of Stone- Curlews nested on Dungeness. Scattered remnants of the former Dungeness colony of Common Terns try to breed in various spots, generally without success. There is also an article by A. A. Wright on the effect of wind on the direction taken by migrating Swallows and Martins. His findings, based on over 100 observed movements (not merely separate parties or flocks of birds) are that the birds " approach the coast mainly by certain routes, viz. down the valleys or across marshland ; and that these routes are usually followed whatever the direction of wind. On reaching the coast, they turn either E. or W. (roughly) and fly for varying distances along or near it, before setting out to sea ; and in this part of their journey they usually (but not always) fly against the wind.” P.A.D.H. THAMES. The Essex Bird-Watching and Preservation Society, Report for 1950. (Ed. G. A. Pyman). This report opens with a census, the first complete one, of the county heron- ries made in 1950. This discloses some striking changes in numbers and distribution since 1928. Although the earlier census was incomplete the 148 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. number of nesting sites has undoubtedly increased, but the total of nesting pairs has declined from 216 to 151. Two of the original heronries are extinct, while the one at Walthamstow has increased from 5 to 67 and now holds almost half of the total nesting population of the county. The notes contain records of a number of Waxwings in January to March, two Golden Orioles in May and J une, a Dipper and a Shore-Lark in December, two Wrynecks on October 12th, a late date. Eiders in August and December and a flock of 200-300 Black-tailed Godwits in October. The nesting of Wigeon, Pochard and Oyster-catcher is also recorded. A separate report follows on the birds of Abberton reservoir, a truly remarkable place. About 20 pairs of Sheld-Ducks nested, some of them using the drains on the slopes of the concrete margins, 25 pairs of Shoveler, 25 to 30 of Tufted Ducks, one pair of Gadwall, probably two of Garganey, one or two of Pochard, about 40 of Common and ii of Little Terns and 1,000 pairs of Black-headed Gulls, all on the island, while about 45 pairs of Great Crested Grebes also nested. This inland nesting of the Common Tern is notable and it seems curious that the main report says nothing of any coastal colonies. Of casual visitors at Abberton a Little Egret on August i8th, eight Spotted Redshanks on February 26th and five on March 5th call for special mention. N.F.T. London Bird Report, No. 15, 1950. (Ed. by C. B. Ashby). This report summarizes the observations of 336 contributors ; this is a record for the series and is without doubt far higher than for any other local report in the country. One result of this heavy density of observers is that the status of many species in the London area is known with considerable accuracy. Certain species to which special attention has been paid are dealt with in papers following the classified notes. Thirteen pairs of Black Redstarts in the City of London reared a record total of 24 broods ; in tw'o cases a third brood was successfully reared after earlier failures. The results of the census of Great Crested Grebes have already been incorporated in a paper in British Birds : the total of adults present in the summer of 1950 is estimated at 557, 242 on gravel pits and 315 on other waters. Monthly duck counts have continued, and a paper continuing one in the 1948 Report summarizes results for 1949-51. It is suggested that after a setback in 1947 the numbers of Mallard are now about 33% above those for the winter of 1938-39. Average winter maxima for some other species are : Pochard — 1,000 ; Tufted Duck — 2,500 to 3,000 ; Goosander — 150 ; Smew — 100 ; an interim report on the Starling enquiry suggests that the large roosts in central London, which have a peak of about 100,000 birds in June and July, are composed mainly of native birds ; out of 1 25 recoveries only two are from overseas. The classified notes contain further detailed figures for some species. At least 17 pairs of Wood-Larks ‘‘ out of an approximate total of 45 pairs or presumed pairs ” bred in 1950, and there are records of breeding, or attempted breeding, in all the London counties except Herts. In 1946, ii pairs bred out of a knowm population of 17 or 18 pairs, so it seems that the species is increasing rapidly. The Stonechat, on the other hand, continues to make very slow progress ; many winter records are given, but only four breeding sites w'ere known in 1950 and one of these is only a “ probable.” Only one definite breeding record is given for Wryneck. Figures of a different kind resulted from a trip by launch over 20 miles of the Thames through London on January 29th. This gave a total of 691 Herring-Gulls and 235 Great Black-backs, an interesting indication of the extent to which the latter is following the inland trend of the other species. It seems unlikely that many rarities can pass unobserved through London’s net of observers. The area did well in the autumn of 1950 as is shown by reports already published in our pages of American Pectoral Sandpiper, Baird’s Sandpiper. Grey Phalaropes and Sabine’s Gulls ; the last two are appropriately subjects of illustrations in this Report. Other records of interest include unusually large flocks of Bramblings in many parts of the area VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 149 in the early months of 1950; a Water-Pipit at Stone Marshes, Kent, in December; several reports of "variant” Yellow Wagtails ; a Great Grey Shrike at Hampton Court on May 30th ; a Firecrest on Wimbledon Common on March 19th; a Hoopoe at Sanderstead, Surrey, which is an addition to our published lists for 1950 ; a Storm-Petrel at Staines on November nth, the first in the area this century ; a party of Dotterels at Heathrow from August 26th-3oth (see antea, p. no). Shoveler bred in Middlesex for the third time. There is a report on the bird census in St. James’s Park and the Green Park. Reference in the introduction to some outstanding features of the year gives further evidence of the damage done by the late April snowstorm. J.D.W. (1) The Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire in 1950. (Ed. D. W. Snow). (2) The Middle Thames Naturalist 1950. (Bird Section). It appears to be inevitable to take these two reports together, for the second of them covers S. Bucks, and S.E. Berks., and the more important of its records from that area are incorporated in the Oxford report. They con- tain a wealth of information of considerable future value, when the time arrives for working out the distribution in the three counties of the more local species, location and character of roosts, roosting flight lines, migration routes, &c., &c., as well as the assessing of the status of the less common visitors. Amongst notes of special interest may be noted the probable nesting of a pair of Dippers in Oxfordshire, the proved nesting of Wigeon and Little Ringed Plover, each at two localities in Berkshire and of the Pochard and Tufted Duck in all three counties. Amongst the less common visitors are a Water- Pipit in Bucks, February 12th and 14th, single Ring- Ouzels in all three counties in March and April, a Hoopoe in Berkshire on June 3rd, a Goshawk in Oxfordshire, January 2nd to 6th, single Bitterns in January, November and December, two Bewick’s Swans in Berkshire, March 5th, a Ruddy Sheld-Duck on May nth, a Ferruginous Duck in Oxfordshire, July 1 6th, single Fork-tailed Petrels in Berks, and Bucks., a Black-necked Grebe in Berks., February nth, and a Black-throated Diver from February 3rd to April 4th, a Great Snipe, September loth, two Temminck’s Stints in May, a wintering Common Sandpiper and Spotted Redshank, a Kittiwake in Oxon., two Little Auks and two Little Gulls in winter. N.F.T. TRENT. The Lincolnshire Naturalists Union Transactions for 1950, Vol. xii. No. 4 (published December, 1951). Ornithology, by S. A. Cox. These records include several notes of interest. Wood-Larks bred in several places near Brigg and the Short-eared Owl at Scotton. A cock Brambling first noticed in the Limber beech -woods on May 31st remained there until at least August 4th and tried, without success, to acquire a hen Chaffinch as a mate {cf. Leicestershire and Rutland Report, and antea, vol. xliv, p. 17). A Chiffchaff frequented a Grimsby allotment from Februaiy 13th to March 13th ; the first normal summer immigrant Chiffchaff appeared on March 23rd [cf. antea, vol. xliv, p. 86). A Hoopoe was seen at Brattlebury on October 8th, and an early Spotted Redshank on February 6th. A.W.B. Derbyshire ArchcBological and N.H. Society : Ornithological Record for Derby- shire, 1950. (Compiled by W. K. Marshall). Of breeding records the most noteworthy were those of the Little Ringed Plover on the River Trent [antea, p. 64), of the Pied Flycatcher in site of previous year (and also in 1949 in Chatsworth Park) and of Dunlin, several pairs, among cottonsedge in the N.W. of the county. New to previous records of recent years are : a pair of Ferruginous Duck from mid-December, 150 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. 1949 to the 3rd week of March at Butterley Reservoir, a Fulmar in Lathkill- dale on i8th December, 1949 {antea, vol. xliv, p. no) (there w'as a previous Derbyshire record in 1847), and Grey Phalarope at Brad well on September 17th (Whitlock’s Birds of Derbyshire gives a number of records between 1770 and 1891). A table of waders seen at Barbrook Reservoir in August and September is given. A.W.B. Leicestershire and Rutland Ornithological Society Report for 1950. A GOOD map of the two counties makes it far easier for the outsider to follow the details of this report than is the case with most local journals. The important reservoirs of Eye Brook, Swithland, Stanford and Cropston have been well covered by several observers, who give a good picture of the avifauna of these waters in central England. At Eye Brook, for example, there w'ere a herd of 22 Bewick's Swans, 39 Goosanders and 1 1 Smews at the end of December, up to 1,400 Wigeon in Eebruary, 3 Velvet Scoters in April, 150/200 Great Crested Grebes in January and February, Red-necked, Slavonian and Black-necked Grebes at various dates, numerous waders including Wood- Sandpiper, Spotted Redshank and Little Ringed Plover and a winter roost of 10/15,000 Common and Black-headed Gulls. The Ferruginous Duck was recorded from Stanford and Swithland Reservoirs in March and December. At Swithland 28 Scaup were seen on December 6th, a large flock for an inland water, and at Stanford two Grey Phalaropes in September, the first recorded for these counties. There is a table shewing the ten wildfowl counts in the year for the International Wildfowl Inquiry at the four chief reservoirs and another table gives the sites where 196 Great Crested Grebes were counted on or near June 7th. From Beacon Hill (which apparently is not shown on the otherwise useful map) several interesting birds were seen ; two Alpine Swdfts on May 24th and Goshawks there and elsewhere in February, October and November ; the presence of two Ravens seen there from June nth to 14th suggests a possible escape from captivity. The Buzzard was seen in the Charnwood Forest district in spring and summer as well as in the earlier months, but there was no evidence of breeding, nor did the Hobbies, reported to be shot annually by a keeper at Outwoods, have a chance. Cannot the perpetrator be proseeuted if his employer is not public-spirited and energetic enough to see that the law is kept ? Other items of interest were a wintering Chiffchaff at Quorn, the breeding of Quail, an increase in the Redstart population of Charnwood and sub- stantial increases in the numbers of Kingfisher and Barn-Owl. At Old Dalby on May 31st a cock Brambling was seen feeding with a hen Chaffinch and behaving as if paired ; a similar instance recorded in the Lincolnshire Report should be compared with this. A.W.B. The Liverpool Naturalists' Field Club : Proceedings and Notes for 1950. The most interesting records among the bird notes are those of the Scaup which frequent the sea off the coast of Wirral in winter : The same observer gives careful data of the fluctuating numbers of Bar- tailed Godwits on the same coast. Black Terns, far more commonly found over the Cheshire meres, were seen at Meols and Hilbre island on the coast in September and October. A Black Guillemot was seen on a sand-bank at Meols on September 23rd, a great rarity in Cheshire ; T. A. Coward in Fauna of Cheshire recorded only one occurrence (in 1837, in the Dec estuary). Grey Phalaropes were seen on September 27th at places some miles apart near the Wirral coast, [cf. antea, vol. xliv, p. 250). A.W.B. MERSEY. In January about 5,000 In Eebruary about 2,000 In March about 1,000 end of April nil. end of November small number end of December about 1.750. VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 151 HUMBER. Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, Committee for Ornithology, Report for 1950. (Edited by R. Chislett). It is difficult to write in reasonable compass a review of this Yorkshire report which has been compiled from the records of a large number of observers in various parts of the county. Particularly valuable are the data from the Spurn Bird Observatory, where much ringing has been done. Nesting records include successful breeding of Raven ; and, in the East Riding, of Wood-Lark ; Pied Flycatchers continue to extend their breeding range and many use nest-boxes ; the Reed-Warbler’s range has extended in Holderness ; the Short-eared Owl nested on moorlands in E. and W. of the county ; two pairs of Common Buzzards reared broods, but no nest of Mon- tagu's Harrier was found in 1950 although birds were seen ; Shoveler, Pochard and Tufted Duck nested in several localities ; there were about 90 Great Crested Grebes in the county in the breeding season ; three and probably four pairs of Little Ringed Plover nested. Passage was particularly well marked and observed at Spurn where the maximum number of Chaffinches was noted between October 6th and 28th and the autumn influx of Blackbirds from October 19th ; Pied Flycatchers (89 trapped) mainly in August, September and October ; Wrynecks and Ring- Ouzels were passing between May 9th and 15th. There are many records of birds uncommon or rare in these islands. On April 23rd a cock Golden Oriole at Spurn ; on December 8th eight Serins near North Otterington were identified by J. P. Utley, and were seen again four miles south on the following day {cf. Northumberland and Durham Report). An Ortolan Bunting was seen on March nth at Shadwell, Leeds. Shore- Larks were few (February and November) but Great Grey Shrikes were recorded at least 15 times from January to March and October to December. Waxwings occurred in a number of localities from January to March, but in no great number. Red-breasted Flycatchers were seen at Spurn on October 5th and 22nd and Icterine (August and September) and Barred Warblers (July 31st) were also found there. The Desert-Wheatear [antea vol. xlii, pp. 179-183) which was first seen on November 9th, 1949, and recorded in the Report for that year, remained in the Halifax area, where it was discovered, until January 22nd. There was a Red-spotted Bluethroat at Spurn on October 28th ; a Hoopoe at Boltby on May loth ; Marsh-Harriers in February and October ; Whooper Swans in many places, but rather fewer Bewick’s Swans. On January 15th at Swillington Ing K. Brown saw a drake Green- winged Teal (antea, vol. xliii, p. 190). There were inland occurrences of Long- tailed Duck in October/November/December, of Velvet Scoter in January and July, and of Red-breasted Merganser in May. A Grey Phalarope was seen at the Gorple Reservoir in October and two Avocets in September at Redmires Dam, Hebden Bridge, near the Lancs. /Yorks, border. Two Stone- Curlew were seen on the Wolds in May and one from August 14th to 25th at Spurn. A young Sabine’s Gull at Wintersett Reservoir, September 19-29 has already been recorded in our pages. A Long-tailed Skua was found dead at Helmsley in autumn. Black Guillemots were found at Filey and at Flamborough. The recoveries of ringed birds marked in Yorkshire or of others ringed abroad and recovered in Yorkshire have been numerous and of consderable interest. Of birds marked at Spurn a Linnet was recovered at La Rochelle, a Song-Thrush in N. Portugal, a Blackbird in Jutland, and at Spurn a Swedish Blackbird was caught and released. A nestling Lesser Redpoll marked in the West Riding was recovered in Belgium ; nestling Willow-Warblers from Shipley and Horsforth were both found in North Spain and a Merlin, ringed on June 25th, 1944, in the Pennines near the Lancs. /Yorks, border, at Rochefort, France, in March, 1950. 152 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Birds marked abroad and recovered in Yorkshire included : — a Swedish Peregrine Falcon, a Norwegian Heron, a Ruff from Swedish Lapland, a Herring-Gull from the Lofoten Islands and a Dunlin from Oland, Sweden. A.W.B. TYNE. N.H. Society of Northumberland, Durham and Newcastle-upon-Tyne : Orni- thological Report for 1950. (Ed. by G. W. Temperley). This very full and detailed report, containing observations and data from well over a hundred contributors, is evidence of the flourishing condition of this society. The records which Mr. Temperley picks out for special mention as items of unusual interest are ; A Serin at Westoe from November 12th to 26th, a new bird for the county of Durham. A small flock was seen in Yorkshire in December (see Yorkshire N.H. report for 1950) and this second record goes to show that in all probability the Durham bird was not an escape from captivity as was at first suggested. Great Grey Shrikes were seen in Coquetdale in January and April ; in April in Teesdale ; and on May 7th at Whitley Bay ; and on May 12th a Red-backed Shrike in Northumberland. Wintering Blackcaps were seen in Northumberland and Durham in Decem- ber, 1949 and on March 9th, November 12th, December 4th, 1950. On October 14th a Roller was seen at close quarters some 12 miles north of Newcastle by an observer who was familiar with the bird in Africa. On July 9th a Hobby appeared at Holy Island, when it was seen to take a Sky- Lark ; from February to May a Golden Eagle frequented the Cheviot district; and on May 28th an Osprey was fishing in the Tweed near Cornhill. Grey Phalaropes were reported in August and September. Nesting records : The Little Owl continues to spread northwards ; the Short-eared Owl has increased its breeding range ; the Montagu’s Harrier again nested successfully in west Durham ; a duck Goosander with a brood of seven young on June i8th on the Coquet ; Turtle-Doves in summer in both counties, but nests not found ; Kittiwakes built eleven nests at South Shields on window ledges overlooking the Ferry nearly two miles from the sea — twelve young reared. Other records include : a number of reports of Common and Rough-legged Buzzard ; a Red-crested Pochard duck at Gosforth (the chance of its being an "escape” cannot be disregarded (c/. antea, vol. xliv, p.29, xlv .p.105); a Red- necked Grebe in full breeding plumage from July 8th to i8th off Holy Island ; winter records of Common Sandpiper (Jan. 12th, R. Wear) and Greenshank (January 22nd, Beadnell) ; Glaucous Gulls on the coast in May, June and July. A.W.B. Fame Islands Committee of the National Trust : Ornithological Report for 1950. (Ed. by Miss Grace Watt). Details of the year’s birds on these islands are interesting, especially when records are compared with the systematic list of Fame Island birds published in Miss Watt’s book (January, 1952) on these islands. Thus no Carrion Crows nested in 1950, although there were 5 pairs in 1948. Nesting Eider Duck showed an increase over the previous four years — 430/50 in all. Thirty-two pairs of Roseate Terns nested, a slight increase, and there were more Sandwich Terns than at any time since 1939. Six pairs of House- Martins tried to nest on the Brownsman, the first time this species has attempted to breed on these islands. Several species were recorded for the first time on the islands : Bullfinches in March and May, Firecrest in March and September. Waxwing (November, 1949) and Little Stint in July and September. A Whooper Swan in October, 1949 and a Stone-Curlew at the Longstone lighthouse were each recorded for the second time only. A.W.B. H. F. <& G. WITHERBY LTD. announce that THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS Edited by P. A. D. HOLLOM WILL BE PUBLISHED JUNE /JULY PRICE 45s. NET STOP PRESS — The Editors have just been informed that the CAMARGUE RESERVE is still seriously flooded and is closed to visitors indefinitely. The Reserve authorities have issued an urgent request for intending visitors to defer coming. WANTED — An assistant at Skokholm Bird Observatory from mid-May until mid-October. Board and Lodging provided but no pay. Suitable for student awaiting National Service or University term. Apply to the Warden, Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. SKOKHOLM BIRD OBSERVATORY. — Accommodation is available for visitors from mid-March to mid-October on this bird island. Apply for particulars to the Warden, Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, new and reconditioned, a good range at reasonable prices. Approval allowed. Lists from Hatton Optical Co., Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES repaired, cleaned and adjusted. Send your instrument for estimate by return. Hatton Optical Co., Ltd. Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. BOOK SERVICE.— Out of print and rare ornithological works will be searched for and reported on. Natural History books bought. Please address communications to Book Dept., British Birds, 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. BRITISH BIRDS, BOUND VOLUMES.— The Publishers have now available only five sets of bound volumes. Nos. I to 12 and the Index to these 12 volumes. The charge is 30/- each volume and 10/- for the Index or £10 for the complete set of 12 volumes and the Index. In addition they will consider the purchase of back volumes (bound or unbound). BRITISH BIRDS BINDING. The Publishers are now able to undertake the binding of Volume XLIV at a charge of 8s. 6d. per volume. This charge also applies to any earlier volumes which subscribers wish to have bound. The parts to be bound should be sent, with remittance please, to British Birds (Binding), 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. THE “TOMMY TIT-CAN” NESTING BOX.—Something new. An inexpensive tin-plate nesting box with lift-off lid. Height 8" ; Width 5' diameter ; entrance hole l|" diameter. In olive-green or dark-brown finish. Price 5/6 each, post free from “ Tommy Tit-Can ” Nesting Boxes, 27, Inverleith Terrace. Edinburgh. Ask for descriptive leaflet. STOCKLAND, W. SOMERSET. Comfortable rooms, full board. Quantocks, Steart and Wembdon Marshes easy distance car ; available early June 6 gns. each. Box No. 401, British Birds, 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. A COLLECTION OF BOOKS on Bird Life. A choice Private Reference Collection of Sixty Volumes. General condition exceptional ; majority in original jackets. Alan W. Robertson, Ranworth, St. Lawrence Drive, Pinner, Middlesex. EXPERT TYPIST undertakes manuscripts. Ornithological work a speciality. Recommendations : Mrs. Prynne, Minton, Pole Barn Lane, Frinton-on-Sea, Essex. FAIR ISLE BIRD OBSERVATORY — Comfortable accommodation is available at the hostel at Fair Isle, Shetland from May to October. Terms^ 6 guineas per week. SUMMER COURSES, with emphasis on field-work, in July and August. For full programme and prospectus write Director, Fair Isle Bird Observatory, by Lerwick, Shetland. Tel. : Fair Isle 8. BUZZARD, Curlew and Raven all nest within a mile of the house. Why not study them in comfort from the Bancyrhyd Guest House, Newport, Pern.? 4-berth caravan also available till 31st July. Special terms for early visitors. SUFFOLK COAST. Close to Minsmere and good centre for Walberswick and Havergate. Comfortable beds and good food. Reference books. Terms very moderate. Miss M. S. van Oostveen, Hill Cottage, Westleton, nr. Saxmundham. Printed in Gt. Britain by Witherby & Co., J.td., London, W.C.I. Published by II. F. & G. WITHFKliY, LTD., 5 Warwick Court, W.C. I BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST Monthlj 25. 6J. yearly 25s MAY, 19^2 VoL. XLV. No. s Published hj H. F. 8l G. Witherhj Ltd. BRITISH BIRDS EDITORS. E. M. Nicholson and W. B. Alexander - A. W. Boyd P. A. D. Hollom - N. F. Ticehurst J. D. Wood PURCHASED -BMAYiae Contents of Number 5, Vol. XLV, May, 1952. PAGE Breeding Biology of the Spotted Flycatcher. By D. Summers-Smith 153 Some observations on Quail during the breeding season of 1951. By W. D. Campbell ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... iby Studies of some species rarely photographed. XXXIX. The Turn- stone. Photographed by Ralph Chislett, Guy B. Farrar, Eric Hosking and Dr. F. N. H. Maidment ... ... ... ... ... ... lyr Census of Common Sand pipers in the Sedbergh area, 1951. By E. J. Cuthbertson, G. T. Foggitt and G. A. Bell ... ... ... 171 The nesting of a pair of Blue Tits. By G. A. and M. A. Arnold. ... 175 Obituary: Cecil Robert Vesey Stoney ... ... ... ... ... i8o Reviews : — The Study of Instinct. By N. Tinbergen ... ... ... ... 182 Letter : — Registration of colour-marking schemes (Dr. Bruce Campbell) ... 183 The Land of the Loon (G. K. Yeates) ... ... ... ... ... 1S3 1 84 Books Received BRITJSHiJBiRDS Number 5, Vol. ^LV, May, 1952. BREEDING BIOLOGY OF THE SPOTTED FLYCATCHER.* BY D. Summers-Smith Introduction The information on the breeding of the Spotted Flycatcher [Muscicapa striata) which is analysed in this paper has been obtained from a number of sources, the most important being the British Trust for Ornithology. Altogether some data on 548 nests were available as shown below : Before 1939 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 Totals British Trust for Ornithology I1933-50) ... 3 I 5 8 10 23 17 21 24 17 31 41 49 250 Whitaker (1893- 1946) 76 5 3 2 2 2 4 5 2 — — — — loi Owen (1935 and 1948-1950) ... 4 — — — — — — — — — 50 55 78 187 Lewis (1937) ...3 — — — — — — — — — — — — 3 Ryves (1943 and 1950) _____ !______ 2 3 Riviere (1949) ... — — — — — ■ — ■ — — — — — 4 — 4 Totals 86 6 8 10 12 26 21 26 26 17 81 100 129 548 The Nest Records Scheme organised by the British Trust for Ornithology was begun in 1939 though there are a few records for earlier years ; in this members of the Trust fill in a card for each nest they discover giving details of dates of laying, hatching, numbers of eggs, etc., and these are subsequently deposited at the Edward Grey Institute. By far the greatest number of Spotted Flycatcher nests recorded in this scheme have been found in gardens or near by and so have been discovered early in the nesting cycle and the sub- sequent operations noted in some detail. The late A. Whitaker deposited a copy of his personal records in the Edward Grey Institute, and though these include details of one hundred Spotted Flycatcher nests the information given is much less detailed and only a limited number of nest records could be used. In addition Mr. J. H. Owen has very generously supplied data on nests he has recorded in Montgomeryshire from 1948 to 1950. The other information noted above has been obtained from published literature. Where there is any ambiguity in the data the information has not been used in the analysis. For example where there is only one visit to a nest the clutch size cannot be known with certainty; this is also the case where the nest has not been found until after the beginning of incubation or during the nestling period, as eggs or young may have disappeared prior to discovery. Again unless a visit is paid to the nest at least once per day during hatching or when the young are leaving the nest the uncertainty in the time that this occurs becomes too great. This means that the actual number * A Publication of the British Trust for Ornithology. 164 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. of nests on which information is available for each of the following sections is somewhat reduced ; for instance in the analysis of the breeding season 397 records have been used and in most of the other sections the number has been further reduced. The method adopted in choosing suitable data is discussed in each section with an indica- tion of the errors that are likely to be introduced. Breeding season In the analysis of the breeding season the date of completion of the clutch has been used. The numbers of clutches completed in seven day periods from the beginning of May onwards are shown in Table I. The records have been divided into three regions : — South-east England ; South-west England and Wales ; and North England and Scotland, each region accounting for about one third of the records. The boundary between North and South has been chosen as the southern boundaries of Cheshire, Derby, Notts, and Lines, and the boundary between South-east and South-west as the eastern boundaries of Warwick, Glos., Wilts, and Dorset. Table I. Breeding season Clutch completed S.E. S.W. N. Total clutches % clutches 0/ /o clutches /o clutches 0/ /o April 30-May 5 I 0.7 — __ I 0-3 May 6-12 I 0.7 — — — — I 0-3 May 13-19 I 0.7 — — I 0.8 2 0-5 May 20-26 10 6.8 I I 9-3 6 4-5 27 6.8 May 2 7- June 2 23 15.6 16 135 30 22.7 69 17.4 June 3-9 43 29.2 30 25-4 34 25.8 107 27.0 June 10-16 ... 22 14.9 21 1 7.8 26 19.7 69 17.4 June 17-23 13 8.8 10 8.5 9 6.8 32 8.0 June 24-30 ... 7 4.8 6 ,51 6 4-5 19 4.8 July 1-7 7 4.8 9 7.8 8 6.1 24 6.0 July 8-14 6 4.2 9 7.8 10 7.6 25 6-3 July 15-21 ... 8 5-4 4 3-4 — — 12 3-2 July 22-28 4 2.7 2 1-7 r 0.8 7 1.8 July 29- Aug. 4 T 0.7 — — I 0.8 2 0-5 Totals ... 147 118 132 397 In the case of the Nest Record cards and also of records from other sources the actual date of completion of clutch is not always known. In including these data the following steps have been employed : (i) if a record is given of the incomplete clutch together with the subsequent size of the complete clutch then the date of completion has been obtained by assuming an egg-laying rate of one per day ; (ii) if the date of hatching or departure of young from the nest is given then the clutch completion date has been obtained by subtracting thirteen or twenty-six days respectively ; (iii) in cases where the nest was found with eggs or young but no informa- tion is available about hatching or time of leaving nest then the completion date has been obtained by subtracting six or nineteen days respectively from the date of finding, though where some indication of the state of incubation or age of young is given this VOL. XLV.] BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 166 has been taken into account. The estimated dates are probably correct to within a day or two and as seven day totals are used in the table very little error is introduced in this way, which eliminates personal bias towards any period. The information in Table I is shown graphically in Figure i : 30 r ’rt 0> u _3 u 20 0> &0 (9 W c a; u L. o Q. 10 B •I On*. \\ < I :l :1 © 1/ I ;i :% •7 •/ \ l\ •V •••X'” S.E. England --0-- S.W. England and Wales N. England and Scotland f X 0V / ' \- y . . • • * * * H • \ 0 -N-.9 16 23 30 13 20 27 II 18 25 May June July Aug Two interesting points emerge from this : (i) The curves from the different regions are all bimodal ; the first peak occurs during June 3rd-9th, 25-30% of all nests being completed at this time. The second peak is much less marked and occurs during the first half of July. This shows that while the Spotted Flycatcher may be double-brooded in Britain this pro- bably only occurs with about 20% of pairs. It should however, be pointed out that the enthusiasm for nest finding is greatest early in the season and thus a smaller proportion of late than of early nests may be recorded. About 50% of all clutches are laid 156 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. between May 27th and June i6th. (ii) There is no evidence to show that there is any difference in the breeding season between the different regions of the country selected (except possibly that a very few nests may occur in the South-east region in early May before nests are found in the West and North). This is not surprising with such a late arrival as the Spotted Flycatcher ; conditions cannot be much less favourable in the North than in the South by the time that breeding begins. The Spotted Flycatcher seems to be very susceptible to adverse weather conditions (Ryves & Ryves, 1950) and it would be interest- ing to see if this would show in the records for any one year ; unfortunately there are, as yet, insufficient data to test this point. The rather flatter first peak for the North region suggests a high proportion of repeat clutches and this may be due possibly to desertion caused by adverse weather conditions which are more probable in the North at the end of May and the beginning of June. Clutch size For the determination of clutch size and its variation with the season only those clutches known to have been completed have been used ; i.e. clutches in which the same number of eggs has been recorded on two visits separated by more than twenty-four hours. The effect of the loss of odd eggs due to predation before the discovery of the nest has been ignored and all clutches, whether fresh or partly incubated, have been included. Lack (1948) has shown in the case of the Robin {Erithacus rubeatla) that this makes only a negligible difference. The date of clutch-completion was derived as already indicated. As before, the records have been divided into three regions ; the seasonal variation in clutch size is shown in Table II. Table II. Seasonal variation in clutch size (a) South-east England Clutch Clutches of Average completed i 2 3 4 5 6 Total clutch size .■\pril zg-May 5-.- I I — May 0-12 T 1 — May 13-iq I I — May 20-26 I () 4 1 1 4-3 May 2 7- June 2 ... 7 I I I 19 4-7 June 3-9 4 lO 20 I 41 4.4 June T0-16 3 1 I 8 '2 2 4.2 June 17-23 - 7 3 12 41 June 24-30 6 6 4.0 July 1-7 ... 2 I I 2 6 2-5 July 8-14 2 5 7 3-7 July 15-21 2 2 3 7 31 July 22-28 '■> 2 — Total No. ... 2 3 17 t>4 48 2 136 4.i7» % 1-5 2 13 47 35 1-5 ♦Standard error of mean -f- 0.077. VOL. XLv.] BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 167 (6) South-west England and Wales Clutch Clutches of Average completed - 3 4 5 Total clutch size May 20-26 3 4 7 4.6 May 27-June 2 6 8 14 4.6 June 3-9 3 10 9 22 4-3 June 10-16 I 9 9 19 4.4 June 17-23 I 4 2 7 4.1 June 24-30 I I 3 5 3-4 July 1-7 1 3 4 3-8 July 8-14 ... 2 4 6 3-7 July 15-21 1 3 (3-7) July 22-28 I I Total No. ... 2 10 44 32 88 4.21* % ••• 2 II 50 3d ""Standard error of mean ±0.075 ORTH England and Scotland Clutch Clutches of Average completed 2 3 4 5 6 Total clutch size May 20-26 I 2 3 (4-7) May 27-June 2 9 I 2 I 2 2 4.6 June 3-9 I 2 17 I 21 4.6 June 10-16 1 8 7 16 4-4 June 17-23 ... I 2 I 4 4.0 June 24-30 ... 5 5 4.0 July 1-7 I I 3 > 7 3-9 July 8-14 1 I 4 I 7 3-d Total No. 2 5 34 42 2 85 4.44* 0/ / 0 2 6 40 50 2 ""Standard error of mean ±0.077. (d) Great Britain Clutch Clutches of A\-eragc completed i ■> 3 4 5 6 Total clutcli size Apr. 29-May 5 ... I 1 — May 6-12 I I — May 13-19 I I — May 20-26 1 10 10 21 4.4 May 27-Junc 2 ... > > 30 2 54 4.6 June 3-9 8 28 46 2 84 4-5 June 10-16 5 28 ^4 57 •!-.5 June 17-23 4 13 6 ^3 4.0 June 24-30 1 1 14 16 3-8 July 1-7 ... 2 2 >3 8 2 17 3-4 July 8-14 I 5 13 I 20 3-7 July 15-21 2 4 5 I t 3-3 J uly 22-28 I 2 3 (^•7) Total No. ... 2 7 33 142 121 4 309 4-^5* /q 2 1 1 46 40 I * Standard error of mean ±0.044 The average clutch size is plotted as a function of the seven day periods in Figure 2. It remains at about 4.5 from May 20th to I une 9th and then decreases steadily to a value below 3 by the end 158 BRITISH BIRDS. VoL. xlv. of July. 85% of the clutches recorded had four or five eggs ; out of over 300 clutches only four had six eggs, two one egg and seven two eggs : small clutches all occurred late in the breeding season. 5r 2 23 30 6 n 20 27 4 M is 25 May June July Figure 2. Variation in average clutch size with season. Figure 3. Regional variation in average clutchsize with season. While there is no significant difference in clutch size between South-east and South-west England, the average clutch size is significantly larger in the North. This is clearly shown in Figure 3 VOL. XLv]. BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 159 where the seasonal variation in average clutch size is plotted for the North and the combined South regions. Owen’s (1948-50) data from Montgomeryshire for 1949 and 1950 (not included in the above analysis) give an average clutch size of 4.1 (55 nests) and 4.2 (78 nests) respectively ; these agree closely with the value for South- west England and Wales derived in Table 11(b). By assuming that most first clutches are complete by the end of June and that most second clutches are laid after this as is indicated in Table I (d), we can derive an average value of 4.4 eggs for first clutches and 3.5 eggs for second clutches. Nesting success Complete data are available for 267 clutches and 197 broods ; 819 eggs hatched out of 1,052 laid, and from 749 eggs that hatched 609 young flew. This means that 78% of eggs hatched and that 81% of the young that hatched flew from the nest. An alternative method of estimating success is by complete nests ; in this case we get closely comparable figures for the percentages of clutches and broods that were more than 50% successful, which are respectively 81% and 82%. The figures for the success of nestlings may be a slight overestimate as the nests are in most cases not visited more than once per day and it is assumed that, if on one visit the young are almost ready to fly and on the next the nest is empty, then the young have flown successfully. This is necessary, as so few records are available of young birds being seen actually leaving the nest, though it may result in the inclusion of some young which sub- sequently failed to do so. The data can be analysed in more detail so that we can examine nesting -success in relation to season and clutch size ; this is shown in Tables III and IV respectively; Table III. Effect of season on nesting success {a) Success Clutch completed OF Eggs Clutches Total eggs Total hatched % of clutches which % Hatched failed completely May 46 208 150 72 17 June 164 711 560 79 13 July ... 40 133 109 82 15 (6) Success of young % success including/excluding % of broods Clutch Total Total to broods which failed which failed completed Broods young leave nest completely completely May 35 143 121 85 93 9 June 129 502 403 80 93 14 July 33 104 85 82 96.5 15 (c) Overall SUCCESS Clutch completed % Success May... 61 June 63 July 67 160 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV The hatching success appears to show a significant increase with advance of season. There is no doubt that this is connected with robbing of eggs by small boys which takes place principally in May whereas later in the season interest in “ bird-nesting ” has waned ; however, this effect may obscure the effect of chilling of eggs which is more probable early in the year and might also account for a lower success at this period. The position of young is rather more obscure. Percentage success is shown in Table III (b) for the total young hatched both including and excluding the figures for broods which failed completely. Excluding the effect of predation (almost all cases of total failure are due to predation) the success is the same for May and June and apparently increases for July ; this, however, may not be a seasonal effect per se, but could be due to the different distribution of brood sizes in the three monthly periods, if there is a correlation between brood size and success (this point is discussed later). The effect of brood size can be eliminated by considering the success of individual brood sizes. There is no significant variation of success with season for b/3 and b/4, but the figures available are rather small so that this point cannot be settled without further information. Table IV. Effect of clutch and brood size (a) Success of Eggs /O Success including/excluding % of clutches Clutch Total Total clutchei j which failed which failed size eggs hatched completely completely I 2 I — — 2 10 8 (80) — — 3 81 54 97 90 2b 4 496 394 79 92.5 14 5 445 349 78 88 1 1 6 18 13 (72) — — (6) Success of Young % Success including/excluding 'Jo of clinches Brood Total Total to clutches whicli failed which failed size young leave nest completely completely I 3 3 — — — -> 38 32 (84) ■ — 3 123 93 7(3 94 19 4 344 284 83 90 14 5 235 191 81 91 1 1 6 6 6 — — Table IV shows that both hatching and nestling success is apparentl}^ greater for clutches and broods of three and four than for those of five. In the case of eggs this may reflect a greater proportion of infertile eggs in c/5, while in the case of young it would seem that in Britain broods of five can only be reared successfully when the conditions are very favourable. To eliminate any seasonal effect the success of the different brood sizes can be examined for a restricted period. This is shown in Table V for the period June ist to 13th when a maximum amount of information is available. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 161 Table V. Relation between brood size and success. Clutches COMPLETED JUNE I-I3 % Success including/excluding broods that failed Brood size Total young completely 3 51 78 95 4 96 8r 97 5 1 10 74 90 Again a lower success is shown for b/5. It is of some interest to investigate the cause of failure in both eggs and young. This is known for only a proportion of cases. However, we can get some idea of the frequency of the various causes by using reduced totals as shown in Table VI. Table VI. Cause of failure of eggs Clutch No. in % in size/ Total which which Total month eggs cause cause eggs Reduced Human completed failed known known laid total Addled interference Predators 4 5 102 96 74 62 72 65 496 445 360 290 No. 30 31 % 6 10 No. % No. % May 58 37 72 208 150 11 7 12 8 14 9 June ... 109 72 711 510 43 8 17 3 49 10 July ... 24 II 46 133 65 7 10 — — 4 6 All nests 233 157 67 1052 700 61 9 29 4 67 10 The table clearly shows the effect of egg robbing by boys which accounts for 8% of eggs laid in May but for none of those laid in July. There is little to show that the proportion of infertile eggs is related to the season, though it does seem possible that the propor- tion is higher in c/5 than in c/4. Predation seems to be somewhat reduced in July. Apart from human beings the following have been recorded as predators of eggs and young in the nest. Birds : Magpie {Pica pica), Jay {Garrulus glandarius), and Little Owl {Athene noctua) ; mammals : Grey Squirrel {Sciurus carolinensis). Rat {Rattus notvegicus), and Stoat {Mustela erminea). Other causes of loss of young are due to drowning and to overcrowding in the nest resulting in birds either falling out or being squashed. Rate of laying Most records show that eggs are laid at the rate of one per day, with usually an interval of 24 hours. There are, however, a few cases where apparently a day has been missed though it is possible in these that an egg may have been stolen without the observer’s knowledge. On the other hand there is one record of an interval of only 17 hours between the laying of two eggs. We have only records of the actual time of laying in eight nests ; in six of these the eggs were laid before 06.30 G.M.T., in one about 09.00 and the other about 16,00, 162 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. Incubation and nestling periods Moreau (1946) has indicated the difficulties in estimating the incubation and nestling (fledging) period when visits are paid to the nest only once per day as is usually the case with observers completing Nest Record cards. It is possible in this way that an error of i i day may be introduced. Many records show that incubation begins before the last egg is laid. It is possible in most cases that this is only casual and it is thus not possible to determine the exact start of incubation without more extensive field observa- tion. For this reason it is more satisfactory to choose arbitrarily the day of completion of the clutch as the start of incubation. In many cases hatching takes place over two days ; where this occurs it is reasonable to assume that the last egg laid is the last to hatch (Gibb (1950) has established this for the Great Tit {Pams major) : in these nests the period from the clutch completion date until the last egg has hatched, which gives an accurate period for the last egg, has been used. Pro\dded a large enough sample is available reasonably accurate incubation and nestling periods should be obtained in this way, and, of course, the possible error of i i day for any individual record will be greatly reduced. Table VII gives the incubation data for the three monthly periods as well as for the different clutch sizes. Table VH. Incubation period No. of nests with incubation period of : Av. inciib. 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 days Total period Clutches TMay 2 2 10 6 — — I 21 13.2 completed S June 2 2 10 27 15 3 3 I 63 13.2 in LJuiy — — 4 6 2 I — — 13 13.0 f 2 — — — , — — I — — I — Clutch 1 5 — — 2 3 2 - I — 8 134 size — 2 9 ^4 8 2 I - — 46 131 2 2 5 16 J3 I I 2 42 133 All nests 2 4 16 43 ^3 4 3 2 97 13.2 There is no variation in incubation period either with the time of year or with clutch size. The mean value of 13.2 days agrees well with the figure of 12-14 days given by Jourdain (1938). 15% of nests lie outside the limits he gives, extending from as few as ten to as many as seventeen days, but in most cases these are almost certainly due to the imperfect method used in recording the start of incubation. It is less easy to determine the nestling period ; in 38% of the nests hatching is recorded as taking place over two days (in three nests over three days), whereas in 15% of nests the young did not all fly on the same day. We can thus choose as the nestling period in these cases either a mean period or the maximum or minimum number of days, which are also accurate for certain of the nestlings. The data for the mean nestling period is given in Table VUl. In addition the figures for the minimum and maximum averages are also shown. Data from nests where it is known that the young VOL. XLV.] BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 163 • flew prematurely, due to the presence of the observer, have not been included, though, of course, this is not known for all the nests in which it occurred. Table VIII. Nestling period No. of nests with nestling period of ; Av. Nestl. Per. lo II 12 13 14 15 16 17 days Total Mean Min. Max. Clutches 1 'May — 0.5 4 9-5 3 3 I I 22 13-5 13-4 13-6 completed < June 2 6 8 15-528.5 8 3 - 71 13-4 13.2 13.6 in July — 2 f I I 4-5 8 1-5 17 13-4 13.2 13-5 2 — 2 3 2 5-5 0.5 I — 14 13.2 I3-I 13-3 Brood 3 I 0-5 45 4 II-5 3 0.5 — 25 13-4 13.2 13.6 size 4 0.53.5 2 II. 5 16.5 7-5 2 0.5 44 13-7 13-5 13-8 5—2 35 12 6 0.50.50.5 25 I3-I 12. 9 13-4 6 0.50.5 I — — — All nests 2 8.5 13 29-5 39-5 12.54 I 1 10 13-4 13.2 13.6 There is apparently no variation in the nestling period with the time of year, nor does it appear that there is any correlation between brood-size and nestling period, though the figure for b/5 may be shorter than for any other brood size. Jourdain (1938) gives 12-13 days for the normal nestling (fledging) period with occasional cases of ii or 14-15 days. The overall average found here is 13.4 days, about a day greater than the value quoted above. The maximum and minimum average values of 13.6 and 13.2 days respectively differ very little from the mean value. The long records of 16 and 17 days may have been due to unfavourable weather conditions and the attendant difficulties of obtaining food. The nestling period was 12-13 in only 39% of the cases recorded ; in 6% of the nests the period was outside the limits given by Jourdain. We can consider in more detail those nests where the hatching or the departure of the young from the nest took place over more than one day, though of course it must be emphasized that where a period of two days is recorded this may in fact be because the nest was only visited once during the day. The data is summarized in Table IX. From this it appears that prolonged hatching is more Table IX. Cases of prolonged hatching and departure of young Clutches Broods Total Prolonged Hatching Total Prolonged Departure Clutches laid in Clutch/ brood size May 21 No. 4 °/ /o 19 22 No. 3 % 14 June 63 27 43 71 10 14 July 13 6 46 17 4 24 I — — — I — — 2 I I — 14 — 0 3 8 2 (25) 25 2 8 4 46 20 43 44 7 16 5 42 14 33 25 7 28 6 — — — I 1 — 97 37 38 no 17 15 Total 164 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. frequent in the later nests ; on the other hand there does not seem to be any dependence on clutch size. Cases of prolonged departure of young from the nest are much less common. This is probably because the departure of some members of the brood stimulates the others to leave the nest; however, the frequency with which this occurs does seem to increase with the size of the brood. It is probable that prolonged hatching occurs more often in the nests where incubation begins before the last egg is laid and suggests that this may occur more frequently with later clutches. It is of interest to notice that Gibb (1950) has found for the Great Tit, that, whereas incubation begins earlier, relative to the time of clutch completion, with the advance of the season, it is not dependent on clutch size. Nests The sites for 197 nests were as follows: Against walls 117 6o°'o Trees, in holes ... 25] in ivy in fork ::: 3-2% on stump 8 j Nest Boxes 10 5% Old nests of other species 6 3% By far the greatest proportion of nests are on walls, usually in ivy or creepers or bushes trained against walls. The only other important site iS in trees. Because of the method of obtaining the results (most records coming from gardens and the neighbourhood of houses) these figures are probably biased in favour of walls. The use of old nests of other species has been noticed quite frequently ; the nests of fourteen different species have been reported as used for this purpose (Jourdain (1917) and this investigation). The same nest is not infrequently used for a second clutch though this is not invariably the case. The distribution of nests at various heights above the ground is given in Table X. The greatest number occur at 5-7 feet. Table X. Heights of nests above ground Height above ground in ft. 1-3 3-5 5-7 7-9 9-11 11-13 13-15 15-17 >17 No. of nests ... ... 7 25 33 27 16 8 5 38 This may be rather a low value as lower nests, being easier to observe will be recorded more frequently. Discussion of results In species which are regularly double-brooded it has been found in Britain that there is a tendency for clutch size to rise to a maxi- mum in early June and then to decrease (Lack, 1947). This has been shown for the Yellow Bunting {Emberiza citrinella) (Parkhurst and Lack, 1946), the Robin (Lack, 1946 and 1948) and the Song- Thrush {Turdus ericetorum) (Silva, 1949). According to Lack ( 1 947) this is connected with the day length which, being at a maximum in June, enables sufficient food to be collected to feed a larger brood, assuming of course that suitable food is available in plentiful supply VoL. XLV.] BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 165 at this period. The Spotted Flycatcher is a late nester, clutches not being completed in the majority of cases till late May or early June, so that we do not find an increase in clutch size to a maximum at the beginning of June ; Fig. 2 and Table II indicate that clutches completed from May 20-26th may be slightly smaller than those completed from May 27th to June 9th though the values are not significantly different ; after this period, however, the average clutch size decreases steadily as happens with the other species mentioned above. The other influence of day length, the increase of clutch size with latitude, is also found ; the overall average clutch size in the north of England and Scotland being 4.4 eggs against a value of 4.2 for the south. That this is not merely the effect of a larger propor- tion of second clutches in the south, is indicated in Fig. 3, which shows that a higher average clutch size is maintained throughout the breeding season in the north. This increase is shown in Table II as an increase in the proportion of c/5’s in the north ; there is nothing to show that c/6’s are more common in the north than in the south ; clutches of this size are, however, extremely rare throughout the country, though according to Lovenskiold (1947) they are not infrequent further north in Norway. The successes of both eggs and young are appreciably higher than the values obtained for the Robin and Song-Thrush in Britain: — Success of Overall Eggs Young success Spotted Flycatcher • 78% 81% 63% Robin (Lack, 1948) 71% 77% 55% Song-Thrush (Silva, 1949) 71% 78% 55% It may be that the sample used is biased in favour of successful nests, though this is unlikely as it has been obtained in the same way as that for the Song-Thrush, investigated by Silva, so it is possible that this is a genuine result. It is tempting to relate this higher success to the shorter breeding period of the Spotted Flycatcher, but there are insufficient data for all three species to determine whether there is a real variation of success within the normal breeding season. Both Lack (1948) and Silva (1949) found an apparent decrease in the nestling period for larger broods in the Robin and Song-Thrush respectively, though they consider that this was not a real effect but due to the seasonal distribution of larger broods. The same ten- dency has been found for the Spotted Flycatcher, and, though the results are not statistically significant, it seems possible that the nestling period does in fact decrease for larger broods ; the effect in the present case cannot be explained as a seasonal one. The reason for such an effect, if it is proved, is somewhat obscure, though it may possibly be connected with the greater activity that pre- sumably occurs in nests with large broods. The amount of data on a particular species that is made available 166 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. by a co-operative inquiry, such as the Nest Records Scheme of The British Trust for Ornithology, opens up a new field in the attainment of comprehensive information. Not only can records be obtained on a scale beyond that of individual resources, but also they are received from all parts of the country and, because of the large number of observers concerned, are largely free from bias. It is to be hoped that inquiries of this nature will receive greater support in the future, because it is only with the accumulation of data that information of real value is obtained. In spite of there being records available on over five hundred nests of the Spotted Flycatcher it is clear that still more records are required to clear up some of the more subtle points, such as the effect of annual variations in weather conditions, the influence of brood size and season on nestling success, and the influence of brood size on nestling period. Detailed factual information of this sort also provides a yardstick whereby long-term changes may be evaluated in the future. It is possible for instance that, if the present amelioration of climate continues, changes may occur in clutch size ; this effect would probably only be small and might not be detected without accurate information being available over a period of several years. Summary 1. The normal laying period for the Spotted Flycatcher in Britain e.xtends from mid-May to the end of July, a small number of pairs being double-brooded. 2. The average clutch size decreases from about 4.5 eggs at the end of May to less than 3 eggs by the end of July. A slightly, but significantly, higher average clutch size occurs in North England and Scotland than in the rest of England and Wales throughout the breeding season. 3. It is probable that the Spotted Flycatcher can only successfully rear a brood of five young in Britain when the conditions are very favourable. 4. No significant variation in nesting success with season has been detected. 5. The average incubation period is 13.2 days and the nestling period 13.4 days ; this latter figure is about one day greater than that given in The Handbook, 6. The situation of nests is discussed briefly. Acknowledgments The author would like to express his thanks to the Director of the Edward Grey Institute for access to the Whitaker records, to Mr. J. H. Owen who very generously made available a large amount of his unpublished data on the Spotted Flycatcher, and not least to members of the British Trust for Ornithology who have completed the Nest Record Cards for the Spotted Flycatcher and the Scientific Advisory Committee of The British Trust for Ornithology who made the cards available for consultation. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING OF SPOTTED FLYCATCHER. 167 Thanks are also due to Mr. J. A. Gibb who read the manuscript and offered his most helpful criticism. References Gibb, J. (1950). “ The Bfeeding Biology of the Great and Blue Titmice." 92; 507-539. JouRDAiN, F. C. R. (1917). ‘‘ Curious nesting sites of Spotted Flycatcher.” British Birds, xi : 87. JouRDAiN, F. C. R. (1938). In The Handbook of British Birds. Witherby et al. Vol. I, p. 301. Lack, D. (1946). " Clutch and Brood Size in the Robin.” British Birds, xxxix : 98-109, 130-135. Lack, D. (1947). “ The Significance of Clutch Size.” Ibis, 89 ; 302-352. -Lack, D. (1948). ” Further Notes on Clutch and Brood Size in the Robin.” British Birds, xli : 98-104, 130-137. Lewis, S. (1937). ' Some domestic habits of a pair of Spotted Flycatchers.” British Birds, xxxi : 194. Lovenskiold, H. L. (1947). Handbok over Norges Bugler. Oslo. Vol. 2. Moreau, R. E. (1946). ” The Recording of Incubation and Fledging Periods.” British Birds, xxxix : 66-70. Owen, J. H. (1934). " Notes on breeding of a pair of Spotted Flycatchers.” British Birds, xxix; 177. Owen, J. H. (1948-50). Unpublished personal records. Parkhurst, R. and Lack, D. (1946). ” The Clutch Size of the Yellow Hammer.” British Birds, xxxix : 358-364. Riviere, B. B. (1949). ” Some Observations on the Nesting Habits of the Spotted Flycatcher.” Wild Bird Protection in Norfolk, 1949 : 21-26. Ryves, B. H. (1943). ” Some Notes on the Breeding of a Pair of Spotted Flycatchers.” British Birds, xxxvii : 82-84. Ryves, Lt.-Col. and Mrs. B. H. (1950). " The Breeding Habits of the Spotted Flycatcher.” 20th Report of the Cornwall Bird-Watching and Preser- vation Society. Silva, E. T. (1949). ” Nest Records of the Song-Thrush.” British Birds, xlii : 97-1 1 1. Whitaker, A. (1893-1946). Personal records deposited in Alexander Library,' Edward Grey Institute, Oxford. SOME OBSERVATIONS ON QUAIL DURING THE BREEDING SEASON OF 1951. BY W. D. Campbell. Location and Habitat The following observations on Quail {Coturnix coturnix) were made at Cholsey, near Wallingford, Berkshire, in the summer of 1951. The habitat was corn, with the exception of two large patches of mature red clover, and extended over some 150 acres of the S.E. face of a ridge, from 200 to 240 ft. above sea-level. The absence of hedges or fences, and the presence of a road and several tracks for farm vehicles intersecting or bounding the fields, did much to facilitate attempts to locate calling birds. 168 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Date of Arrival In mid-June the farmer, who takes a sportsman’s interest in his Partridges {Perdix perdix), flushed a pair of birds which puzzled him because he recognised that they were not young birds of this species ; subsequently, no doubt because of his habitual daily rides over his land, accompanied by retrievers, he saw more Quail than any other observer, and thus became certain that the first two birds were of this species. I myself had passed and returned through this area almost dail}' since early spring, usually between 4.30 and 7.00 a.m. G.M.T. — a very favourable time for hearing Quail — but I heard none until June 30th. The shepherd, who had a flock folded on the clover, also first noted the call on this date. [It is worthy of note that this man immediately realised that the sound was something new in his experience, although he had fol- lowed his calling in these fields for 30 years.] Numbers On July 3rd two separate males were calling, about a quarter of a mile apart. The shepherd stated that a third bird had by this time established itself in the clover where his sheep were. By July 12th four males were calling regularly from fairly definite territories, and calls were heard twice from a site so far removed from the others as to indicate the presence of a fifth bird. On July 13th and for some weeks subsequently, another male was calling at a lower site about i mile to the eastward. Calls Male. — The well-known ventriloquial effect of the male call renders direction-finding by ear difficult, but on each of nine occasions when the proximity of the road or tracks made approach possible, 1 found that the usual series of “ wet-my-lips ” was invariably preceded by the nasal-guttural call. The “rowow ” of Naumann {Handbook, vol. v, p. 251), if the vowel sounds are as in English “ how now,” is a good rendering of this hoarse sound at the distance when it first becomes audible, but at close quarters there is more to be heard. The French version of Bailly (Moreau, antea, vol. xliv, p. 269) lacks the guttural effect which to my ear is characteristic. My rendering is ” miaow-ch- wah ” — the ‘‘ miaow ” somewhat leisurely, the ” ch ” a guttural aspirate, and the final “ wah ” very emphatic and abrupt. Female.— P. E. Moreau kindly provided me with a call-pipe of French manufacture, procured in an Algerian bazaar. This con- sists essentially of a brass whistle with a leather concertina-type bellows. It produces a “ peep ” approximating in pitch to the highest ‘‘ E ” on the pianoforte keyboard. Until August 7th my calling experiments had been based on the assumption that the female’s disyllable must coincide with the last two notes of the male’s ti'isyllable. (Ue Bout, quoted by Moreau, British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 37 Turnstone (Arenaria interpres). Ol.\nu. Sweden. {Photographed by R.m.ph Chislett) British Birds, \'ol. xlv, PI. 38. 'I'uKNsroNK {Areuaria iitterprcs). ()i..\nd. S\v1';i)KN. [Photographed f>v K.m.i-ii Ciiisi.iiT'r). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 39. Turnstone {Arenaria interpres), nesting in thrift. {Photographed by R.\lph Chislett). I URNSTONE (Arenaria inter pres) , nesting on shoreside. {Plwtographcd by Rai.i’ii Ciuslett). British Birds, ^■ol. xlv, PI. 41. UJ a: 5 (/) u EG U ca D H c/5 w w W ^ Q < X . X ttj < O tl, < D hJ a- H c/5 D o D << CO >■ P o •o a. 55 2 Ui z o H c/5 Z X D British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 43 • Irtish. Birds, \'ol. xl\-, PI. 44. Turnstones (Are)iayiu iiitcrpres) , with some Redsh.\nks [Triuga totauiis), .\eter the TURN OF THE TIUE. HiLBRE ISLAND, CHESHIRE. {Photographed by Eric Hoskino). VOL. XLV.] OBSERVATIONS ON QUAIL IN 1951. 169 yUAIL-PITE FROM ALGERIA. AcTUAL .SIZK. lUitea, vol. xiiv, p. 270). This produced no conclusive results. On August 7th, by which date calling was becoming very infrequent, I had been vainly making double calls of various rhythms, when I chanced on one which produced an immediate response. It was timed to coincide with the first and last syllables of “ wet-my-lips ” — “ peep-(pause)-peep.” At once there came from the corn near by a very urgent and excited “ miaowchwah,” repeated six or seven times, in perfect synchronization with my double call. The illusion that I myself was producing the sound by working the pipe-bellows was very strong, and suggested “ a wheezy pumping ” as an apt description of this call. As I continued to make my call the answer- ing bird suddenly changed to a very distant normal trisyllable, but still in time with my calls. On the next day my calling produced the preliminary response repeated twice only, followed by a burst of normal calling, at first sounding fairly close, but suddenl}^ becoming distant. On August loth, during a survey of the area from 4.30-6.30 a.m. G.M.T., no calling was heard. At 6.30 a.m. I tried the hypothetical female 'call, and at once received the “wet-my-lips” reply, again the “ close ” followed by the sudden “ distant,” effect. At 2 p.m. on the same day, but at a distinct territory, 1 obtained an exactly similar result. My impression on these two last dates is that the answering males were much deeper in the corn than was the bird on the first successful occasion ; but since I had come to regard the audibility of the preliminary call as the only criterion of propin- quity, the validity of this impression may be doubtful. The performance of the male on August 7th certainly gives some support to Bailly’s statement as to the increased use of the prelimin- ary call by the male when near the calling female (Moreau, antea, vol. xliv, p. 269). I was away from the district from August iith-25th, but during this time no calling was heard by the shepherd, the farmer, or any of the farmworkers, all of whom were by this time very interested and co-operative. From August 26th I resumed using the call, and during the ensuing fortnight obtained no results, except that on four occasions a Partridge replied with an agitated covey-rallying call. This seems to support H. M. Stanford’s description of the female Quail’s call, quoted by Moreau {antea, vol. xliv, p. 270), 170 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. assuming that “ a miniature edition of an English Partridge’s call ” is equivalent to the call of a juvenile of that species. Further probable evidence as to the calling of a female came from the shepherd, who reported that the only calls which he heard for the last few days before chicks appeared were of “ two blasts instead of the usual three.” Breeding and length of stay The shepherd saw an adult with an uncertain number of chicks, probably 7 or 8, on August loth. The farmer flushed bevies of 5 or 6 on at least two occasions in early September, and saw two birds together on several occasions throughout October, If, as both the shepherd and I suspect, nesting took place in one patch of clover, the clutch would almost certainly have been destroyed, for it. was completely grazed and thoroughly trodden by penned sheep during July. The last birds, two together, were seen on October 24th. On October 4th a tractor-driver engaged in gathering up the loose heaps of straw left by the combine-harvester, saw a bird fluttering and entangled in the straw as it ascended the canvas, and a Quail emerged just in time to escape compression. R. E. Moreau informs me that the Egyptian Quail-netters used to set up small heaps of scrubby cover, into which birds which had overshot the net would run and hide. 1 imagine that in this case a heap of loose straw had been similarly used as a refuge by a bird startled from the stubble. If this assumption is correct, it seems probable that with the increase of mechanization the post-harvest operations may prove more dangerous to this species than the actual reaping. Summary 1. During the summer of 1951 a small concentration of Quail occurred, somewhat late in the season, near Cholsey, Berkshire. 2. The preliminary call of the male is discussed. 3. From the use of a call-pipe observations are made on {a) The nature of the female’s call. [b) The male’s answering calls. (c) The reaction of the Partridge. 4. Evidence of breeding is given. 5. A potential danger arising from mechanized harvesting is mentioned. (171) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XXXIX. THE TURNSTONE. Photographed by Ralph Chislett, Guy B. Farrar, Eric Hosking AND Dr. F. N. H. Maidment (Plates 37-44)- Though the Turnstone {Arenaria interpres) is more numerous on our coasts in spring and autumn, it is safe to say that there are some present in every month of the year. Individuals in the striking and handsome breeding plumage shown in Plates 37 to 41 may be seen even on the South coast in mid- June, and it is perhaps not surpris- ing that rumours of nesting occur from time to time. A case in which there seems to have been strong circumstantial evidence is referred to on p. 181 ; a more recent one is reported from Cornwall {Cornwall Bird-watching and Preservation Society, 20th Annual Report, 1950, p. 25). So far, however, there is no proof that the species has bred in Britain, though it would not be surprising if it did so. Its breeding range includes islands in the Baltic, such as Oland where some of our plates were taken, and overlaps much of the range of Temminck’s Stint {Calidris temminckii) which has attempted to nest in Britain and is of much rarer occurrence on passage. Plates 42 to 44, taken in the Dee estuary, Cheshire, give some indication of the large numbers of Turnstones which may occur at times of passage ; they also show the more sombre, uniform plumage of autumn birds. It should be remembered that a high- tide refuge like Hilbre Island receives a remarkable concentration of birds gathered from a wide area ; flocks on the feeding grounds are usually smaller. J.D.W. A CENSUS OF COMMON SANDPIPERS IN THE SEDBERGH AREA, 1951. BY E. I. CUTHBERTSON, G. T. FOGGITT AND M. A. BeLL The Common Sandpiper {Actitis hypoleucos) was chosen as the sub- ject of a census in the Sedbergh area of Yorkshire for two reasons: (i) a distribution count of Common Sandpipers had been completed in 1939, and records existed from that year onwards; (ii) the Com- mon Sandpiper stays near rivers and streams, making it an easy species to observe and a good subject for an accurate distribution count. Topography The Common Sandpiper in this district breeds along the river 172 BRITISH BIRDS. VOL. XLV. Lune and its tributaries, Rawthey, Dee and Clough, and along some of their tributaries. In this area it appeared to shun limestone areas and any stream where the fall was greater than 200 ft. per mile. Few, however, nested out of the valleys and their limit appeared to be 1,750 ft. This area is extremely mountainous and out of some 300 miles of river and beck c. 60 miles held sandpipers. The higher the hills, the fewer the pairs, but in the low river valleys the densit}' was in many places high. Local migration in the breeding season At Killington reservoir, 400 ft. above the valley floor and i| miles as the crow flies from the Lune, about four or five pairs nested. The numbers were never accurately counted owing to an influx of apparently non-breeding sandpipers. The numbers varied from day to day and possibly adult breeding sandpipers came in to feed. There may, however, have been one or two barren pairs resident there and, later in the season, early flying young. But wherever in the valleys a nest or young was in some way destroyed the adults left the district soon after. Thus the influx may have been due to birds which had had their nests destroyed. Habitat in the breeding season The Common Sandpiper nests along the banks of rivers and becks and on the shores of lakes and reservoirs. If there is a suitable island the nest will always be situated on it ; otherwise it will be found on the grassy verges of shingle banks or in a clump of reeds. Once the nest was found 8 ft. up on a ledge of a small cliff. \Miere the river has eroded its bank the nest is often found half way up a sheer sandy bank in a suitable hollow. Usually it is concealed in a clump of vegetation. Nests are found at an altitude of over 1,000 ft. a.s.l., or low down in the valleys. Thickly vegetated banks are shunned, as are bare rocky banks ; a mixture of the two seems to be preferred. The nest The nest itself is a small hollow lined with dead grasses and leaves. At the back it is completely concealed by thick vegetation, usually a clump of reeds or small shrubs, but once by a log and washed u]> debris and twice, when the nest was on a ledge of a small cliff, by sheer rock. The front is also camouflaged by a little vegetation, mostly reeds and grass. We found no exceptions to these rules. Territory It was noted that sandpipers would always retire up or down stream at the approach of an observer. Then, after having been driven for a certain distance, they would return, either straight back along the stream or by making a detour away from the river. other places, however, the birds bred so closely that four pairs would often freely intermingle. 1nCUB.\TION, hatching and ll.VrCHING SUCCESS Details are given in Table I of dates of the start of incubation and VOL. XLV.] CENSUS OF COMMON SANDPIPERS. 173 of hatching in the three years,’ 1949, 1950 and 1951. The nests in question were visited at least once in three days. Table I Year Average start of incubation Earliest and latest dates of start of incubation Average hatching date Earliest and latest dates of hatching No. of nests 1949 May 25 ^ June 15 ♦ 2 1950 May 26 May 1 9- June i June 16 June 9-22 4 1951 May 19 May 14-23 June 9 June 4-13 8 All years May 23 May 14-June I June 13 June 4-23 T4 * Incubation in both nests started on the same day; both hatched on June 15 In Table II are given the details for hatching success. The data do not cover the period after the young left the nest, so the table does not indicate fledging success. Years for which data are inadequate or unreliable have been omitted. Table II : Causes OF DESTRUCTION OF NESTS Nests destroyed by Nests Year Floods Crows Unknown causes hatched Total i937 — 2 — 3 5 1939 — — 2 2 1943 — — I — I 1945 — — . I 2 3 1949 — — — 3 3 1950 I ■ — 4 5 1951 — — I 10 1 1 .All years I 2 3 ^4 30 0* /o 3i 6! 10 80 Census figures In Table III the results of the 1951 census are compared with the figures for the same stretches of river in 1939. Table III River Pairs in 1939 Pairs in 1951 Increase/ Decrease Length of river surveyed Rawthey... 10 16 + 6 4f miles Lune 7 6 ' 1 3l .. Dee 4 4 — 3i - Clough . . . 2 — —2 2 ,, Total 23 26 + 3 14 miles In Table IV the results of the census made in 1951 are given in full. The position of each pair recorded is plotted on the accom- panying map. The census was carried out by a team of three members of the Sedbergh School Ornithological Society. The information com- piled by the same team in 1949 and 1950 was also included as part of the census. The areas marked on the map as “ unsuitable ” are so marked either because the vegetation on either bank is so 174 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. too steep or occasionally too bare and rocky. The counts were made between May ist and July 15th. Many stretches of river were covered three or more times, others further away were covered only twice and those furthest away only once. The latter are, however, few. The river levels were normal throughout the seasons. A heavy flood could have done great damage. VOL. XLv.] CENSUS OF COMMON SANDPIPERS. 175 River Table iv No. of pairs Mileage of river surveyed Rawthey 22 13 Lune ... 40 13 Dee II loj Clough 2 6 Barbondale . . . 10 5i Cautley Beck. . . 3 I Deepdale 3 Covvgill Beck . . . 2 Blake Beck . . . I 2 Bowderdale . . . 5 Hazelgill 2 2 Total ... lOI 60 THE NESTING OF A PAIR OF BLUE TITS. BY G. A. AND M. A. Arnold Introduction During 1951 we were able to study a pair of Blue Tits {Pams ccenileus) nesting in a garden at Wilnecote, north Warwickshire, and the following are some of the more outstanding observations. Both birds had been trapped and colour-ringed in the winter. They were thought to be paired by February 3rd as they were almost invariably together from that date. Nest-site prospecting began on March i8th by the female perching on, and looking into, the entrances of nest-boxes. On April 7th at 13.15 G.M.T. the female was first seen to enter the chosen nest-box, followed a few seconds later by her mate ; the male reappearing within five seconds and the female within a minute. The box was placed six feet high on a rustic pergola. The area of “ territory ” roamed over was about 3^ acres with no competition from rival pairs in adjoining land. Rural gardens were mainly flower-beds and vegetable plots with little fruit tree and shrub growth, and about 150 yards of hawthorn and privet hedging. Main feeding areas proved to be at the extremities of the range : chiefly in a half-acre slag-heap thicket, mostly of 20 foot black poplars, birch and beech ; but also in two small apple orchards totalling another half-acre. Building the nest On the morning of April 8th the male was pecking at the lower part of the hole from the outside whilst the female was inside the box. Eight times during the day the female entered and stayed for one to five minutes. The next day the pair started carrying out wood-chippings placed there^three weeks earlier. More shavings were 176 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL, XLV. taken away until April nth when only a few fragments remained. Foundations of the nest appeared on April 13th and building con- tinued until the 19th, entirely by the female, using the usual grass and moss vegetation. Up to May 7th neither bird visited the nest- box again and they seldom came into the garden. They returned on May 8th and, until the nth, the female, and rarely the male, took in lining for the nest, mostly feathers no longer than one inch, with some rope and string strands plucked from clothes lines. Lining was added up to the day of laying of the third egg. Hole-pecking was done almost always by the male, but was only noted three times from the inside. The female likewise pecked from both sides but on four occasions only. As this activity was performed whilst the nest foundations were in the course of con- struction, also during lining, and at no other time, it supports the contention (Gibb, 1950) that hole-pecking in tits is a form of dis- play. When the female was a short distance from the nest it was frequently observed that the male, after a bout of pecking, would induce the female to pay attention to the nest. Laying One egg was laid each day : the first on May 12th, and the last, the twelfth, on May 23rd. Invariably the egg was laid before 10.00 and most likely before 8.00. The earliest eggs were buried deep below the lining, and raised towards the top as the clutch neared completion. Length of active day On May 12th the male began singing at 4.40 B.S.T. During the tending of the young the earliest feeding time was 4.30 and the latest 21.31 B.S.T., on June 17th when the female was absent for the first night. Roosting First roosting on the nest by the female was two or three days before the first egg was laid, and then she roosted nightly until the young were ii days old. The male always roosted away from the nest. On the day the first young hatched the female tended them to 19.59 before finally retiring and in the brood’s first ii days of life she did not enter to roost until about 20.30. The male was often around when his mate retired (c/. Colquhoun, 1942) and frequently took food in to her for a further 20 minutes. Incubation Incubation began about ii.oo B.S.T. on May 22nd with the pen- ultimate egg. Incubation was undertaken entirely by the female and after 13 days, on June 4th, the first egg hatched between 10.00 and noon. The frequency distribution in Table i gives the periods the female spent sitting, which averaged 59 minutes. There is a surprisingly even spread from the 21-40 minute group to the 81-100 minute group witli no clear peak at all. The periods the female spent VOL. XLV.] NESTING OF A PAIR OF BLUE TITS. 177 Table i. Period SPENT ON AND OFF NEST LENGTH OF PERIODS FEMALE LENGTH OF PERIODS FEMALE SPENT ON NEST SPENT OFF NEST Minutes Number of Periods Minutes Number of Periods 1-20 8 1-2 '2 21-40 10 3-4 3 4 X -60 10 5-b 25 OI-80 i-i 7-8 -5 8 i-ioo 12 9-IU P) 101-120 4 1 1-12 9 ^3-14 2 Total number of Total number of Periods ... 58 Periods ... 81 Average time 59 mins. Average time 7.5 mins: away from the eggs averaged 'j\ minutes. The male was not, at any time, in the nest-box for more than two or three minutes. Often he would alight close by and call off his mate, but just as often she emerged on her own initiative. Dividing the day into three the female’s time on the nest differed slightly, viz., morning (9.00- noon) average 54 minutes ; afternoon (noon-16. 00), 64 minutes, and evening (16.00-20.00), 58 minutes. During incubation the average period on the nest from the ist-4th days was 56 minutes; 5th-6th days, 61 minutes, and 9th-i3th days, 59 minutes. Whichever way the periods off the nest are calculated under similar headings the result is consistently between seven and eight minutes. Brooding the young Two eggs proved infertile ; the remaining ten hatched over a period of three days, during which the female brooded much as usual for incubation. On the third day she was away from the nest a good deal and on the sixth day was feeding the brood as much as the male. Wing-shivering Throughout incubation the female begged food from her mate, but on the day all young hatched the male began wing-shivering. For the next two or three days he continued to pass food when begged. When the young were four days old and wing-shivering was mutual the male began ignoring the female and took in his own supply to the young even though she was close by. Feeding the young As the male delivered his load of caterpillars to the female to carry in, it could be seen that on about half the occasions only one larva was brought, otherwise two were exchanged, and twice he had three caterpillars to transfer. Talkie 2 depicts the hourly feeding variation to the young. Around mid-day on the young’s 13th day the male achieved his highest rate of 49 visits in half-an-hour. These trips were with bread crumbs, taken from a neighbouring garden 15 yards from the nest, and were made directly after a heavy rain shower. The inclusion of this exceptional count tends to inflate this period, so that. 178 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. Table 2. Feeding the young VARIATION IN FEEDS TO YOUNG Visits per half-hour 9-1 1 a.m. ii-i p.m. 1-3 p.m. 3-5 p m- 5-7 p.m. 7-9 p.m. All hours 1-5 2 6 5 6 I 3 23 6-10 10 I 10 5 5 3 34 11-15 8 10 13 9 7 6 53 16-20 6 8 8 8 8 3 41 21-25 2 5 2 I 10 7 27 26-30 — 1 — — — I 2 31-35 — 0 — — — 2 2 36-40 — 0 — — — — 0 41-45 — 0 — • — 0 46-50 — I — — — — I Total half- hours counted 28 32 38 29 31 25 183 Average visits per half-hour 12.3 14.2 12.0 II. 8 16.4 16.8 14.0 AVERAGE HOURLY FEEDS PER DAY TO YOUNG. Total feeds by the female by the male VOL. XLV.] NESTING OF A PAIR OF BLUE TITS. 179 in fact, there is no significant difference in the feeding rate from 9.00 to 17.00. There is an increase between 17.00 and 21.00. In the graph it will be seen that the male did most feeding of the young during the first five days. From the 6th-iith days duties were equally shared. From then until the igth day the male success- fully accomplished the task alone. The female was last seen in mid-afternoon of the young’s nth day ; she then held a beakful of feathers when leaving the nest and never returned. The male’s role in feeding the young depicted in the graph shows the increased effort of which an adult is capable in an emergency. The facts that the feeding rate dropped so markedly on the last few days, and that one of the ten young was found dead in the nest after the others had flown, both suggest he was exerting himself to a capacity which he could not maintain. It is unusual for the fall in the feeding rate to be so acute and yet sufficient to nourish the young properly. Gibb {loc. cit.) who has had similar experience with the Great Tit {Parus major) found such broods considerably under- weight. In the 19I: days of feeding the young we made from 8-12 half-hour counts daily, but no counts were made prior to 9.00. On the 14th day the male averaged 37 visits per hour, this figure being concluded from ii counts. With his active day at 15I hours — 4.30-20.00 B.S.T. — he alone performed between 550 and 600 visits to the nest with food. Observations from the iith- 17th day reveal that he was never away from the nest more than ten minutes at one time, except for roosting, and usually less than five minutes. Food Items .of food picked out from a distance of 20 yards through binoculars and telescope consisted of over 2,000 | in.-ij in. length light green caterpillars (probably geometrid species) ; 47 visits with other species of larvae and with greenfly ; bread and other crumbs at least 250 times, these mainly fed during wet spells ; six small flies : five beakfuls of walnut kernel and three of fat ; two small light brown moths and a | in. piece of lettuce, taken into the box when the female was inside with the young. These figures give a percentage of approximately 85% green caterpillars, 12% crumbs, 2% other caterpillars, and 1% miscellaneous. Sipping of water from a bird-bath near by was seen only eight times in the male and he bathed once ; the female only once was seen to drink. Nest-sanitation First excrement was carried out 24 hours after the first young hatched. For the next three days the membranous sac was seen to be swallowed twice each by both parents. Average rate of carrying from the 3rd-i7th day was five times per hour ; as the brood clamoured for food at the entrance during the last two days before flying, the parent could seldom make his way into the nest- box. After the nine young left the nest — ten were colour-ringed on their 12th day, therefore one died in the last seven days — the nest 180 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL, XLV. was covered witli droppings. Up to the nth day both parents took excrement 15-50 yards away, but the male later deposited it only one to four yards from the nest. Le.-wing the nest To induce the young to leave the nest the male called with food at a distance of 10 or 20 yards, and eight young emerged from 15.30 to 16.10, each flying 5-15 yards to the ground amongst low l)ut thick vegetation. Within an hour a very heavy thunderstorm began, and with little abatement lasted into the night. The ninth and last youngster left the nest at 18.15 during a temporary lull. One dead was later found deep inside the nest. As the male was severely hampered tending them in the conditions, mortality was probably high. One was found dead next morning, June 24th. Only one was seen later in company with the male, and the youngster was feeding completely independently just 21 da}^s after leaving the nest. We are indebted to John Gibb and R. A. O. Hickling for advice on the presentation of this paper. References CoLQUHOUN, M. K. (1942). “ Notes on the social behaviour of J51uc Tits.” Brit. Birds, xxxv' : 234-240. CriBB, J. A. (1950). ” The breeding biology of the Great and Blue Titmice.” Ibis, 92 : 507-539. OBITUARY. ChXlL ROBERT \dtSEY STONEY (1878-1952) C. Y. Stoney, who died on Eebruary 19th, 1952, in the Isle of Man, was one of the finest field ornithologists ever produced by Ireland. Stoney was a scholar of Shrewsbury and of Emanuel College, Cambridge, where he took first-class honours in classics. After teaching for some years in preparatory schools in England, he took over a school of his own in County Wicklow. Here he taught until his father’s death when he became squire of the family property of Oakfield in County Donegal. In 1931 he settled in Berkshire where he set up a coaching establishment, before retiring to the Isle of Man at the end of the war. Although he wrote comparatively little, he had great influence on Irish ornithology and ornithologists. There was hardly a county in Ireland which Stoney had not visited and explored. Probably his most important find was the great colony of Black-necked Grebes which George R. Humphreys and he discovered in 1929. Working on the slenderest of clues, these two ornithologists succeeded in locating this remarkable colony of birds in the reed-beds of a lough in the Irish midlands. Stoney, H. T. Malcomson, G. R. Humphreys and C. J. Carroll, also discovered large colonies of Roseate Terns breeding on islands from which they had probably been absent for many years. On one of their expeditions, Malcomson and he found the only erythristic VOL. XLV.1 OBITUARY. 181 Roseate Tern’s egg ever found in Britain. He visited and studied what was then the large colony of Red-necked Phalaropes in the estuarine marshes of County Mayo. He found at least one nest of Hen-Harriers in Connemara, and watched one of the last of the Irish pairs of Golden Eagle. I shall also always remember how he described to me what was, in his opinion, a pair of nesting Turn- stone on a small and remote island off the coast of north-west Ireland. Stoney always believed that had not a storm blown up, he would have been able to establish the first British breeding record of this fascinating species. Stoney belonged to a generation of superlative nest-hunters, men of skill and might in the field, who lived hard and to whom personal discomfort meant little. Gilroy, Macomb and Edgar Chance, Walpole-Bond, O. R. Owen and Arthur Whitaker were all of Stoney’s generation. Each of these men had remarkable gifts. Stoney, certainly not least among them, was possibly, indeed, primus inter pares. Few equalled his all-round skill in the field ; none surpassed him in energy, determination, and ability to analyse and assess a bird’s behaviour at the nest. He had the gift of anticipation and timing possessed by all great games players. I myself have watched him move in such a way that a cock Wood- Lark called its mate from her nest and then, such was his intuitive power, induce the cock bird to chivvy back the hen almost as if he had commanded it ! Although Stoney lived much of his life in Ireland, he also visited practically every haunt of rare birds in the British Isles. He revelled and excelled in tackling the most difficult quarry. Along with Gilroy and Macomb Chance, he was one of the first who had much success in' finding Greenshanks’ nests in the Highlands of Scotland. His exceptionally quick eyesight and keen hearing helped him to follow small birds with uncanny skill for long distances. This enabled him to track down many Siskins to their nests in the great demesnes of Wicklow and Donegal. Those who have worked with him are never likely to forget the keenness and persistence with which he went about his tasks in the field. Whether he was after Hobbies or Dartford Warblers on southern heaths or downs. Bittern, Bearded Tit or Harrier in Broadland, or Eagle, Dotterel or Green- shank in the Highlands, Stoney was always the same — completely confident and almost invariably successful. He belonged to an age in which almost all the great ornithologists collected, or had collected, eggs. The hunting-instinct was strong in him, but, had he been the child of a later generation, his gifts would have enabled him to become a leading student of the breeding- biology of birds. He had the most delightful sense of humour, puckish wit, buoyant enthusiasm, and the gift of teaching and inspiring young men, making them devotees for life. It will be long before we see his like again, and the world of ornithology is the poorer for his passing. D. N.-T. (182) REVIEWS. The Study of Instinct. By N. Tinbergen. (Oxford U.P., 1951. 25s.). Field observers have long felt the need of an authoritative, condensed summing up of the vast but fragmentary and often contradictory mass of fact and theory which has been accumulating about animal behaviour in recent years. All serious students of bird habits must be indebted to Dr. Tinbergen for having produced a guide to the subject so much better than could reasonably have been expected in view of its rapid and confusing develop- ment up to the present moment. One hardly knows whether to admire most the profound grasp and easy exposition of the broad relationships between physiology, psychology, ethology (" the objective study of behaviour ”), ecology, sociology and taxonomy, or the clear, concrete language, dissecting and criticising the technicalities without ever losing sight of the living creatures behind them, and without ever becoming enslaved to jargon. The illustration of the text with no less than 130 diagrams adds greatly to the ease and enjoy- ment of following it, and the publishers have achieved a standard of production worthy of the high importance of the work, which observers of bird behaviour will no doubt be consulting pretty frequently for years to come. While the subject-matter is drawm from the entire animal world the author’s ornithological experience ensures that birds receive fully their fair share of attention, and the comparisons with behaviour of invertebrates, fishes and mammals (not excluding man) add considerably to the value of the work and to the solidity of its foundations, as also does its comprehensive use of European and American studies unknown to most students of bird behaviour in this country. Originating as a series of lectures delivered in New York in 1947 the book has become a major contribution to international co-operation in the science of animal behaviour and particularly in the organization of its problems into a coherent whole. So far as it can be summarized in a few sentences the author’s presentation stresses the existence in animals of a vast and highly integrated range of nervous mechanisms of different types and levels which are hierarchically grouped in a number of “instincts,” actuated by a series of priming, releasing and directing impulses from without and within, and responding to these impulses through the removal of one or more "blocks”, thus enabling the performance of co-ordinated movements which contribute to the maintenance of the individual and the species. On the whole the simplest, most rigid and therefore most easily studied of these processes are the “ con- summatory acts ” such as eating, escape or sleep in which the impulses are eventually discharged, in a more or less stereotyped fashion, through immensely intricate co-ordinated signals to the muscles and the motor units which are the slaves of the entire hierarchy. The next easiest point of study is the potential capacity of the animal to receive through its senses messages of sight, sound and so forth, and the problem of ascertaining how much of this vast potential field of excitation actually plays any part in obtaining responses. It is known for instance that bats not only hear but respond to sounds at least as high as 40,000 cycles per second, roughly three times as high as in man, while certain owls can hunt successfully by light of between one-tenth and one-hundredth of the intensity needed for human vision, although it is still at least doubtful whether they can see infra-red light. Yet with all these rich possibilities animals are apt to select and rely upon a remarkably limited range of sign stimuli, and to remain blind and deaf to all others. The author’s own study of the importance for Herring-Gull chicks of the red mark on the bill of the parent is a good ilhistration. Adult Herring-Gulls can see and hear well enough to pick out their mates in a flock 30 yards away, yet they will fail to recognise and brood their own eggs, however distinctively marked, if they are moved a few inches. The sound of a chick in distress may produce immediate response while the sight of it without the sound appears to mean nothing. Often it is some con- junction of landmarks or actions or characteristics of shape and colour which gets the response ; one of the most curious and interesting experimental results is that a wide variety of models of birds of prey overhead release escape VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 183 reactions provided they are moved in the direction which gives a " short- necked ” appearance ; if the direction is reversed so that the object appears short-tailed but long-necked it receives no response. In some cases, especially in courtship, it has been possible to work out long “ reaction chains ” of consequential moves on the part of two or more animals, and study of releasers (or “ social releasers ” as the author has more accurately termed them) has shown how closely and economically they are adjusted to the giving by an animal of just the sign stimulus which is needed to touch off the corresponding response in others of its own kind. The greatest difficulty is to trace what takes place between the acceptance of a message from outside and the execution of the appropriate response, and above all to explain the initiation of action in the apparent absence of any outside stimulus. Some light has been thrown even on this mysterious hinter- land of animal mind by observing the displacement activities which occur when the creature is torn between two courses of action (such as fighting or escape) and when the thwarted impulse as it were “ sparks over ” on to some other and irrelevant track, such as preening, digging or picking up nest- material. Another significant revelation is the ‘‘ explosion ” of apparently causeless " vacuum activities ” when there is a strong internal drive deprived by some unusual or artificial circumstance of its normal releasing stimulus, as when a captive Starling goes through the motions of catching an imaginary insect or young artificially reared Ptarmigan broods, which had never known the natural release of their escape reactions through the mother’s alarm call, began showing frantic flight responses on the smallest disturbance or on none. The only criticism which the present reviewer would offer is on the inter- pretation of the close massing of Starling flocks in the presence of a bird of prey as being an adaptation to deter high-speed stoops by Peregrine Falcons, owing to their fear of the effects of collisions. If this is a correct interpretation of the origin it certainly cannot explain the probably more frequent aerial manouevres performed between flocks of Starlings and Sparrow-Hawks over many roosts in this country, in which the Starlings at times follow the hawk rather than the other way round, and excellent opportunities for leisurely capture are given but are not seized. Possibly further study may bring to light some alternative, or perhaps additional, interpretation. Dr. Tinbergen skilfully combines a survey of the contributions of others with a valuable discussion and provisional synthesis on his own part, in which field observers will welcome the emphasis on preparatory study of the entire behaviour pattern as the only safeguard against mistaken interpretations of particular experiments and observations. In the light of his discussion the crude approaches fashionable a few years ago are seen to be fully as distorted as old-fashioned anthropomorphism, although that term is itself open to objection, now that the behaviour of man himself is becoming recognised to be something very different from what the anthropomorphists used to assume it was. E.M.N. LETTERS. REGISTRATION OF COLOUR-MARKING SCHEMES To the Editors 0/ British Birds Sirs. — The increasing use of various types of colour-marking for the field recognition of birds must lead to confusion between individual experiments unless an authoritative central register can be compiled. The Scientific Advisory Committee of the British Trust for Ornithology therefore invites all prnithologists who are running colour-marking experiments with rings, dyes, BRITISH BIRDS. \S4 [VOL. XLV, or in any other form, to file details of the marks used on a special schedule which 1 shall be pleased to send out on request. Colour-marking schemes fall broadly into two groups : I. Studies of population, dispersal and migration in mobile species, where a single colour is used to indicate the place of origin or the age when marked. II. Detailed population and behaviour studies, usually of sedentary species, in which combinations of colours are used to identify individual birds. It is obviously important that confusion in group 1 studies should be avoided and it is hoped, by means of the proposed register, that the B.T.O. office can serve as a clearing-house for information on all such schemes in the British Isles. But it is also important that workers engaged in group II studies in the same neighbourhood should be aware of each other’s existence, and so it is hoped that those who are running schemes, even on a small scale in their own gardens, will co-operate as well by asking for and filling in a schedule. 2, King Edward Street, Bruce Campbell, Oxford. Secretary B.T.O. THE LAND OF THE LOON. To the Editors of British Birds. Sirs, — In my recent book. The Land of the Loon and in Mr. Nicholson’s review of it {antea, vol. xlv, p. 79) reference was made to the nesting of the Knot {Calidris canutus) in Iceland. Although permission to report this record was obtained from its discoverer, Mr. Adam Watson, it appears {Ibis 04 ; p. 373) that Mr. Watson has now been persuaded that the bird was not a Knot, but a Purple Sandpiper [Calidris maritima). It seems desirable therefore to correct this error at the earliest opportunity. G. K. Yeates. [Since this reference appeared we have learned for the first time that the late Editor of British Birds, B. W. Tucker, had personally considered the evidence in this case and had come to the same conclusion. We take this opportunity of calling attention to the general difficulty of checking here the validity of sight identifications claimed for other countries. While the Editors will take all reasonable care, it must be understood that the re- sponsibility for determining the eligibility of such records for inclusion in other countries’ lists rests elsewhere and that the Editors are not in a position always to examine the evidence in such cases exhaustively. Even within the British Isles, reference in reviews in British Birds to published records of rarities should not be taken to imply that the Editors have scrutinised and accepted the evidence behind the statement unless the review says so. The review of The Land of the Loon also contained criticisms of the re- production of the photographs which call for correction, as subsequent careful examination has shown that the review copy on which these strictures were based was a defective one, and we therefore wish unreservedly to with- draw them. The review itself mentioned the high reputation which the publishers. Country Life Ltd., have won by their achievements in tlie repro- duction of nature photographs, and, in the circumstances which have been brought to our attention, we would not think it right to leave on the record anything which might detract from that reputation. — Eds.] BOOKS RECEIVED. Birds as Individuals. By Len Howard. (Collins. los. 6d.). Three studies in bird character. By Lord William Percy. (Country Life. 21S.) Bird-watchers’ Delight. By John Warham (Country Life. i8s.) The Birds of the Malay Peninsula, Singapore and Penang. By A. G. Glenister. (O.U.P. 35s.) Bud Becognition, 2. By James Fisher (Pelican Books. 3s. 6d.) Witherby’s announce- — for publication June/July — THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS PROVIDING— IN ONE HANDY-SIZED VOLUME —AN AUTHENTIC AND FULLY ILLUSTRATED REFERENCE TO BRITISH BIRDS J — ♦♦ ♦♦ - 350 species described, with vital details of general habits, field recognition, habitat, breeding and distribution. All species included are arranged in the Wetmnre order of classification — a pioneer feature. All species described are illustrated in colour. About 1,000 birds are featured to illustrate different plumages. There are 9 black-and-white plates of birds on the wing. There is a special range of egg plates, reproduced from photographs of the actual eggs, greatest care being taken to ensure accuracy of colour. In all there are 227 eggs in colour and 69 in black-and- white. This work was originally planned by the late H. F. Witherhy, developed by the late B. W. Tucker and is now edited by P. A. D. Hollom. There are approximately 500 pages of text and the size is Small Demy 8vo. — — «-♦ — Price 45f- net For the convenience of travellers there is a special limited edition — printed on thin India paper and bound in limp leather cloth — at 70s. net. (Weight approximately 14 ozs.) BULLETIN OF THE FAIR ISLE BIRD OBSERVATORY. A 36-48 pp. quarterly report devoted to migration events and studies at Fair Isle and else- where. Free to Friends of Fair Isle, subscription £1. Is. Enquiries to Director, Fair Isle Bird Observatory, by Lerwick, Shetland. MR. & MRS. D. A. T. MORGAN, M.B.O.U., Hunt’s Barn, Knodishall, Suffolk, have vacancies in June and September for fellow ornithologists as paying guests. Handbook, bicycles available. Ideal centre for Walberswick, Minsmere, Havergate. £5. 5s. p.w. inclusive. CLIFF HOUSE RESIDENTIAL COUNTRY CLUB, DUNWICH, 15 minutes walk from Scots Hall and Minsmere Bird Sanctuary. Good food, packed lunches, comfortable rooms. Club Licence. Reasonable terms. Tel. Westleton 282. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, new and reconditioned, a good range at reasonable prices. Approval allowed. Lists from Hatton Optical Co., Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES repaired, cleaned and adjusted. Send your instrument for estimate by return. Hatton Optical Co., Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. FAIR ISLE BIRD OBSERVATORY — Comfortable accommodation is available at the hostel at Fair Isle, Shetland from May to October. Terms: 6 guineas per week. SUMMER COURSES, with emphasis on field-work, in July and August. For full programme and prospectus write Director, Fair Isle Bird Observatory, by Lerwick, Shetland. Tel.: Fair Isle 8. BUZZARD, Curlew and Raven all nest within a mile of the house. Why not study them in comfort from the Bancyrhyd Guest House, Newport, Pern.? 4-berth caravan also available till 31st July. Special terms for early visitors. WALBERSWICK This charming Suffolk coast village on the edge of the Dunwich marshes and within five miles of the Minsmere Sanctuary is an ideal centre for Bird Watchers. STAY AT THE BELL HOTEL Small ♦ Comfortable ♦ Warm •* Good Food Moderate Terms •* Fully Licensed Telephone : Southwold 3109 Printed in Gt. Britain by The Riverside Press, Ltd., Twickenham, Middx. Published by U. F. & G. WITHERRY, LTD., 5 Warwick Court, W.C.l. BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST Monthly 2s. 6d. Yearly 2^s. June, 1952 VoL. XLV. No. 6 Published by H. F. G. Witherby Ltd. BRITISH BIRDS V7JUN1BI2 EDITORS. E. M. Nicholson and W. B. Alexander A. W. Boyd P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst I. J. Ferguson-Lees Editorial Address : Fordlands, Crowhurst, Sussex. Contents of Number 6, Vol. XLV, June, 1932. Page Editorial ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 185 The breeding behaviour of the Swift. By David and Elizabeth Lack... 186 Studies of some species rarely photographed. XL. The Snow- Bunting. Photographed by Arthur Christiansen, Bernard Jeans, C. Persson, P. O. Swanberg and G. K. Yeates ... ... ... 215 Mid-season movements of Swifts in Sussex. By D. D. Harber ... 216 Notes : — Moustached Warblers in Hampshire (Gordon E. Wooldridge and C. B. Ballantyne) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 21c) Great Reed-Warbler in Sussex (R. A. W. Reynolds) ... ... 220 Little Shearwater in Caernarvonshire (R. H. Ry all) ... ... ... 222 Food and Habitat of Jack Snipe (P. W. P. Browne) ... ... 222 Marsh-Sandpipers in Sussex (G. des Forges and C. W. G. Paulson ; L. P. Alder and C. M. James) ... ... ... ... ... 223 Requests for Information ... ... ... ... ... ... 22.J Published by H. F. & G. Witherby, 5, Warwick Court, W.C.i, to whom all enquiries relating to subscriptions, back numbers and binding should be acklressed. To make certain of obtaining the popular hand- book OF BRITISH BIRDS Order your copy now, and it will be sent to you on publication. Scarcity of paper limits the number of copies that can be printed. To ORDER FORM Please send me on pubhcation cop of THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS ^45s. Edition 70s Edition 1 s. extra) for which I enclose cheque/postal order for £ : : *Please delete whichever is not required. Name (please use block letters) Address Date H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD. (Publishers) 5 WARWICK COURT • LONDON • W.C.i Witherby^s announce — for publication early July — THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS —0—0— PROVIDING— IN ONE HANDY-SIZED VOLUME —AN AUTHENTIC AND FULLY ILLUSTRATED REFERENCE TO BRITISH BIRDS — — O— 330 species described, with vital details of general habits, field recognition, habitat, breeding and distribution. All species included are arranged in the Wetmore order of classification — a pioneer feature. About 1,000 birds are illustrated in colour to show different plumages. There are 9 black-and-white plates of birds on the wing. There is a special range of egg plates, reproduced from photographs of the actual eggs, greatest care being taken to ensure accuracy of colour. In all there are 111 eggs in colour and 69 in black-and- white. This work was originally planned by the late H. F. Witherby, developed by the late B. W. Tucker and is now edited by P. A. D. Hollom. There are 448 pages of text and the size is Small Deray 8vo. - <;>—<;>— Price 45 1- net For the convenience of travellers there is a special limited edition printed on thin India paper and bound in limp leather cloth— at 70s. net. (Weight approximately 14ozs.) V Number 6, Vol. XLV, June 1952. EDITORIAL. Just a year ago at the time of writing these words the first issue of British Birds to be produced by the new Editorial Board went to press, opening with an Editorial in which a number of aims and objects were stated. Some of these have been fulfilled, at least to the satisfaction of the Editors, but others remain to be accomplished. Revised arrangements for the verification and publication of sight-records of rare birds have been worked out with the co-operation of those coneerned and have been put into effect as explained in our January issue {antea, pp. 1-2). A number of valuable papers have been obtained and have been published, so far as possible at the seasons when they are of most interest to readers, and in some eases within a few weeks of being written. The prineipal outstanding problem here is to secure an even broader spread of subjects treated, and to avoid too much tendency for certain topics to monopolize an undue share of the available spaee. In the ease of Notes some reduction in arrears has been achieved by the methods indicated in last year’s Editorial, although in response to appeals from several readers we have generally avoided the use of smaller type, and the adoption of a different style of heading has enabled space to be saved. Nevertheless it eannot be elaimed that the position about Notes is even yet satisfactory, since the average wait for publication remains too long. Thanks to the eontinued eo-operation of many expert bird photographers and several talented artists the number and range of illustrations has been maintained at a satisfaetory level. In the reviewing of publieations we have found mueh more difficulty, and it has not so far been praeticable to complete the Supplement covering recent literature which we stated among our aims last year. On the other hand the very large number of local reports in respect of 1950 have been reviewed in a body in reeent issues, although certain of them were only published as we were going to press. It has also proved even more difficult than was expected to revert to regular publication on the ist of each month, although this has been achieved for certain issues and others have appeared without much delay. In our efforts to bring about further improvements we hope to have the goodwill and help of our contributors and readers. We are glad to know that despite the very diffieult times the cireulation has been well maintained, but nothing eould assist more to improve Birtish Birds than a substantial inerease in cireulation to afford some margin over increasing eosts, and every extra reader helps in this way. 186 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Finally, it is with the utmost regret that we have to announce the impending retirement from the Editorial Board of J. D. Wood, who is taking up a post at Geneva which makes it impossible for him to continue to serve. We are sure that all our readers will join with us in paying tribute to the great contribution which he has made to British Birds during one of the most difficult periods of its existence, and to the pleasant and efficient manner in which he has kept all concerned with its preparation and production in touch. He has not spared himself, and he has certainly left his mark. We are glad to announce that we have secured the services as his successor of I. J. Ferguson-Lees, who has been for some time a contributor of field notes and a very active field ornithologist. We are confident that our contributors and readers will extend him a welcome and will support him in assuming his new burdens. From the appearance of this issue all editorial correspondence should be addressed to; Mr. I. J. Ferguson-Lees, Fordlands, Crowhurst, Sussex. THE BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. BY David and Elizabeth Lack. (Edward Grey Institute, Oxford). Contents. I . Introduction. 12. Ejection of eggs. 2. Occupation of boxes. L3- Incubation. 3- Arrival in spring. 14- Brooding of young. 4- Roosting. 15- Feeding of young. 5- Behaviour in boxes by day. 16. Recognition of nestlings. 6. “Bangers”. 17- Nest sanitation. 7- Threat display and greeting 18. Exercising of young. of mate. 19. Fledging. 8. Fighting. 20. Departure of adults. 9- Courtship. 21. Work by others. 10. Nest building. Summary. ! I . Egg laying. References. (i) Introduction. We started to study the breeding biology of the Swift {Apus apus) in the summer of 1946, thinking that little was known of this remarkable bird. In Switzerland, however, Weitnaucr (1947) had a long-term study of the species in preparation, and a shorter paper by Cutcliffe (1951) has now appeared in this country. Our first observations were made on pairs nesting in holes in thatched VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 187 roofs in villages near Oxford. Stimulated by a visit to Weitnauer in the autumn of 1946, we decided to try to induce the birds to breed in nest-boxes. Swifts have nested for many years in the ventilators of the tower of the University Museum in Oxford (hereafter referred to as “the Tower”). In 1948, helped by a grant from Mrs. J. B. Priestley, we had platforms erected inside the Tower, and the ventilators were replaced by nest-boxes, to which glass backs were fitted in 1949. The observer can now sit in semi-darkness a few inches from the birds, v/atching them against the light from their entrance holes without causing them any disturbance. In this paper we describe the behaviour of the birds in their holes. Aerial behaviour is not considered except where necessary for interpreting behaviour at the nest, and the numerical aspects of breeding biology have been treated elsewhere (Lack and Lack, 1951). We are greatly indebted to R. E. Moreau for his extensive criticisms of this paper in manuscript. The Tower has a steeply sloping roof with 10 ventilators on each of its four sides. Buildings lower than the Tower adjoin it on three sides, the east being clearer than the north or south, while the west side is open. Swifts seem to prefer a clear “run-in” to the nests, and this is probably why the west is used more than the other sides. Of our breeding records during four years, 27 have been on the west, 20 on the east, 15 on the south and 13 on the north side of the Tower. Most adult Swifts show little fear in their boxes, presumably owing to lack of natural enemies at the nest. There is, however, great individual variation. Some were extremely tame from the start and were not at all disturbed when, in our weighing experi- ments, we removed and later replaced their eggs or young under them. Others at first left the box if a hand was inserted, but became tame through repeated handling. Some fiercely attacked an inserted hand with their claws, and displayed (see later) if they heard us outside the box or saw an object near the glass. A few birds, on the other hand, always left when a hand was placed in the box, and later became shyer, not tamer, leaving if they merely heard a slight noise near the box. Some of the Tower adults became so used to being handled that, near the end of the 1948 breeding season, we were able to place rings on their legs in the boxes without causing them any appreciable disturbance. When, however, we took a few of the adults out of the boxes for ringing, several of them deserted their nests. This came as a great surprise, both in view of their previous tameness,, and because we did not think that we had caused any desertions in 1946 and 1947, when we caught the adults on nests in thatched roofs by inserting a hand from outside. (Actually a few had deserted, but we had not realised that we were the cause.) Acting on a suggestion from Weitnauer, we later caught some of the Tower birds and, instead of replacing them 188 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. in their boxes, released them from a window. Fewer deserted, but some still did so. We therefore gave up catching and ringing adult Swifts, and would urge other ringers to do the same. We may add that, in Sweden, Magnusson and Svardson (1948) found that a rather high proportion of the breeding Swifts deserted when caught at their nests from outside for ringing. (2) Occupation of boxes. In 1948, 16 pairs of Swifts laid eggs in the Tower boxes; the non-breeders were not counted. In 1949, 19 pairs laid eggs and 7 more boxes were occupied for at least part of the season by birds which did not lay eggs, the largest number of adults present on one day being 45. In both 1950 and 1951, 20 pairs laid eggs and about 45 adults were present in all. The latter total cannot be given exactly, as some of the non-breeders occupied boxes for only a few days or weeks, and some possibly changed from one box to another in the Tower. Most of the non-breeders were doubtless one-year-old birds. The latter were found by Weitnauer (1947) to occupy nest-sites and to form pairs, but not normally to breed, though one first-year male bred with an older female. Likewise Arn (1945) found that most Alpine Swifts {Apus melba) did not breed until their second year, though two individuals did so in their first year. Weitnauer (1947) found that Common Swifts tended to return to the same nest-sites in successive years and that, probably for this reason, the same pairs tended to breed together in successive years. As we gave up catching the adult Swifts, we cannot assess the extent to which they were faithful to their nest-sites or to each other. Some individuals returned to the same nest-site and the same mate, but others changed, perhaps due to our disturbing them. (3) Arrival in spring. The arrival of the adults in spring was recorded by inspecting the boxes each evening when the birds came in for the night. In 1949, the first two adults appeared on May 5th and most came May iith-27th. In 1950, the first appeared on May ist and most came May 4th-i7th, decidedly earlier than in 1949. In both years the colony assembled gradually, there being- 2 to 5 newcomers each day. The biggest arrivals were of 10 on May loth, 1949, and of 7 on May 4th, 1950. In 1951, the pattern of arrival was rather different. The first two came on May ist and 13 others had arrived by May 6th. The next newcomer did not appear until May 15th, and the rest came between then and June 8th, between 2 and 5 arriving each day. There was thus a gap of 9 days with no arrivals, presumably due to a hold-up on the migration route; H. G. Hurrell {in litt.) found a similar hold-up in arrivals on the coast in 1951. yoL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 189 In several cases, particularly in 1951, a nest-box was frequented by one bird or a pair during the day, but was not used for roosting at night until several days later. It is not known where such birds roosted meanwhile. In several boxes, also, roosting was rather intermittent at first, a bird appearing one night, not the next, and so on, but this occurred chiefly with single birds, before the mate arrived. In about a quarter of the observed pairs, the two members arrived on the same day. This happened with 7 out of 19 pairs in 1949, 2 out of 20 in 1950 and 5 out of 20 in 1951. In the rest, one bird arrived 1 to 10 days after its mate, while in the exceptional hold-up of 1951, one arrived 20 days and another 21 days after its mate. In view of these facts, it seems most unlikely that the pair stay together in their winter quarters and migrate north together in spring. Re-matings are presumably due to a tendency for both birds to return to the nest-site occupied in the previous year. Non-breeders, i.e. those pairs which did not lay eggs, arrived concurrently with the pairs that later bred. (4) Roosting. Except occasionally in the first few days after their arrival, each pair roosted in its box regularly each night throughout the breeding season. Very rarely, a bird returned so late in the evening that it failed to enter its nest-hole in the dusk, and we do not know where such individuals eventually spent the night. Once or twice a non-breeding bird, or a pair, disturbed and put out of their box at roosting time, returned to roost in another box, but we did not find this in the breeding pairs. In August, 1951, also, one non-breeding bird alternated irregularly, both for roosting and on its daytime visits, between two adjacent boxes, one of which was empty and the other regularly occupied by another individual. On only one occasion, in August, 1951, have we found three individuals roosting in the same box, the strange bird presumably being a passing migrant. The trio was not disturbed and only two birds were roosting there on subsequent nights. In May, 1951, one bird, presumably a stranger, came to roost at dusk clinging outside the Tower near one of the nest-holes, but we do not know whether it stayed the night. The roosting pair sit with their heads facing inwards, often side by side, but particularly in cold weather with one on top of the other. We agree with Weitnauer (1947) that Swifts do not enter or leave the nest-holes during the night. The famous dusk ascents, which Weitnauer has shown are carried out by the first- year birds, are not considered in this paper. We saw them in various parts of Oxford. When one occurred on June 8th, 1949, about a mile from the Tower, none of the Tower birds, breeders or non-breeders, took part. 190 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. The Swift is a late riser by avian standards, and it comes out much later and retires much earlier in bad than g"ood weather. In early May, 1951, when 8 individuals had arrived in the upper part of the Tower, it was found that the order in which they came in to roost was nearly, though not quite, the same on each of nine consecutive evenings. Certain individuals were always among the first and others always among the last to arrive. One bird regularly came in, stayed for a few minutes, and then went out again for a few minutes, before finally coming in for the night. In August, 1951, those parents feeding chicks stayed out much later than those without young. Rising and roosting times have recently been studied quantitatively by v. Haartman (1949) and Scheer (1949). (5) Behaviour in boxes by d.ay. The Swift usually enters its hole by a straight flight with a short rise at the end, alighting on the rim of the hole and immediately running in. With a wind force of 3 or more, or in fading light at dusk, a bird sometimes appears to miss the entrance hole; it then drops off and tries again. On a dark evening one individual actually made 20 consecutive attempts to enter its hole and then gave it up. During the day, several individuals often arrive almost simultaneously at their boxes. This is particularly common when they arc feeding young, and suggests that they travel and feed in small groups. Both the breeding and non-breeding adults visit the boxes regularly during the daytime in fine weather, the most favoured times being around 0730 and 1800 hours, and the least popular between 1200 and 1600 hours. On these visits they often stay inside for less than five minutes but sometimes for periods of an hour or more. (When eggs or young are present, the frequency of visits of course increases greatly.) In rain, the Swifts often take shelter in the boxes, and in continuous heavy rain they may stay in for much of the day. During a watch from 0800 to 1800 hours on June 26th, 1951, when the weather was cold, windy and almost continuously wet, the two members of a non-breeding pair spent respectively only 6 and 12 (out of 600) m.inutes outside. The pairs with young, however, spent part of the day seeking food. In August, 1951, on the Berkshire Downs, we saw several Swifts flying in front of and away from an approaching heavy thunderstorm. Swifts regularly dodge local storms in this way, and we have seen parents coming in to feed their young a few minutes after a heavy rainstorm had passed, but with their feathers quite dry. We have also seen SwiRs flying through heavy rain, and arriving in their boxes very wet. During a watch in the Tower on July 17th, 1950, a sudden severe rain-squall brought VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 191 seven adults into the Tower at once, presumably because they were feeding" close by. The many other adults did not come in at that time. In very cold weather, the pair sit close together or on top of each other in the box, with hunched bodies and ruffled feathers. At 1500 hours on May 8th, 1950, in cold rainy weather, we found three birds huddled together in a box. The third bird remained at least an hour, but had gone by roosting time. There was scarcely any excitement, low clucks and occasional low screams, and a little subdued preening, though on every other occasion (except the roosting incident already mentioned) three birds in a box meant severe fighting. In really cold weather. Swifts have a remarkable habit of congregating in clusters on walls (see Lack, 1951), and the above was possibly an incipient case of this kind. (6) “Bangers'L In an aerial display, here called “banging”. Swifts fly up to the nest-holes of other individuals and brush or bang ag'ainst them, apparently with the wings, and then fly on. Sometimes a lone bird flies up in this way to several different nest-holes in suc- cession, or to the same hole repeatedly, and sometimes a small party follow each other up to the same hole, then passing on to another hole. We have also had a banger follow up a parent returning to its nest. The bangers are usually silent and their flight is rather leisurely. Usually the banger just touches the hole and immediately flies on, sometimes it comes up to the hole and turns away without touching it at all, and occasionally it alights'at the entrance hole and looks in. Still more occasionally, the stranger may actually enter a hole, as described later. “Banging” is quite distinct from the missed attempts at entrance by the parent birds described in the previous paragraph, though it may sound similar when heard inside the Tower. Banging occurs throughout the breeding season, and at any time of day, being especially common around 0800 hours and infrequent in the afternoon. It is restricted to good weather with little or no wind, and is particularly noticeable on the first fine day after a spell of bad weather. The significance of this behaviour is unknown. Possibly it is initiated by non-breeders seeking nest-sites. One of us has seen similar display, with follow-my-leader up to the nest-holes, in the shearwater Puffinus Vherminieri suhalaris in the late afternoons along the cliffs in the Galapagos Islands. When a banger or a banging party is going the rounds, the breeding adults often return and enter their boxes. They then sit looking out of the entrance holes, which makes their white throats prominent, and scream violently as the bangers pass by. If both parents have returned, they scream in duet, one giving a higher note than the other. If a single parent is present and sitting on the eggs or young, it sometimes ignores the banging. 192 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. but more often it screams, sometimes without leaving the eggs, while at other times it leaves the nest and walks to the entrance hole, perhaps with incipient threat display. One bird, disturbed by a banger while building, advanced still carrying a leaf in its beak, but returned after a minute to continue building. The owners of the boxes react to the bangers as if they were intruders. Banging is a quite different type of behaviour from the scream- ing parties which dash rapidly round the Tower, particularly on fine evenings. Birds in the boxes often answer the screams of those outside, and sometimes come out and join in. Screaming parties are a communal display in which a whole colony may join, and perhaps members of other colonies also, as more individuals have sometimes circled the Tower than could be accounted for by the residents. Screaming parties occur, throughout the breeding season, but only in fine weather, and they are rare at the start and end of the season when few birds are present. (7) Threat display and greeting of mate. A Swift entering an occupied box is usually greeted by incipient threat display. The occupant screams, rises up on its feet (instead of sitting with its body on the floor of the box) and advances with wings held partly out and raised. Alternatively, it raises only the wing nearest the newcomer, tipping its body sideways and exposing the feet, which is probably significant as the feet play the chief part in fighting. So far, the display is the same whether the newcomer is the bird’s own mate or a stranger, but the next stage differs. If it is the bird’s own mate, both may now scream and advance, and the mate may also show incipient threat display, but they then quickly come together, sometimes almost bowing at each other, and start vigorous mutual preening. A similar sequence of behaviour is sometimes seen when the pair enter their box one immediately after the other, and occasionally when both are already sitting in the box. We have twice, on May 9th and iith, 1950, seen a definite scuffle between a presumptive pair. In each case the box had until then been occupied by a single bird, so we perhaps witnessed the first meeting between the pair that year. The bird in the box greeted the newcomer with much threat display, the newcomer responded similarly, and a short scuffle developed, though the birds did not actually grip each other with their claws. One pair quickly settled down together for the night. In the other case, one of the birds dropped out of the box, but was back two minutes later, after which there was a second scuffle, and the pair then settled down together for the night. The extent of the threat display between the pair varies greatly. There is a tendency for it to diminish in intensity as the season progresses, but sometimes it is extremely reduced even early in VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 193 the season, while occasionally it is strong- late in the season. Sometimes it is omitted entirely and often it is reduced to a short scream with no posturing, but often there is a little posturing. The behaviour is usually so unlike fighting that we at first called it a “greeting ceremony”, but its origin from threat display is now evident. If the newcomer to the box is a stranger, the threat display of the owner becomes exaggerated. The newcomer may then leave at once, but occasionally it responds. Both birds then prance round each other on raised legs, then pause with the near-side wing tipped up. They then come to grips and a fight commences. (8) Fighting. A strange Swift entering a box usually acts very nervously, sometimes staying quietly in the entrance before proceeding further in, then exploring tentatively, sometimes flicking its wings or walking high on its feet. Even if the owners of the box are absent, it often leaves after a minute or two, and it does not respond to begging chicks. If one of the owners is present and displays at it, it often leaves immediately. Early in the season, however, an intruder sometimes persists and a fig'ht follows. Out of i6 observed fights, 15 occurred before there were eggs in the box concerned. Five were seen in 1949, 8 in 1950, but only 3 in 1951. Nearly all occurred in May, a few in early June and i on July 13th. Six started in the morning, i at midday, 3 about 1700 hours, I at 2000 hours and 5 were first noticed on our routine visit at dusk. Although there have always been unoccupied boxes available in the Tower, the fights are probably for ownership of a box rather than of a mate. A fight often developed between an intruder and one of the owning pair when its mate was absent, and one of the pair ( ? the male) always does much more of the fighting than the other. Omitting brief scuffles, due to the ejection of a bird which perhaps entered by mistake, the shortest fight lasted for 20 minutes, the longest for 343 minutes. In another case, two birds were found already fighting and continued for a further 333 minutes. Fights of 2 to 5 hours seem not uncommon. In one box there were fights on two consecutive days, in another case a second fight took place three days after the first. Nearly all the fights started when an intruder entered an already occupied box. On one occasion, however, a bird entered a temporarily empty box with an angry scream, and when we next looked in five minutes later, two birds were fighting at the entrance hole with a third behind them on the nest. Likewise, Weitnauer (1947) has recorded three birds entering a hole in quick succession and then fighting. This suggests that a fight may occasionally start in the air. 194 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. After a few seconds of excited screaming and posturing, the birds rush together, gripping each others’ legs with their claws and struggling furiously. They remain thus g'ripped together for the rest of the fight. The claws are sharp and their grip is extremely strong, but as the birds usually grip their opponent’s legs, little if any damage results. The birds also peck repeatedly with their beaks at whatever part of their opponent’s body comes within range, usually the wing or body feathers. The pecks are vigorous but harmless, as we tested by Inserting a finger during a fight and allowing a bird to strike it. The birds struggle with their wings, sometimes shifting their positions. Periods of great activity alternate with pauses when the birds lie motionless and silent, apparently exhausted, with nictitating membranes over the eyes. After a time, one of the fighters will be found to be lying on its back below the other. Surprisingly, it is usually the under bird which is winning. It gradually shifts the other towards the entrance hole, the other resisting, and though it is hard to be sure of what is happening, as the birds are closely interlocked, it seems that the under bird is trying to throw the other out of the hole. At this stage the upper bird sometimes tries to escape on its own, but it cannot do so, as the victor does not relax its grip. Eventu- ally the fight carries on over the hole itself, with one bird partly outside, and then both birds usually tumble out, though occa- sionally one has managed to remain in. One fight continued with one bird partly out of the hole, flapping violently, for as long as 12 minutes. During their struggles, the birds scream violently, and during the later stages the bird that is getting the worst of it utters a plaintive piping call, not heard in any other circumstances. The loser ofter appears to be in great agony, alternately piping and lying back breathing faintly. On one occasion, after a fight had lasted 4| hours, we accidently disturbed the birds. The apparent victor ran to the entrance hole, while the other lay back and seemed utterly exhausted. After about four minutes, the victor returned, sat beside the other and pecked it. There was no response, so it got onto it and started dragging the unresisting body to the entrance hole, but it was then again frightened, and left the box. A moment later, the apparent corpse rose and left the box, evidently quite uninjured, though it had looked dead for several minutes. After other fierce fights also, we have found no trace of a dead or injured bird beneatli the nest hole, nor was any bird visibly damaged. Hence the apparent ferocity of the fights is misleading. On May 20th, 1948, howeyer, we found a freshly dead adult male, perhaps killed in a fight, in a box with a pair. On one occasion when an intruding Swift looked into a box, one of the owning pair at the back of the box rushed past its mate and attacked, while its mate, who had been nearer to the enemy, retired to the nest. In every other fight, also, one member VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 195 of the owning pair ( ? the male) took a much more active part than the other. The more retiring sex sometimes took part for a short while at the start, screaming and attacking the intruder, but after a few minutes it usually retired to the nest and took no more notice. Sometimes it left the box altogether; while one such bird built calmly at the nest, another quietly entered and left several times, and yet another preened one of the fighters repeatedly ! In one fight, four individuals, presumably two pairs, were involved. Two were fighting hard, with a third joining in occa- sionally, when a fourth bird entered. The third bird immediately left the other two and attacked the newcomer, and after five minutes it was driven from the box. The third bird then joined the original fight. After 20 minutes one of the three was pushed out of the box, but the other two continued fighting for some time. In a long fight the presumed female usually left well before the end, but she sometimes remained throughout a brief fight, after which the mated pair sometimes scuffled mildly with each other for a few moments, as also recorded in the Robin {Erithaciis rubecula) following ejection of a rival (Lack, 1943). In one case on May 17th, a third Swift entered a nest-box a little before dusk. It was ejected after a brief scuffle, and the owning pair had a slight dispute before settling down. A few minutes later the third bird entered again, it was again ejected and there was again a scuffle between the owning pair, which then settled down for the night at opposite sides of the nest-box, instead of side by side as is usual. An exceptional fight occurred on July 13th, 1950, in a box with a 25-day-old chick. An adult fed the chick at 1115 hours and remained in the box. At 1121 another adult, its throat-pouch full of food, entered. The parent usually pays little attention to its mate entering with food for the young, but this bird was imme- diately attacked. A confused fight followed over the hole; after 9 minutes one bird was half out of the hole, and after it had clung there for a further 6 minutes, both fighters fell out. Six minutes later an adult returned, possibly fed the chick, but then quickly settled by the hole preening, and remained preening for 29 minutes, which is very unusual at this stage, and suggests that it had been engaged in the fight. This is the only fight that we have seen with young in the nest, and it was presumably due to an adult entering the wrong box by mistake. The record is of interest in showing that the parent appeared to recognise imme- diately that the other adult was a stranger, even though it was carrying food for the young. Some of the Swifts had an aggressive display at us. This was quite distinct from the threat display against other Swifts. The bird would suddenly lunge forwards, flicking the wings partly 196 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. open and making" a sharp noise on the box. A few adults violently attacked a hand inserted in the box, g"ripping strongly with their claws, and sometimes drawing blood. The aggressive display with flicked wings was also given by some of the young, normally those whose parents behaved similarly. (9) Courtship. The pair is probably formed when the second bird arrives in the box at the beginning of the season. As already mentioned, the first display between the pair resembles threat, but this subsides. The most characteristic display between the pair is mutual preening, especially of those parts of the body which the bird cannot preen for itself, the throat, nape, and other parts of the head. Mutual preening occurs throughout the breeding season, but is particularly vigorous before the eggs are laid, when it may almost look like pecking. Sometimes it is accompanied by vibration of the wings, and occasionally in the courtship period the birds sit clo.se together in a rather humped position with the feathers fluffed out, excitedly preening and calling. Occasionally one bird has then tried to mount the other, but as the usual behaviour prior to copulation is different, we think that mutual preening is not linked with sexual display in the narrow sense. It is perhaps comparable with the courtship-feeding of the Robin, which likewise continues through much of the breeding season, is quite separate from the pre-coitional display and perhaps has a “bond-forming” function (Lack, 1943). A gentle “clucking” note, lower pitched and much softer than the usual scream, is characteristic of the courtship period. It is not heard from unpaired individuals, but starts as soon as a mate has been obtained and ceases when the eggs are laid. It is uttered by only one of the pair ( ? the female), usually when both are together in the box, but occasionally when one is alone. We have heard this call resumed in midsummer after pairs had lost their eggs, and also in August just after the young had fledged, while in the non-breeders (presumed first-year birds) it is heard throughout the breeding season. It is often heard independently of any particular display, but also accompanies mutual preening, though not copulation. The duet screaming, already mentioned, is another mutual activity of the pair, a joint threat display at other Swifts flying past. The two birds scream in rapid alternation so that there is no pause between the sounds. This is probably the “sweeree” call mentioned in The Handbook, where its double origin was apparently not recognised. We have not determined whether the duetting is always started by the same member of the pair, nor whether the one which screams at a lower pitch than the other is the same as the bird which clucks. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 197 We not infrequently saw copulation in the boxes, but only between 0630 and 0730 and between 1630 and 1830 hours, these being- the times of day when Swifts seem most excited, both in their boxes and round the Tower. A characteristic subdued call, between a scream and a cluck, usually but not invariably preceded copulation. The female sat in the normal resting position on the floor of the box. The male than mounted, gripping the female’s back with his claws and her nape with his beak. The female elevated the tail and the male twisted round, on one occasion almost lying on his back in the effort. Usually the male mounted three or four times in succession, but sometimes only once. Afterwards, there was usually mutual preening, but clucking was not heard. Copulation was observed only just prior to, and during, the egg-laying period. We, like other observers, have seen what we took to be copulation on the wing, but there has been much dispute as to whether this is effective or not. When we analysed the published records in Beitrdge zur Fortpflanzungshiologie der Vogel, where most have appeared, we found that they were seen around either 0700 or 1800 hours, the same times of day at which we observed copulation in the Tower. This coincidence supports the view that Swifts copulate both on the wing and in the nest- hole. Certainly, we did not see copulation in the boxes as often as we should have expected if it happened onl^ there. Moreau (1942) thought that copulation occurred both in the nest-hole and in the air in the White-rumped Swift (Apus caffer) of Africa. Some unexplained behaviour was seen between a pair in the first three weeks of June, 1949. One bird often pursued the other round the box, almost treading on its tail. Twice it mounted, but the under bird then slipped out of the nest-hole, leaving the other within. On several occasions vigorous mutual preening led to display, a chase and then a short fight, after which both birds went out. Twice, a third bird was involved for a time. The birds built a large untidy nest, and the box was later abandoned after a long fight on June 21st. We do not know enough to interpret this behaviour. (10) N EST-BUILDING. All the nests have been placed at the back of the box, as far from the entrance hole as possible. Knowing this, we at the start placed a little hollow ring of straw at the back of each box, and many pairs lined this ring for their nest, while others built to one side of it. The same nest is used and added to year after year. Building often starts on the day that the second member of the pair arrives, but sometimes there was a delay of several days. Occasionally, we saw nest material in a box before the birds spent the night there. Both sexes bring material and build it into the nest ; their behaviour is indistinguishable. They work quite independently of each other. Thus, if one is on the nest when 198 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. the other arrives with material, the sitter does not assist the newcomer. On two occasions when both adults arrived together with material, there was some display and even a brief scuffle before each built it in. The material is normally brought in the beak, but sometimes inside the mouth. The nest material is caught in the air, hence building is erratic, being most frequent when there is sufficient wind to carry up suitable material into the air. The time between successive visits with material varies greatly. One bird returned with an elm seed only two minutes after leaving the box. Dead grass, hay, straw, dead and green leaves, flower petals, winged seeds, seed flulf, bud sheaths, cocoons, feathers and scraps of paper, including a bus ticket, have been found in the Tower nests. On several occasions, birds have brought fresh poppy petals, which made a vivid splash of colour in the nest. All the birds collected hay in large quantities when a field near by was cut. Just after the local pigeons had had a scrap on the roof, a Swift entered with a pigeon’s feather. Another bird brought in a Cabbage White Butterfly [Pieris hrassicce), making no attempt to eat it, but trying to stick it down to the nest, in which it had great difficulty as the butterfly started a reflex jerking of its wings. The material is stuck to the nest with saliva, which is used from the start of building, and has even been seen in a box before the birds had collected any material. When secreting saliva, the bird sometimes continues to hold the nest material in its beak and at other times lays it down. It crouches with the head held rather low, sometimes nodding the head or vibrating the whole body, the wings being held partly out. Bill and throat can be seen moving, and saliva appears in sticky threads. The bird usually builds for three to four minutes after bringing material into the box, with pauses of up to half a minute to rest, when the head is often laid on the side of the nest. One bird which was disturbed when building raised its head and swallowed hard. The nest is shaped by the bird turning round in it and scrabbling with its feet. Building does not cease with the laying of the eggs, but con- tinues right through incubation. As a result, the nest is larger and much neater at the end than at the start of incubation. An adult relieving its mate on the eggs often returns with nest material in its bill, and the incubating bird spends much time pecking round the outside of the nest and sticking down odd pieces of material. The pecking looks rather aimless, and the material seems to be found by touch, not sight. This may be because many natural nest-sites are darker than the Tower boxes, for the latter would seem light enough for the birds to have used their eyes. Heinroth (1911) has suggested that the Swift is long- sighted, and cannot focus on near objects. This may be so, but in that case it is surprising how accurately it feeds its tiny young. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 199 Building' stops completely when the young hatch, though we once saw a parent (with chicks three weeks old) playing with a feather in the box. The non-breeders continue building throughout the summer, but spend much less time than the incubating birds in sticking the material down. Because of this, the nests acquire more material but are much less tidy than those of incubating birds. Parents which have lost their eggs also continue building until late into the season. On July 26th, 1950, a bird was caught with nest material in a box where .building had occurred intermittently through the summer. This bird, which we ringed, we supposed was a first- year non-breeder, but two days later it was caught feeding its 2i-day-old chicks in another box! On June 4th, the original female of this latter box had been found dead, and the newly laid clutch was thrown out. We guess that the male of the pair then mated up with the presumed first-year bird, which then laid a clutch of eggs and raised a family, but at the same time retained some of its first-year behaviour with reference to the box which it originally occupied. This interpretation may be thought far- fetched, but it is difficult to see why otherwise a bird should build in one box and raise young in another. Further, Weitnauer (1947) has recorded a first-year male which paired up with an older female and raised young, but which retained its first-year behaviour in relation to night ascents, then deserting its young for a time. (ii) Egg-laying. The first egg was laid between 7 and 29 days after the start of building.- In seven cases, we know that the egg was laid between 0740 and 1 1 15 hours, and in one case between 1715 and 2045 hours, the last being the only occasion on which we have any reason to think that an eg'g was laid after noon. Breeding seasons and clutch-size are treated elsewhere (Lack, 1951). On the morning when the egg is laid, we have sometimes found faeces in the box. The adults do not normally defascate in the boxes, and this suggests that the laying female may not leave the box between waking and pi'oducing the egg. We have seen her go up to the entrance hole when Swifts were flying round outside, but, if she had not yet laid her egg, she returned quickly to the nest. The male is sometimes present in the box while the female is laying the egg, and in one case he kept trying to sit on the first egg, but the female each time managed to insert herself under him, and he left at 1015 hours. The female then sat quietly, and at 1043 humped her back and looked under her wings, which were held low. She then resumed a normal position, and when she preened at 1100 hours, the second egg could be seen under her. At 1104, she moved the eggs a little with her beak, and seven minutes later she went slowly to the hole and flew out. We 200 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. recorded similar behaviour by the laying" female on other occasions, including" the humped attitude, her turning" of the eggs a fe"w minutes after laying, and her departure soon after"wards. If the clutch is destroyed or ejected. Swifts sometimes, though not usually, lay again. In two cases in which the clutch was lost during incubation, the repeat clutch was started respectively lo and 17 days later, while another pair that deserted on the day that the first egg hatched laid again 12 days later. In addition, we have three records of pairs which laid one or two eggs but did not incubate them, and later laid again, the new clutch following respectively 6, 24 and 29 days after the previous laying. There was also a remarkable pair which in 1950 laid four eggs in succes- sion at two-day intervals, throwing out the first two but incubating the last two. In the same box in 1951, a pair (' ? the same) actually laid five eggs in succession, on June 6th, 7th, 9th, loth and 13th or 14th respectively. Some of these eggs were ejected, but we replaced them in the nest, so that the bird incubated all five eggs, but the only ones to hatch were the last two laid. It is most unusual for a Swift to lay a clutch of more than three, or to lay eggs at a shorter interval than two days, but we saw only two adults in this box, and have no reason to think that two females were involved. Weitnauer (1947) states that Swifts will not accept extra eggs added to their completed clutch, a point that he tested on five occasions. We have in three cases added a third egg to a clutch of two, in two cases on the day that the second egg was laid, and in the third case after six days of incubation, and in each case it was accepted. (12) Ejection of eggs. Swifts not infrequently ejected one of their eggs, or even the whole clutch. This might happen at any stage between laying and hatching. Usually the ejected egg was left for a while in the box just outside the nest, but later it often disappeared, presumably being dropped out of the entrance hole. Any cracked egg was normally ejected, and if we replaced it, it was usually ejected again within a day. An infertile egg was sometimes ejected, but it was sometimes retained throughout incubation and for several days after the other egg or eggs had hatched. A fertile egg was also ejected not infrequently. Except on one occasion when a parent disturbed by us accidentally carried an egg between its legs and body on to the floor of the box, we do not know why fertile eggs were ejected. Perhaps the parents are rather careless, in addition to which they seem to have no instinct to bring misplaced eggs back into the nest. When we replaced an ejected egg in the nest, the parents often hatched it successfully, though sometimes they again ejected it. In iqS^' ^ pair threw out one of their eggs seven times during incubation, in five cases VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 201 the first egg' and in two cases the second egg of their clutch. Each time we replaced the ejected egg, and eventually both hatched. In another case when we replaced an ejected egg several times, the parents deserted. Swifts sometimes threw out their complete clutch, possibly in one or more cases due to disturbance by us, but usually for no apparent reason. Weitnauer (1947) claims that single eggs and complete clutches may be ejected in abnormally cold weather, and Cutclift'e (1951) also states that eggs tend to be thrown out in bad weather. Our evidence on this point is inconclusive. If the correlation with cold weather is genuine, it might mean either that abnormal cold deranges the reproductive behaviour of the parents, or that cold weather addles the eggs, which are then ejected. There is, however, no evidence for the latter suggestion at present. As mentioned later, the parent Swifts sometimes leave their eggs uncovered for several hours of the day, including in cold weather, but the eggs seem unusually resistant to cooling, and they often hatch out after such treatment. The whole problem of egg ejection, and of the degree to which the eg'gs can withstand cooling, requires further study. We have twice seen an egg ejected. A sitting bird was fidgetting in the nest with head down, when an egg suddenly popped out from its flank, but so quickly that we could not see how it was ejected. (Egg-shells are ejected by the foot, and the foot may well have been used in this case also.) In another box, both parents were sitting in a box with a freshly laid but cracked egg on the rim of the nest. One of the birds suddenly picked up the egg in its mouth, and holding it with the long axis at right angles to the beak, ran up with it to the entrance hole, and dropped it near, but not out of, the hole. The egg rolled back towards the nest, but the parents paid no more attention to it at that time, though it vanished later in the day. Moreau (1942) has seen the African Apus caffer carrying an egg in its mouth to the nest entrance and dropping it out. (13) Incubation. The birds usually start incubating by day when the second egg is laid, but in a clutch of two the first egg often hatches a day before the second, presumably because it receives some incubation on the night before the second egg is laid (see full dicussion In Lack, 1951). In May, 1948, several clutches were completed during unusually cold and stormy weather, the parents left their eggs uncovered for much of the day, and the interval between the completion of the clutch and the hatching of the young was 4-5 days longer than usual. The Incubating bird normally sits with its back to the entrance hole. It is continually fidgetting, preening, scratching, vibrating the body, shuffling the eggs or turning them with its bill or feet. 202 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. rattling its bill on the side of the box, picking up loose nest material or building it into the nest. If a banger is heard outside, the sitter may turn temporarily to face the entrance hole, and sometimes it even leaves the eggs and looks out of the hole, but usually it returns to the eggs after a few minutes. One bird stood up over its eggs each time that it heard the loud clapping from the Parks near by as successive New Zealand wickets fell to a triumphant University. In very hot weather, the parent sometimes sits in the box without covering the eggs. When the eggs are turned, they can often be heard rattling on the floor of the box, but they seem to come to no harm. The two parents take turn and turn about on the eggs. The sitter often greets the arrival of its mate with a scream or with very mild threat display as it moves slowly off the eggs. Some- times it is reluctant to leave, and the newcomer then prods it gently or gradually insinuates its body under that of the sitter. On one occasion when the newcomer was kept waiting, it picked up some grass lying in the box, presumably a displacement reaction. The bird which has been relieved usually sits by the entrance hole for two or three minutes and then flies out. Very occasionally it has not flown out, but has returned and taken its place again on the eggs, relieving the bird which had only just come in. If the newcomer has entered with nest material, it may build it into the nest immediately, or it may settle on the eggs and build later, while incubating. Sometimes, and particularly when the sitter has not been relieved for a long time, it leaves the eggs, and after a pause flies out. The eggs may then be uncovered for an interval varying from one minute to at least 6^- hours. When both parents stay in the box, as in the early morning or in con- tinuous rain, one sits on the eggs while the other often sits close alongside it. We do not know whether they periodically change places on the eggs under these circumstances, nor whether they relieve each other at night. In 1949, we carried out 4 dawn-to-dusk watches on the incubating birds, relieving each other about as frequently as the parent Swifts. We were able to observ'e the 1 1 upper nests in the Tower simultaneously, helped by the fact that the returning parent makes a slight bang as it alights at the hole. In 1950, we carried out 4 watches from 0800 to 1800 hours on one incubating pair, and in 1951, 5 ten-hour watches on up to 10 different nests. We found a ten-hour watch far less tiring than one from dawn to dusk. Altogether, we obtained in this way 58 ten-hour records of incubation, the total being smaller than the previous figures might suggest because not all of the nests mentioned contained eggs on every visit. The length of time for which each parent sits on the eggs depends primarily on the relieving bird, i.e. the sitting bird normally departs as soon as it is relieved, however short or long VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 203 the interval, thoug-h occasionally it leaves before being relieved. Under the latter circumstances, the next bird to return is some- times the one that has been out longest, but occasionally one bird has returned in less than five minutes and the other a few minutes later, suggesting that the sitter left for a few minutes, had a short look round and then returned without feeding. Likewise when both parents have stayed in the box in rainy weather, one of them has sometimes gone out for from i to lo minutes and then returned, presumably without having fed. For our 58 ten-hour records, the average number of reliefs occurring between 0800 and 1800 hours was 5.2, which means that the average interval for which the parent was away was 1 15 minutes. The maximum number of reliefs at one nest in the ten hours was 12, the minimum 2, and the interval between successive reliefs (i.e. the length of a sit) varied between 2 and 345 minutes. There were often big differences in the length of individual sits at the same nest on the same day. On the average, the two members of the pair bore an equal share, as found by Weitnauer (1947), though Cutcliffe (1951) thought that the female bore the major share. Some pairs consistently relieved each other at more frequent intervals than others. As shown in Table i, of five pairs watched on three different days in 1949, pair A had consistently the shortest average sit, pair E consistently the longest, and B’s average was always shorter than C’s. Pair D were more erratic, as were pair F (see footnote). Table i. Average length of each sit by 5 pairs on 3 days in 1949. Pair June 15 June 21 June 25 A 72 mins. 55 mins. 65' mins. B 79 67 ,, 120 ,, C 90 74 .. 120 ,, D 120 ,, 63 93 .. E 149 99 .. 183 ,, Notes : (i) The averages for pair F were 103 minutes on June 15th and 106 minutes on June 21st, but by June 25th the eggs had hatched. (ii) Watch from dawn to dusk on June 15th and 25th, but starting only at 0645 on June 21st. The average length of sit is longer before than after midday, as was particularly clear in the 1949 watches started at dawn. The birds relieve each other at particularly long intervals early in the mornnig. In 38 of our 58 ten-hour watches, the eggs were covered by one or other parent throughout the ten hours, and they were left uncovered for only one minute in another case, but in the remain- ing 19 the eggs were left uncovered for a total varying from 4 to 392 minutes out of the 600. Tliere was much individual variation. Thus on one day, when the eggs in one nest were left uncovered for 172 minutes, another pair brooded continuously. The longest period for which the eggs were uncovered, just over 204 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. 6^ hours, occurred in cold and squally weather on the day before the eg-g-s hatched ; the same pair had brooded continuously throug'hout an earlier watch. The parents rarely left their eg'g's uncovered before iioo hours. Thus considering all our watches, and scoring i for each hour in which each nest was left uncovered for at least part of the time, 44 out of 52 records occurred between IIOO and 1700 hours, being very evenly divided over this part of the day, while only 4 occurred between 0800 and 1100 hours and 4 between 1700 and 1800 hours. Incubation was sometimes intermittent for a day or two after the clutch was completed, but, apart from this, the extent to which the eggs were left uncovered did not seem inlluenced by the stage of incubation. Indeed, it is difficult to know what causes the observed variations. Surprisingly, weather had no clear influence, possibly because the weather has several rather difl'erent ciTects. One might guess that a brooding parent would be more likely to depart leaving the eggs uncovered, cither during ^•ery cold weather through becoming hungry before its mate returned, or in very hot weather when the eggs would scarcely require brooding. We perhaps observed both efl'ects, but it is hard to be certain. It might also be thought that the time for which the relieving parent stays out feeding would be shorter in good than bad weather, as feeding is easier in good weather, but our data do not support this view. Great irregularity in the incubation rhytbm, and a similar difficulty in relating it to weather or other factors, was found by Moreau (1942) in the African Apits caffer. (14) Brooding of young. 'I'he eggs usually halcb on consecutive days, as discussed else- where (Lack, 1951). d'hc eggshell is sometimes left in or beside the nest, where it gradually disintegrates, but at other times it disappears, presumably being removed from the box by the parents. On one occasion, shortly after a chick had hatched, the Iirooding adult ejected the eggshell backwards from the nest with a quick movement of one leg. 'I'he parents quickly respond to the presence of a newly hatched chick by bringing food, but the change from incubating to feeding behaviour is gradual, as for tbe first week of their life the young are brooded almost continuously, each adult still regularly relieving the other on the nest when it returns with food. 'Fhe time for which each parent broods tbe young is primarily determined by the incoming bird, and seems to be basically a problem of feeding frequency, which we analysed in our earlier paper, showing the marked influence of the weather (Lack, 1951). After it has been relieved, the brooding parent usually waits for a minute or two by the nest-entrance before flying out. On one occasion when the brooding parent was pushed ofl' the chicks by the relieving bird. British Birds, Vol. xlvi. PI. 45. Snow-Bunting {Plectrophenax nivalis). Nest. Sweden. [Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol. xlvi, PI. 46. {Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). British Birds, Vol. xlvi, PI. 47, {Photographed by Bernard Jeans). British Birds, ^’ol. xlvi, PI. 48. Snow-Bunting {I’/eclyoplieuax nivalis). .Male. hioRTii Iceland. [Photographed by Ci. K. \'eates). British Birds, Vol. xlvi, PI. 49 Snow-Bunting {Plectvophenax nivalis) Female. North Iceland. {Photographed by G. K. Yeates). Snow-Bunting {Plectrophcnax nivalis). Winter Flock. Jamtland, Sweden. [Photographed by C. Persson). British Birds, Vol. xlvi. Pi. 51. t I' i] II II Snow-Bunting [Plectrophenax nivalis). Winter plumage. {Photographed by Arthur Christiansen). Britlsli Birds, ^^ol. xlvi, PI. 52. Bill marks of Jack Snipe {Lynwocryptes miniums) in Mrn. Xottingiiam, Makch t()tii, ic)5i. Upper : Two tvpicai. patti'Rns. Lower : Natfrai. size. [Photographed by j. 1'. Hanks). (See p. 2^3). VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 205 the displaced bird pecked vigorously at nest material, and this also happened once when we removed the chicks for weighing'. These were displacement reactions. In 17 ten-hour watches on broods under a week old, the young were covered for 98 per cent, of the time, and in ii similar watches on broods in their second week for 52 per cent, of the time, while young more than a fortnight old were covered for 7 per cent, of the time or less. Very wet days were excluded from the above summary, because then the adults sometimes stay in their boxes, and it becomes difficult to tell whether they are really brooding the young or are merely sitting beside or over them. The effect of rain is illustrated by our records from oSoo to 1800 hours on July 20th, 23rd and 25th, 1951. Considering 8 broods over a fortnight old, a parent was in the box with the young for an average of 9 per cent, of the time on July 20th and 2 per cent, on July 25th, both days being fine, but for an average of 78 per cent, of the time on July 23rd, which was very wet. Further, both parents were together in the box for a negligible amount of the time on July 20th and 25th, but for 34 per cent, of the time on July 23rd. It IS chiefly in continuous heavy rain that the parents shelter in the boxes in this way. In cold and windy, but dry, weather, when food may also be very scarce, the parents with older young usually. stay out hunting'. (15) Feeding of young. 'I'he parent returning to the box with food for its young has an enormous bulge just below the beak, due to the mass of insects packed into the throat and stuck together with saliva. There is usually a definite food-ball, though at times the insects adhere together only loosely. On coming to the nest, the adult holds its head low with throat moving and then produces the insects. When the chicks arc very small, the adult passes over the food in several successive portions; sometimes one mouthful to each chick, and the feed may last for three or four minutes, as the adult sometimes takes the food back into its own mouth and then produces it again, presumably because the original meal was too large for the chick. When the chicks are older, the food is always passed quickly in one large ball to one of the chicks only. We on two occasions thought it possible that food passed between a returning adult and its mate brooding the young chicks, but wc could not be sure. If it occurred, it may have been by accident, the mouth of the brooding' parent getting in the way at the critical moment. We never saw one adult feed ihe other during incubation, and we wonder whether Weitnauer (1947) is correct in saying that this is occasional, as the billing in mutual preening sometimes looks rather like feeding. 206 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. The adults normally bring" food for the young" every time that they return to the nest, including on the last visit "when they come in for the night. If, however, a banger is going the rounds, the parent birds often return to their boxes without bringing food, and then sit in the entrance holes screaming" as the intruder flies past. The ready return of these adults, and their similar return in numbers in a sudden shower, suggest that they often hunt for food near their nests. The chicks are normally fed on the nest itself. This is true even in the later stages, when between feeds the chicks wander about the box and often sit looking" out of the entrance hole. On the return of a parent, they dash back to the nest and beg for food. In thatched roofs, we have sometimes found the young wandering for some distance from the original nest, and their habit of returning for the feed perhaps helps to prevent them from straying too far. Very occasionally when the young were exceedingly hungry, they appeared to be fed at the entrance hole by the returning parent, which immediately left again. The chicks call repeatedly, a plaintive note much weaker than the adult’s scream. One was heard before it was out of the egg, the sound being clearly audible six feet from the closed box. Another youngster, found with a damaged wing about a mile from the Tower the day after it had fledged, still gave the typical nestling call when handled. The young beg for food by squeaking and waving the open bill. When they are older, they also pursue the adult round the box with excited flapping of the wings, repeatedly trying to grab its beak in theirs. The begging becomes much more violent when the young are hungry, as during a spell of poor weather, and particularly with broods of three young. The young start to beg as soon as they hear the adult alight at the nest entrance, and w'hen particularly hungry they also react to any other similar noise, sueh as a sharp gust of wind outside, or a backfire from a car in the road, or a sneeze by the observer, and they then continue the reaction by begging from each other. When excited, also, they often beg from the brooding parent as its mate arrives, and they usually beg when the brooding adult moves off them even though no other adult has entered the box. (The brooding adult of course has no food for them.) After about the first week, the young keep up a quiet high-pitched murmuring throughout the time that the parents stay with them, but not usually when both parents are out. Very occasionally, presumably because temporarily satisfied, the young did not beg from an incoming parent. With very young chicks, the parent then prodded gently, the young then begged and were fed. We have only four records of an older chick failing to beg. In two cases the adult merely waited for several minutes, after which the chick took the food. In the third case the adult waited for three minutes and then left the box. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 207 still carrying' the food. In the fourth case the adult, retaining" the food in its throat, preened the chick’s throat. It then made some small swallowing movements. The second parent now entered with food. The first parent proi-nptly displayed at it with lifted wing, a most unusual occurrence at this stage of the breeding cycle, and presumably a displacement reaction. The second parent fed one of the chicks while the first parent went to the entrance hole, made more swallowing movements, picked up some fcEces, and left. After it has been fed, the chick sometimes turns away from the adult, calling and shivering its wings, and sometimes it plays with the adult’s beak, but there is usually no special behaviour after the feed. (i6) Recognition of nestlings. Swifts appear unable to recognise their own young individually, or even to be aware of the correct number in their brood. ’When weighing broods of only one young, we usually placed a member of another brood in the box so that the adult would not return to an empty nest. On several such occasions the returning parent has fed the strange youngster, though in one case it was ten days younger than its own chick and was much less well feathered. We have also added an extra nestling to a brood of one, and in another case to a brood of two, and in both cases the parents successfully raised the foundling with their own family without any apparent disturbance. More remarkably, after the last chick of a brood of two had fledged at 0720 hours on July 30th, 1950, and while both parents were still out, we inserted a 26-day-old chick in the box. This chick had been deserted by its parents and had been starving for 40 hours. Being only partly feathered, it looked very different from the departed fledgling and it was so feeble that it failed to beg when one of the adults returned to the box a minute after it had been inserted. Indeed, the returning adult failed to notice the chick, and sat by the entrance hole. The adult later screamed at a passing Swift, which roused the chick to beg feebly, and the adult then turned and looked at it. After 50 minutes, the adult moved from the entrance hole to the nest, where it allowed the chick to preen it, and 20 minutes later it left the box. The chick was not visited by either parent until 1850, when one adult entered, but so quietly that we did not see whether it fed it. On the following day, both parents fed the chick normally, and they continued to do so till it fledged 15 days later. The parents had previously fed their own brood for 40 days, and as they normally migrate a few days after the young have fledged, the addition of the strange chick not only prolonged their nest-care by 15 days, but probably postponed their departure on migration by at least as long. 208 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. On one occasion, as already nientioned, an adult bring-ing' food into a box with young’ was attacked and expelled by another adult in the box, presumably because the newcomer had mistaken this box for its own. One wonders whether, had the rightful parent been absent, the stranger would have fed the young. If so, we may well have failed to notice similar cases of mistaken entry elsewhere. We have also four records of an adult Swift bringing- food into a box containing no young. One of these birds we caught and ringed (but did not see again), the other three we watched. Each bird came to the back of the box, investigated the nest, poking about in it, then went to the entrance hole and looked out, then returned to the nest. Two of the birds left after 5 minutes, the other after 28 minutes. Each left with its throat still bulging with food, though one had made some small swallow- ing movements. After one of these departures, the young in the next-door box were fed within half a minute, suggesting that this parent had been the intruder. Such mistakes are probably more frequent at the Tower, with its symetrical entrance holes, than in natural nesting sites. (17) Nest sanit.vtion. We have not seen an adult Swift defalcate in the box, and have found fresh droppings from tlie adults only on the morning when an egg was laid, and occasionally on the first arrival of the birds in May. When the chicks are very young, they defaecate over the rim of the nest, but after they are three to four weeks old they often, though not always, go up to the entrance hole, turn round witli the cloaca over the hole, and dehecate outside. Swifts’ nests can be located late in the season by the white splashes outside. In the early stages, the adults appear to swallow the Ixeces of the young, but later to carry them away In the throat; it is, however, difficult to be sure. The adults seek for fieces particu- larly just after they have fed the young, and they peck around the box in the same vague manner as an incubating bird seeking nest material. It seems as though they find the fteces by touch, not sight, and faeces are normally removed only when damp. If in their search the adults touch dry faeces they often ignore them. Although the adults continue to remove some of the faeces up to the time when the young fledge, many faeces get left in the box, which becomes extremely dirty. One bird picked up some fieces to which a feather had stuck, and took the whole lot into its mouth. (18) Exercising of young. From the day of hatching, the young can both flap their wings and grip strongly with their claws. Care must be taken in lifting them out of the nest, as they grip so tightly that a claw may be left behind. Very occasionally, a youngster has got pushed out over the edge of the nest on to the floor of the box, and if it is VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 209 less than about ten days old, it cannot climb back in again. Surprisingly, the adults do not then feed it, even though it may be only just over the edge of the nest and may beg hard for food ; hence it usually dies. We have seen io-12-day-old nestlings climb back into the nest when pushed out. At an age of two or three weeks, the young start shuffling round the floor of the box. They take exercise by flapping violently with the wings and jumping up and down, resting every few seconds. Sometimes, the body is tipped forward, the tail spread and the wings vibrated. At other times, the body is pressed against the vertical side of the box, with tail spread and pressed against the floor. Starting when they are about four weeks old, the young do a form of “press-up”, the wings being partly extended and pressed down on the floor, taking the weight, while the body is raised until both it and the feet leave the floor altogether. At first the bird cannot sustain this position, and merely hops up and down, but after a few days it can hold its body clear of the ground for a second or two, and the time gradually increases until, just before fledging, the chicks have held this position for 10 seconds or more. The chicks take exercise particularly in fine weather and when well fed. In July, 1950, after bad weather and poor feeding, they exercised much less. When badly undernourished, the chicks become torpid and clammy, losing temperature control, as we first noticed in the bad summer of 1946, and they may remain in this state for several days. At first, we thought that such chicks were dying, but they recovered amazingly quickly if supplied with food. The chicks were first seen to make preening movements when about three weeks old, and thereafter the amount of preening increased. A chick will preen itself, other chicks in the nest and its own parents, who sometimes preen the chicks. The mutual preening of the parents in courtship is perhaps linked with this juvenile behaviour. (19) Fledging. At Oxford most young Swifts left the nest between the third week of July and the third week of August, the latest on September 7th. The young left equally in good and bad weather, departing very gradually, one on one day and one on another, most of them over a period of 3-4 weeks. At least in the years 1948-51, there was no case of a temporary hold-up due to bad weather. Hence the departure of the young was in marked contrast to that of the adults in 1951, described later. The young Swift leaves the nest fully able to take care of itself, and independent of its parents. This is unusual in birds, particu- larly in an Order placed close to the Passeriformes. We suppose that the young migrate on the day that they leave the nest. No young Swift has returned to our boxes after fledging, and this was 210 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. also the experience of Weitnauer (1947), though Cutcllffe (1951) states that some of the young returned to his nests on the evening after fledging. There are two possible explanations for Cutcliffe’s finding. At the nests in thatched roofs near Oxford, we found that the older young sometimes wandered off for several feet under the roofs and might be absent from their nests for a few hours at a time. Possibly Cutcliffe mistook such temporary absences for true departures. Alternatively, Weitnauer’s and the Oxford Swifts were breeding in nest-boxes, each entered by one small hole, whereas Cutcliffe’s birds bred in a church tower to which there was much easier access all round the tower, so that the young might find their way into the tower to roost and, once in, might recognise where they were. In the African White- rumped Swift [Apus caffer) the young do not return to the nests once they have flown (Moreau, 1942), but in the Alpine Swift (Apus melba), the young regularly return to roost in the colony after they have fledged, staying for several weeks before migrating (Am, 1945). The young normally left the nest in the morning, often before 0800, as also found by Moreau (1942) in African Swifts. We have only one record of a Swift leaving after midday, between 1330 and 1930 hours, but another fledgling capable of flight fell from the nest at 1245, probably by accident during excited movements of the brood. Omitting this last case, we observed five actual departures. As already mentioned, the older young spend much of the day looking out of the nest-hole, and in the last few days before they fledge, they spend most of the day there. In one case, the parent left the box at 0825 hours. The chick sat looking out of the entrance hole. It spread its wings and tail, and tipped forward with its head out of the hole, but then turned back into the box. This performance it repeated. Finally, at 0835, it inserted its right wing out of the hole and gently tipped itself out. Another bird behaved very similarly. At 0810, it was found sitting with its head out of the hole and its wings and tail partly spread. It then stretched its wings and preened them, moved back from the hole, and went up to it again. The body feathers were alternately fluffed out and flattened, giving the appearance of deep breathing, and the tail was moved up and down. The youngster then stretched its wings above its back, and tipped forward half out of the hole, but hesitated to make the final effort, and scrambled awkwardly back into the box, supporting itself on its wings. After sitting by the entrance hole for about a minute, it slipped out. In several other cases we saw similar behaviour prior to fledging, but as the preliminary hesitations occasionally last for several hours, or even for more than a day, we have not always stayed (o watch the final departure. In another case, a fledgling launched VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 211 itself quietly from the hole without our having seen any preliminary movements. Twice, we saw a fledgling leave, possibly by accident during' the excitement, when bangers were going round the Tower. When another nestling is present in the box, it seems unaffected by the departure of its companion. It sometimes leaves on the same morning, but often not until from one to several days later. All the young referred to above fledged when both parents were out of the box, and this is probably normal. Hence the parent Swift is unaware that the young bird has gone, and on its next visit it returns as usual with food to the now empty box. We have several times watched its subsequent behaviour. The adult moved on to and then off the nest several times, walking rather high on its feet as in threat display, then stretched the wings, yawned repeatedly, poked the nest with its beak and displayed at it with one wing raised ; presumably a series of displacement reactions. After this, the bird usually sat about half way up the box, facing towards the entrance. Two of the birds then made violent swallowing movements, involving great effort, with the eyes partly closed, but a third left the box still carrying an intact food pouch. Four of the adults left the box after 8-io minutes, another after 15 minutes, but we could not always see what they did with the food ball. If in the later stages a nestling is deserted by its parents, it usually stays in the nest for several days, but eventually it jumps out, even though its wings are not fully grown. It may be able to fly a short distance, but it then comes to earth and cannot rise again. The widespread belief that a Swift cannot take off from the ground is presumably due to people finding these premature fledglings, which look fully feathered, though the wings are not full grown. An adult Swift can easily rise from a flat surface, as we have tested several times. (20) Departure of adults. The departure of the adult Swifts was studied only in 1951, by a regular roosting check each evening from July 30th to August i8th Inclusive. In this period, we recorded the day of departure for 25 parents which raised young and for 8 other adults which had no young. A few other individuals were excluded, either because we could not see clearly into their boxes, or because their departure might have been due to our disturbing' them. At least in 1951, the adult Swifts, unlike the fledglings, tended to depart in waves. Thus 30 out of the 33 recorded departures took place on only 6 of the 20 days of the watch : 5 on August 3rd and 5 on the 4th, then 7 on the 8th and 4 on the 9th, and finally 7 on the 17th and 2 on the i8th. The other 3 individuals left singly on intervening days. The gap of seven days between August gth and 17th, during which only two individuals left, was probably caused by the weather. The first five days were very 212 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV, bad, the next two were very fine and were presumably used by the Swifts to feed up prior to leaving". The early morning" of August 17th was overcast and rain started at 0745 hours, lasting the rest of the morning. A flock of over a hundred Swifts gradually collected over Oxford and at about 0800 hours, after circling and apparently feeding, most of them set off between S.VV. and S.S.W., rising as they went. Some returned and joined another party of about 50, which then left in the same direction. That evening, it was found that 7 out of the 9 ‘Tree” adults remaining in the Tower had departed, the other two going next day, leaving only the parents still feeding young. We had rather expected that the non-breeders would leave earlier than parents which had raised young, but this did not happen during the main period of departures. Thus parents and non-breeders were included in similar proportions in both the first exodus on August 3rd-4th and the last on August 17th. When the main departures were completed on August i8th, however, the only birds which remained were two pairs feeding late broods, and these stayed for 2^ weeks longer, leaving immediately after their young fledged in the first week of September. In 4 out of 17 pairs both individuals left on the same day, while in the rest one of the pair left i to 5 days after its mate. The parents normally left a few days after the last of their young, the commonest interval being 5 days, the longest 7, 9, 15 and 16 days. Two adults left on the same day as the last of their young. In 4 cases one, but never both, of the parents left i or 2 days before the last of the brood departed, but in these cases only one of the young was still left. In a brood of one, one of the parents left 5 days before the nestling. The average interval between the departure of the last nestling in each brood and of its parents was 3 clays for the first and 5 days for the second parent (reckoning as minus those parents which left before their young). Weitnauer (1947) states that the parent Swifts usually left on the same day as their young, though a few stayed for another night or two, and that one parent often left several days before the young fledged, as also reported by other workers (references in Koskimies, 1950). This was contrary to our experience in 1951. Further, Swifts on autumn migration tend to weigh much more than breeding adults, suggesting that they have had time to put on weight before departure (Lack, 1951). The extent to which the parents leave their young before they are fledged evidently needs further study. It would be highly remarkable if the parents frequently desert their broods before the end of the normal breeding season, and then migrate before putting on fat ; though we can understand how one of the two parents might leave a single chick before the end, as in good weather one chick needs only one parent to feed it. We found that parent Swifts readily VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 213 desert through disturbance in the final stages, and we wonder whether many of the reported cases of Swifts abandoning their young may not have been caused inadvertently by the observer. (21) Work by others. The literature on the breeding of the Common Swift has been surveyed by Koskimies (1950) and we ourselves gave many refer- ences in our earlier paper (Lack, 1951). Hence in the present paper, we have not thought it necessary to refer to the work of others on Apus apus except where we seriously differ. We ought, therefore, to record that, except for the few points discussed in the text, we are in full agreement with the conclusions reached by Weitnauer (1947) in his long and important paper, and also with Cutcliffe (1951). The review of breeding habits by Koskimies (1950) is another matter, as the author seems to us to have been uncritical in both his acceptance and his interpretation of the work of others. In addition to various minor errors in emphasis, he includes the following statements which we consider erroneous (the page references are to Koskimies’ paper) : there is an after- noon rest (p. 14) ; there is probably no feed on the last return to the nest at roosting time (p. 21); building lasts 8 days (p. 55); incubation starts only after the second egg is laid (p. 60) ; most of the young fledge at about the same date in any one year (pp. 65, 75) ; the fledging period is longer in broods of larger size (p. 66, apparently based on two broods in different years studied by V. Boxberger, though Koskimies quotes the quantitative evidence of Moreau to the contrary) ; the young depart on migra- tion in waves (p. 75); the whole colony tends to leave together p. 76). The above statements are mainly derived from others, but as the author’s aim was a critical review, it is unfortunate that he should have accepted all of them and based arguments on them. Summary. (1) A colony of Swifts was induced to breed in nest-boxes with glass backs. (2) Each year about 20 pairs laid eggs and several non-breeding pairs ( ? in their first year) occupied other boxes. (3) The adults arrived in spring and departed in autumn over about three weeks. There was sometimes a hold-up during part of this time. The two members of each pair usually arrived and departed separately. (4) Each pair normally roosted in their box throughout the summer. (5) The adults visit the boxes at any hour of the day, but especially around 0730 and 1800 hours. They sometimes shelter in the boxes in rain. (6) In fine weather single individuals or small parties, the “bangers”, may fly up to and brush against the boxes. They are treated as strangers by the owning birds. 214 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. (7) When another Swift enters a box, it is often greeted with incipient threat display. If it is the bird’s own mate, this quickly gives place to mutual preening. If it is a stranger, a fight may follow. (8) Violent fights were seen, the birds remaining grappled for up to five hours, but no serious harm usually resulted. (g) Copulation occurs in the boxes, with little preliminary display. (10) Nest-building starts on the day that the pair is formed and continues until the end of incubation. Non-breeders build throughout the summer. The material is stuck down with saliva. (11) Egg-laying is described. If a clutch is lost, a repeat clutch sometimes follows. (12) Swifts sometimes eject part or the whole of their clutch. The ejected eggs are sometimes fertile, and the reasons for the habit are obscure. (13) The parents take an equal share in incubation. The time of each sit varied from 2 to 345 minutes. The eggs were some- times left uncovered during the day for periods of up to hours. The influence of weather on the incubation rhythm is obscure. (14) The parents brood the young by day nearly continuously in the first week and for about half the time in the second week, but very little thereafter. (15) The feeding parent brings a mass of insects stuck together with saliva. This is normally passed as a single food-ball to one nestling, but with very small nestlings it is divided. (16) Parent Swifts readily adopt a strange nestling added to, or in place of, their own. (17) The parents remove some of the faeces, but many others are left in the box. The older nestlings sometimes defaecate from the hole. (18) The older nestlings exercise their wings vigorously, and have a curious form of “press-up”. (19) Fledging is described. Nearly all the departures were in the morning, and no fledgling returned to its box. (20) At least in 1951, most of the parent Swifts stayed for several days after the departure of their young. References. Arn, H. (1945). “ Zur Biologie des Alpenseglers Micropus melba melba (L).” Schweiz. Archiv. Ornith., ii : 137-181. CuTCLiFFE, A. S. (1951). “ Notes on the breeding habits of the Swift.” Brit. Birds, xliv : 47-56. Haartman, L. V. (1949). “ Neue Studien iiber den Tagesrhythmus des Mauerseglers, Apus apus (L).” Orn. Fenn., xxvi : 16-24. Heinroth, M. (1911). " Zimmerbeobachtungen an seltcner gehalteneii europaischen Vogeln.” V. Int. Orn. Kong. : 703-764, esp. pp. 717-722. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING BEHAVIOUR OF THE SWIFT. 215 Koskimies, J. (1950). " The Life of the Swift Micropus apus (L).” Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. A., iv : 151. Lack, D. (1943). The Life of the Robin. London. Lack, D. and E. (1951). "The breeding biology of the Swift Apus apus.” Ibis, xciii : 501-546. Magnusson, M. and Svardson, G. (1948). " Livslangd hos tornsvalor Micropus apus (L)." Vdr Fdgelvdrld, vii : 129-144. Moreau, R. E. (1942). " The breeding biology of Micropus caffer streubelii Hartlaub, the White-rumped Swift.” Ibis 1942 : 27-49. ScHEER, G. (1949). " Beobachtungen iiber den morgendlichen Flugbeginn des Mauerseglers, Micropus apus (L).” Vogelwarte, xv : 104-9. Weitnauer, E. (1947). “Am Neste des Mauerseglers, Apus apus (L).” Orn. Beob., xliv : 133-182 STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XL. THE SNOW-BUNTING. Photographed by Arthur Christiansen, Bernard Jeans, C. Persson, P. O. SwANBERG AND G. K. YeATES. {Plates 45-51). As a winter visitor the Snow-Bunting {Plectrophenax nivalis) is mainly a coastal bird. As a rule it occurs in some numbers on the north and east coasts, but in most years smaller numbers are also seen in the west and south-west, so that its winter distribution is a good deal wider than that of the Shore-Lark {Eremophila alpestris). Inland occurrences are somewhat uncommon, but in recent years several have been recorded at reservoirs and sewage farms in midland and lowland counties, including the London area. More normal winter haunts are the high moorlands of the Pennines {cf. antea, vol. xxvii, pp. 153-157), where they feed on the Purple Moor Grass {Molinia cceridea) and the gall-midge larvae which infest it, and the mountains of North Wales and the Lake District. Wintering flocks of Snow-Buntings were at one time a feature of some of the public parks in Edinburgh and we learn from the latest number of the Edinburgh Bird Bidletin (Vol. 2, No. 4, p. 45) that flocks were unusually large in Queen’s Park during the recent winter when “on many days there were probably between 150 and 200 on the hill”. Winter birds in the plumage shown in Plate 51 are often quite inconspicuous on the ground, the females especially showing relatively little white, but the impression of dull coloration is soon dispelled when the birds take to flight as all show some white in the wing, males a good deal more than females. As with the Lapland Bunting {Ccdcarius lapponica) the Snow-Bunting’s normal gait is a quick run. 216 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. It is not quite clear whether the publication of these plates in our June issue is, or is not, unseasonable. It is certainly true to say that the Snow-Bunting' has bred in the higher Cairngorms and in certain mountains beyond the Caledonian Canal; whether it does so regularly is more doubtful. Readers are reminded of the existence of the Rare Birds’ Protection Committee of the Scottish Ornithologists’ Club (Hon. Sec., P. W. Sandeman, Dalshian, Harelaw Road, Colinton, Edinburgh), which is the appropriate body to receive confidential information on the breeding status of the Snow-Bunting. Scotland is on the southern fringe of the bird’s breeding range, and all our plates taken at the nest come from Sweden or Iceland. It is possible that the Snow- Bunting used to breed regularly in Britain but is ceasing to do so as a result of the amelioration in climate. MID-SEASON MOVEMENTS OF SWIFTS IN SUSSEX. BY D. D. Harber. In his article, “The Movements of Swifts in Summer’’ [aniea, vol. xliv, pp. 146-152), H. G. Hurrell states that “there is evidence which suggests the possibility of an influx from the Continent about the end of June’’. My own observations on the Sussex coast during the summers of 1950 and 1951 would appear to indicate that not only does such an influx take place but that movements in both directions across the Channel may be normal in this species during the breeding season, though sometimes on quite a small scale. All movements described below were observed at Langney Point, Sussex, except where otherwise stated. About a quarter of a mile of coast was regularly watched there, but though most of the birds seen crossed this bit of coast (in one direction or the other) this was not the case with all the birds coming in from the sea, some of which, while seen from there over the sea, actually crossed the coast elsewhere. Except in the case of big movements (when, of course, it was impossible to follow the course of each bird) nearly all the birds recorded as coming in from the sea were first picked up with glasses some way out, most being first seen at a great distance as tiny specks, sometimes only visible through a telescope. Likewise nearly all the birds recorded as flying between N. and N.W. were followed inland, through glasses, until lost to sight. Except where other- wise stated the period of observation was normally of about two hours’ duration and usually from about 11.00 to 13.00 (B.S.T.). VOL. XLV.] MOVEMENT OF SWIFTS IN SUSSEX. 217 1950 June 14th. Three flew in together, S.E. to N.W. Wind S.W. On the 13th a cold front from the N.E. had moved S.E. and on the 14th it joined an occlusion which had come up from the S. and this gave widespread rain in England during the night of the 13th and on the 14th, breaking a long spell of mainly dry weather. June 2.1st. Two, one and two flew S. out to sea. Wind S.W. This and the next two observations were made during a period of a complex and mainly cyclonic type of pressure distribution which lasted until the 24th, the heaviest rain being on the 20-2 ist. A drop in temperature on the 21st. June 22nd. A party of six flew S. out to sea. A strong W. wind. Much the same weather conditions as on the previous day. June 23rd. One flew in S.E. to N.W. Wind N.W. Pressure high over France. June 25th. Four, one and one flew in S.E. to N.W. Wind W. On the 24th an anticyclone had developed over France and a S.W. to W. type was established over the British Isles, lasting to the end of the month. June 28th. One flew S. out to sea and one and two flew in S.E. to N.W. Warm and fine in S.E. and Midlands. Wind W. June ^oth. Two flew S. out to sea and three flew in S.E. to N.W. Wind W. Still warm and flne in S.E. and Midlands. July jth. Two flew in S.E. to W., seven, five and two S.E. to N.W. and eight and three S.S.E. to N.N.W. When the last two parties crossed the coast other Swifts, c. 20 in all, were seen crossing the coast in much the same direction further to the N.E. Wind N.W. later W. An anticyclone over France with a ridge of high pressure extending northwards across England and intensifying. 1951- June 12th. 15.30-16.00 (B.S.T.), 22 in all flew S. out to sea. Strong W.S.W. wind. Early on this day a cold front gave thunderstorms and heavy rainfall in S.E. and E. England. June 22nd. Two and four flew out to sea between S. and S.E. Wind S.S.W. During the night of 2ist-22nd a shallow depression spreading from France gave thunderstorms and thundery rain in some S. and Midland areas. June 23yd. 1 1. 30-13. 30, c. 500 flew in from between S.S.E. and S.S.W. to between N.N.E. and N.N.W. 14.50-17.20 c. 260 flew in likewise. The largest party of the day consisted of c. 200. Eight flew E. out to sea. Wind N.N.W., fog in night had mainly lifted. The shallow depression had moved into the North Sea and gave dull, cool weather on this day in the E. and Midlands. June 24//}. 10-15-13.00, 20, 12 and 4 flew in from between S. and S.E. to between N. and N.W. Wind N.W. veering W. 15. 15-16.15, 15 in all flew in S.E. to N.W. and a party of about 20 flew E. out to sea. A strong W. wind. Depression still in region of North Sea. June 26th. 15. 30-17. 15, c. 200, coming from N.N.E., flew out to sea between S. and S.S.W. A party of six flew in from the sea, S.E. to N.W. Strong W. wind. Rain spreading southwards over a considerable area of the British Isles. Depression still in region of North Sea. A fall in tem- perature. June 2jth. 10-30-13. 15, no Swifts seen. Fresh W.S.W. wind. Clear and warmer. Depression filling and moving away, anticyclone spreading from S.W. and intensifying, giving fine weather until end of month. 218 BRITISH BIRDS. [vol xlv. June 2%th. 9.30-10.30, 15 flew in from between S. and S.E. to between N. and N.W. None, 10.30-13.00. Wind N.W. July -^rd. 16. 15-18. 15, 12 flew in from between S.E. and' E. to between N.W. and W. Strong W. wind. Belt of high pressure still giving fine weather. July :\th. 10.45-13.00, 13 flew in from between S.E. and E. to between N.W. and W. Strong W. wind. 15. 15-18.00, 42 flew in as before. Wind northerly. A cold front reached the S. on this day. July 11th. Two flew in S.E. to N.W. Wind S.W. A fairly deep depression moving slowly N.E. across Scotland. Rain in all districts. July iSith. Rye Harbour, Sussex. 15.45-16.45, many hundreds coming in from the S.E. (from over the sea) and going N.W. inland. This movement extended as far as the eye (plus x 12 binoculars) could see on both sides of the mouth of the Rother. Afterwards only a few came in. Wind N.W. with much cloud. An anticyclone had come in from the Atlantic on the 13th- 14th and had increased in intensity, giving, dry and mostly bright weather in the S. July c. 40 flew in S.E. to N.W. (this record is by A. R. Mead-Briggs) . A ridge of high pressure moving over the British Isles. (The meteorological data above have been obtained from the “ Daily Weather Reports " of the Meteorological Office with the exception of the conditions of wind and visibility which were noted at the time). It is, of course, possible that the July movements given here, or some of them, may have been connected with the autumn emigration. The fact that the birds were coming in from the S.E. and going N.W. inland as in the case of the earlier inward movements in no way disposes of this possibility. For Swifts arrive on the Sussex coast in this way in August when they are undoubtedly emigrating and the hiriindmes on autumn emigration often behave in like manner there. It will be seen that the above data give little support to the theory of Koskimies (as outlined in H. G. Hurrell’s article quoted above) that Swifts endeavour to avoid an advancing depression by flying against the wind round the S.E. side of it. The two large scale movements in particular (June 23rd and June 26th, 1951) do, however, seem to suggest a connexion with unfavour- able feeding conditions caused by the passage of a depression. The influx of June 23rd followed the passage of a shallow depression coming from the Continent on the night of June 21st- 22nd. One cannot but suspect the outward movement of June 26th to have been, at least in part, a return of birds which came in on the earlier date, presumably in consequence of their finding that the passage of the depression had created similar unfavour- able feeding conditions over Britain. (219) NOTES. Moustached Warblers in Hampshire. — At about 7 p.m. on August 13th, 1951, Campbell Ballantyne told G. E. Wooldridge of two warblers that he had been watching that morning. Although obviously warblers their identity was puzzling. He gave a fairly full description of the birds seen, the most striking feature being, “very dark brown head with white eyestripe’’. He had been first attracted by their call, a Stonechat-like “tac-tac” which he considered an unusual note to hear from a reed bed. We went at once to Eling Great Marsh, Totton, near Southampton, and in the same area of low spartina, about two to three feet high, found first one and then two warblers. They moved through the spartina just above the ground or water level, occasionally appearing on the tops, particularly preparatory to taking flight when driven to the edge of the small patches. Flights were short, usually to the next nearest patch, twenty to fifty feet away. They flew low, not above five feet, direct, and with little undulation. They almost invariably called after a flight. We watched them for nearly an hour, with good sunlight (though low) behind us, and had good views down to five yards, with 8 x 30, and 12 X 40 binoculars. CB had previously watched them in morning sunlight for approximately two hours. The following notes were made in the field, with initials where variations between observers occur: — ' Size — about Sedge-Warbler [Acrocephalus schoenohccnus) to which at first sight there was a resemblance. Crown and nape — ■ black, some dark brown at certain angles. Conspicuous white stripe above eye, black stripe from beak through eye, broadening behind eye, dark ear coverts (ashy-brown CB). Sides of neck light brown (GEW). Mantle— dark brown (with darker marks CB). Back — S5**55**55**55**55**55**55**55**55* ^ I /\ r L t 3 *55**55**55**55**55**55**55**55**55**55* SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS 9/- for 3 lines (minimum) ; 3/- for each extra line or part thereof. For the use of a Box Number there is an extra charge of I/-: Advertisements for a particular issue should reach this office by the 21st of the preceding month. AJI communications to be addressed to: — H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C. I. SKOKHOLM BIRD OBSERVATORY remains open well into October, Accommodation for naturalists, 4 guineas per week. Details from Warden. Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. WANTED. — W. Beebe’s A MONOGRAPH OF THE PHEASANTS in four vol- umes. Please write to H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., the publishers of this work. FOR SALE. — Thorburn ’s 6r/t/sh Birds, 4 vols. 4to ond Supp/ement, 1st Edition: British Birds, vols I — 29, last 2 in parts: Transaction’s Norfolk and Norwich Nat- uralists’ Society, Vols I — 8 half calf, 9 — 10 buckram, rest in parts. Offers to N. Tracy, S. Wootton, Kings Lynn. CLIFF HOUSE RESIDENTIAL COUNTRY CLUB, DUNWICH, 15 minutes walk from Scots Hall and Minsmere Bird Sanctuary. Good food, packed lunches, comfortable rooms. Club Licence. Reasonable terms. Tel. Westleton 282. BIRD BIOLOGY COURSES organised by the British Trust for Ornithology in conjunction with the Council for the Promotion of Field Studies. There are still a few vacancies for the remaining Courses to be run this year: August 6th to 13th — FLOCKING BEHAVIOUR at Malham Tarn Field Centre, near Settle, Yorkshire. Staff, P. F. Holmes (Warden) and Miss I. Worth. Sept. lOth to 17th— PROBLEMS OF MIGRATION at Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. Staff, J. H. Barrett (Warden) and W. B. Alexander. Cost gns. each Course ; apply direct to Wardens at addresses given. The Courses are not confined to members of the B.T.O. Printed in Gt. Britain by The Riverstde Press, Ltd., Twickenham, Middx. Published by U. F. & G. WlTHFJUl^', LTD., r> Warwick Court, W.C. I. BRITISH BIRDS AN lU USTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST Monthly 2s. 6d. Yearly 25J. AUGUST, 1952 VoL. XLV. No. 8 Published by H. F. ^ G. Witherby Ltd, BRITISH BIRDS EDITORS. E. M. Nicholson £ 5 AUG and W. B. Alexander A. W. Boyd P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst I. J. Ferguson-Lees Editorial Address : Fordlands, Crowhurst, Sussex. Contents of Number 8, Vol. XLV, August, 1952. Page Report on Bird-Kinging for 1951. By A. Landsborough Thomson, C.B., D.Sc. and E. P. Leach ... ... ... ... ... ... 265 Studies of some species rarely photographed. XLII. The Great White Heron. The Glossy Ibis. The Squacco Heron. Photographed by Arthur Brook ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 278 The post-hedging dispersal of juvenile titmice. By Ivan M. Goodbody. 279 Notes : — Starlings attacking Chrysanthemum and Pansies ... ... ... 286 Exceptional passage of Lapland Buntings in Norfolk, 1950 (R. A. Richardson and Peter Jackson) ... ... ... ... ... 286 Short-toed Lark at Great Saltee, Co. Wexford (P. W. P. Browne) ... 287 Water-Pipit in Surrey ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 288 Habituated fear response in Blue Tits (John Ash) ... ... ... 288 Woodchat Shrike in Kent (G. R. Shannon). ... ... ... ... 289 Pied Flycatcher breeding in Cheshire and Staffordshire (G. Pass and C. B. Williams ; P, H. Charlton) ... ... ... ... ... 289 Brown-backed Warbler on Great Saltee, Co. Wexford (P. W. P. Browne). ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 290 Robin’s nest used for two successive broods (Hubert E. Pounds) ... 291 Great White Herons in Cornwall and Dorset (R. H. Blair ; A. J. Bull) 291 Squacco Heron in Sussex (M. J. Dawson) ... ... ... ... 293 Red-breasted Goose on Montgomeryshire-Shropshire border (W. A. Cadman)... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 293 Goosander breeding in Cumberland ... ... ... ... ... 294 Red-breasted Merganser breeding in Cumberland ... ... ... 294 American Pectoral Sandpipers in England, 1951 ... ... ... 294 Sociable Plover in Northamptonshire (H. G. .Mexander) ... ... 294 Continental Oystercatcher in Britain (Holger Holgersen) ... ... 295 Letter : — Visible Migration in Britain (David Lack, C. A. Norris, E. R. Parrinder, Eric Simms and Bruce Campbell) ... ... ... 296 JUST PUBLISHED The Popular Handbook of British Birds 45s. net 227 eggs Providing — in one handy-sized volume — an authentic and unique reference to British Birds for the field observer. “ . . . one of the best bird books ever brought out ...” DAILY EXPRESS Edited by P. A. D. HOLLO 448 pages ’ 'J' tHE , „ 1 H. * 1000 birds Illustrated in colour Limited Special Edition, on India paper, bound in limp leather cloth 70s. net In order to obtain a copy of this book please fill in this form, detach it along the perforation, and post it to us. ORDER FORM To H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD. 5 WARWICK COURT, LONDON, W.C.i. Please send me cop of THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS *45s. Edition , (postage 1 s. extra) for which I enclose cheque/postal order for £ : : *Please delete whichever is not required. Name Address (please use block letters) Date or from your local bookseller BRITISH BIRDS Number 8, Vol. XLV, August, 1952. REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951* BY A. Landsborough Thomson, C.B., D.S.c., Chairman, AND E. P. Leach, Hon. Secretary, Bird-Ringing Committee, British Trust for Ornithology . This is the fifteenth reportf issued on behalf of the Committee, continuing the earlier sequence under the title “The British Birds Marking Scheme.” It is in the form instituted last year, com- bining a report on the prog'ress of ringing during 1951 with a selected list of recent recoveries such as was formerly Issued separately. Management. The headquarters of the scheme remain in the British Museum (Natural History) by permission of the Trustees, and rings are inscribed “BRITISH MUSEUM NAT. HIST. LONDON.” The Honorary Secretary of the Committee has continued to carry out the work of running the scheme, which continues to grow as the number of birds ringed increases. .Since September, 1951, she has had the whole-time assistance of Miss Diana Syms. The constitution of the Committee remains unchanged since the addi- tions reported last year. Finance. A generous grant from the Nature Conservancy has made possible the provision of assistance in the headquarters work, as mentioned above. The Committee is now also indebted to the British Trust for Ornithology for a contribution of p^ioo per annum towards expenses from its main funds. The cost of rings, as of stationery and postage, has continued to rise ; but so far the increase has not had to be passed on to the users, except in the case of No. 4 rings (now 12/- per hundred). The accounts for 1951 will be published with those for 1952 in the report of the Trust. Methods. The Committee approved, during the year, the issue of Addi- tions and Amendments to the Instructions to Ringers. These were framed with a view to raising the general standard of ringing, in which a few regrettable lapses have come to notice. More stringent conditions than formerly for the admission of new ringers are likewise being maintained. *A publication of the British Trust for Ornithology. fThe last preceding report was published in Brit. Birds, vol. xliv, pp. 289-310. 266 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Progress of Ringing. T-he total number of birds ringed (from October, 1950, to September, 1951) was 85,743, of which 49,364 were trapped and 3^)379 were nestlings. This is a new record for any year, and the grand total since the inception of the scheme is now over a million. The names of ringers are listed alphabetically in Table II, on this occasion without showing their individual totals. In the Committee’s view it is undesirable to stress quantity .in this respect. It may be said, however, that twenty-one individual ringers or groups were each responsible for ringing over a thousand birds during the year. The largest total is that of the London Natural History Society. The total of birds ringed at duck-decoys for the Wildfowl Inquiry Committee shows an increase. The relatively large number of Pink-footed Geese ringed by the Severn Wildfowl Trust is of special interest. Dartford Warbler nestlings to the number of 22 — more than in all the earlier years together. — were ringed by Mr. John Ash. The following species were ringed for the first time: — Pallas’s Warbler (Monks’ House); Red-headed Bunting, Tawny Pipit and Subalpine Warbler (P'air Isle); Melodious Warbler (Lundy); Olivaceous W'arbler (Skokholm) ; Little Stint (K. Macgregor) ; and American Water-Pipit (Saltee Ringing Station). The supply of new rings is scarcely keeping pace with the ever growing demand, and difficulty in increasing the rate of delivery is causing the Committee concern. Many people are still retaining unused stocks of rings, in some cases issued several years ago, and the Committee would be grateful if such surplus rings were returned. Selected List of Recoveries. The following list is again necessarily restricted to records of some individual interest, excluding many which will be of value for subsequent analysis. In some cases the records have been summarised rather than listed in detail, and in other cases atten- tion has been drawn to points of novelty in those given. The list includes new recoveries reported up to April, 1952. No. Ringed. Recovered. Magpie [Pica pica). 342034 Haynes (Beds.), 6.7.51, young, by Laxton (Northants), 4.9.51, Bedford Sch. [3601. N.N.W.]. Starling [Sturnus vulgaris). The following list of interesting recoveries is classified in groups. The first of these, immediately below, consists of records of birds ringed in Great Britain in winter and recovered abroad in what may be presumed to be the breeding season. Within the group, the recoveries are arranged geographically in the order Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Holland. VOL. XLV.] BIRD-RINGING COMMITTEE REPORT. 267 No. PM.532 T.2898 12047 RL.180 W.3987 W.3281 RB. 444 W.4536 W.5353 PW. 934 21730 PT.340 PW.444 RK.775 W.6279 1 1 800 PS. 089 W. 5089 X. 4986 PA.596 SR.526 PL. 706 W.5394 Ringed. Loanhead (Midlothian) 1.1.51, by R. W. J. Smith. Edinburgh, 6.3.48, by Midlothian O.C. Ballantrae (Ayr) 23.1.49, by Nelson and Stevenson. York, 10.12.50, by Bootham Sch. Thornaby - on - Tees (Yorks.), 13. 1. 51, by P. A. Rayfield. Bebington (Ches.), 25.1. 51, by W. Rankin and Birkenhead Sch. Carlisle (Cumb.), 2.12.49, by J. Hughes. Leicester, 14. 2. 51, by Leics. and Rutd. O.S. York, 27. 1. 5 1, by Bootham Sch. Oundle (Northants), 16.12.50, by Oundle Sch. S. Shields (Durham), 2.2.50, by F. G. Grey. Leeds (Yorks.), 5.1. 51, by J. R. Govett. Carlisle (Cumb.), 3.12.50, by J. Hughes. Cley Bird Obs., (Norfolk), 10.12.50. Bebington (Ches.), 17. 2. 51, by W. Rankin and Birkenhead Sch. York, 31. 1. 50, by Bootham Sch. Cambridge, 15.12.50, by J. J. H. Wilson. Douglas, I. of M., 3.3.51. by Cowin, Crellin, Moss and Pool. Cleveleys (Lancs.), 9.3.47, by R. M. Band. Nottingham, 30.12.50, by J. McMeeking. Crewe (Ches.), 23.12.49, by F. J. Brown. Bedford, 18.1.51, by Bedford Sch. York, 31. 1. 51, by Bootham Sch. Recovered. Larsmo, W. Finland 5.6.51 [63° 45' N. 22° 40' E], Steinkjer (N. Trondelag), Norway, 26.5.51. Near Stavanger, Norway, 4.6.51. Ljungskile (Goteborg), Sweden, 22.5.51. Near Ljungby (SmMand), Sweden, 23.6.51. Tjornarp (Scania), Sweden 5-6-5I- Halsingborg, Sweden, I7-5-5I- Thyholm (Jutland), Denmark, 25.4.51. Langaa (Jutland), Den- mark, 21. 5. 51. Mailing (Jutland), Den- mark, 5.8.51. Nyborg (Fyn), Denmark, 7-7-5I- Near Taastrup (Zealand), Denmark, 2.7.51. Near Husum (Schleswig- Holstein), Germany, 7-4-5I. Schafstedt in Dithmar- schen, Schleswig- Holstein, -.5.51. Wremen, Mouth of Weser, Germany, 16.8.51. Emden, Germany, 3.6.51. Spijk (Groningen), Holland, 24.7.51. Near Lauwers Zee, (Fries- land), Holland, 27.4.51. Leeuwarden (Friesland), Holland, -.7.51. Schagen, Noord Holland, -.4.51. Westzaan, Noord Holland, I7-7-5I- Zeist (Utrecht), Holland, 25-4-51- South Beveland, Holland, 25-7-51- 268 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. No. W.7114 Leicester, Rutland O.S. X.8810 Lundy Bird Obs., 11.10.49. This next group consists of records of birds ringed in Great Britain in winter and recovered abroad in early spring or in autumn or winter. The recoveries are arranged geographically as before. Ringed. Recovered. 1. 3. 51, by Leics. and Fredrikstad, (Ostfold), Norway, 25.3.52. Valinge (Scania), Sweden, 22.10.51. Havndal (Jutland), Den- mark, 12. 12. 51. Near Aalborg, (Jutland), Denmark, -.3.52. Drejb, (Fyn) Denmark, -•9-5I- Near Husum, Schleswig- Holstein, 5. 1 1.5 1. Near Nordenham (Olden- burg), Germany, 24.2.52 Wesel (Westphalia), Germany, 22.2.52. Woltersum (Groningen), Holland, 21.3.52. Drachten (Friesland), Holland, 5.10.51. Meppel (Drente), Holland, -•3-52. Slagharen (Overijssel), Holland, 15. 10.51. Zuilichem (Gelderland), Holland, 4.3.52. Near Hilversum, Noord Holland, 6.3.52. Near Dordrecht, Zuid Holland, 20.3.51. PW.844 12516 RM.396 W.2502 13490 W.0248 W.8229 T.6120 W.0211 ’^"■4735 PM.729 PL. 548 W.0175 PM. 03 7 PL. 1 18 Oundle (Northants.), 10.12.50, by Oundle Sch. York, 7.2.49, by A. and M. White Douglas, I. of Man, 23.1. 51, by Cowin, Crellin, Moss and Pool. Bebington (Ches.), 8.1.51, by W. Rankin and Birkenhead Sch. Near Wolverhampton (Staffs), I3-3-50, by G. C. Lambourne. Breaston (Derby), 23. 1.5 1, by J. B. Crompton. Scarborough (Yorks.), 5.3.51, by A. Wallis. Thornaby-on-Tees (Yorks.), 26.11.50, by P. A. Rayfield. Breaston (Derby), 16.12.50, by J. B. C. Crompton. Swanage (Dorset), 24.1.50, by E. M. Cawkell. Fordingbridge (Hants.), 31.1.51, by Ash and Ridley. Bournemouth (Hants.), 16.12.50, by Miss Jellicoe. Trafalgar Square, London, 18.12.50, by London N.H.S. Ditto, 1. 1. 51. Hertogenbosch Cleveleys (Lancs.), R. IM. Band. 2.1.51, by (N. Brabant), Holland, 25.2.52. Lightship S.2, North Sea, 3-4-5I- [54° N, 3°3o'E.]. In the following group, the birds were ringed in Great Britain, in winter, and recovered in Ireland or at a distance within Great Britain. Eleven other records from distances up to 100 miles have been omitted. SP.422 W.3121 PN.951 Fair Isle Bird Obs. 12. 11.49. Aghadowey (Londonderry) 8.12.51, Carlisle, 14.1.51, by J. Hughes. Wellington (Salop.), 9.2.51, b}' F. B. Clemson. Dundalk (Louth), -.2.52. Wedmore (Somerset), -.11.51, [103 m. S.]. VOL. XLV.] BIRD-RINGING COMMITTEE REPORT. 269 No. Ringed. Recovered. RB.256 Shipston-on-Stour (Warwick), Duns (Berwick), 18.1.52. 24.2.51, by C. A. Norris. [260 m. N.]. The following were ringed as young, and recovered at some distance within Great Britain. S.6481 Hoy, Orkney, 20.5.51, by A. E. Avoch (Ross), 5.1.52. Billett. [90 m. S.]. PF.065 South Shields (Durham), 28.6.50, Hessle (E. Yorks. ),-5. 51, by J. C. Coulson. [95 m. S.]. RM.156 15371 Private Ring. Greenfinch {Chloris chloris). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Saffron Walden (Essex), 24.12.50, by A. Darlington. Spurn Bird Obs., 15.10.49. Skolcholm Bird Obs., 20.4.50. Stonham Aspal (Suffolk,) -.5.51, [40 m. E.N.E.]. Near Loftus (N. Yorks.), 17.6.51, [75 m. N.]. Wexford, Ireland, 3 1.7.5 1. Goldfinch {Carduelis c. hritannica). The following fully substantiated record is remarkable in showing a considerable migration on the part of a bird of the British race, regarded as mainly resident. The birds native to the Iberian Peninsula are racially distinct. F.3005 Oxford, 16.6.51, young, by Ox- Pamplona, Spain, 8.1.52. ford Orn. Soc. MD. 601 NA.378 M.0420 H.1798 J.6670 ME. 236 ED.874 J-4345 J-5246 Linnet {Carduelis cannahina). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Seahouses (Northumb.), 12. 10.51, by E. A. R. Ennion. Spurn Bird. Obs., 21. 7. 51. Ditto 25.4.51. Ditto 8.8.50. Lundy Bird Obs., 16.5.51. Portland Bill (Dorset), 6.10.51. by K. B. Rooke. Gourge (Deux Sevres) , France, 23.12.51. Bressuire (Deux Sevres), France, 3.2.52. La Rdole (Gironde), France, 7.11.51. Near Nerac (Lot et Gar- onne), France, 6.1.52. Tolosa (Guipuzcoa), Spain, 29.10.51. Sestao (Vizcaya), Spain, 16.12. 51. Chaffinch {Fringilla coelebs). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Isle of May Bird Obs., 2.10.46. Skokholm Bird Obs., 29.3.51. Great Budworth (Ches.), 18.12.50, by A. W. Boyd. Nassane, Norway, Oct. or Nov., 1951. [61° 7'N : 8° 3'E.]. Asnes, Norway, 28.8.51. [60° 36' N : 11° 59' E.]. Edsele, Sweden, 28.9.51, [63° 26' N ; 16° 32' E.]. 270 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. No. Ringed. Recovered. Meadow-Pipit {Anthus pratensis). RINGED AS YOUNG. NF.484 Havergate Island (Suffolk), Near Cordoba, Spain, 18.5.51, by H. G. Brownlow. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. 16.11.51. MD.672 Seahouses (Northumb.), 21. 10.51, Bridlington (Yorks.), by E. A. R. Ennion. -.2.52, [125 m. S.]. NA.608 Spurn Bird Obs., 26.7.51. Jerez de la Frontera, Spain, 28.1 1.5 1. J-0405 Halifax (Yorks.), 24.4.50, by Ditto, 21. 1. 51. Halifax Sci. Soc. J.8886 L5693 N.6674 N.6686 MA.034 H.0557 K.5366 M. 1417 N. 1517 L-3939 Pied Wagtail {Motacilla alba yarrellii). RINGED AS YOUNG. Haweswater (Westmor.), 8.6.50, by R. H. Brown. Clitheroe (Lancs.) 17.6.51. by J. J. Boon. Vizeu, Portugal. -12.50, [4o°4i'N: 7°55'W.]. Ferrol, Galicia, Spain, 17.2.52. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Halifax (Yorks.), 13.8.51, by Moliets (Landes), France, Halifax Sci. Soc. 6.10.51. Ditto, 12.8.51 Olhao (Algarve), Portugal, 26.10.51. Abberton (Essex), 8.10.51, by Near Gibraltar, Nov. or C. B. Wainwright. Dec., 1951. Great Tit {Pams major). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., Eastbourne (Sussex), 27.10.49. 1.6.51, [170 m. S.]. Shrewsbury, 29.1.52, by Shrews- Builth Wells (Brecon), bury School. 1 1.3.52, [50 m. S.W.]. Blue Tit {Pams ccBruleus). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Leeds, (Yorks.), 2.1. 51, by J. R. Govett. Reading (Berks.), 7.2.51, by Leighton Park Sch. Sunninghill (Berks.), 22.8.50, by Ash and Ridley. Middlewood, Sheffield, 2.4.51, [32 m. S.]. Chandlersford, (Hants.). 15. 11. 51, [40m. S.S.W.], Near Dunster (Somerset), 25.1 1. 51, [125 m. W.S.W], Pied Flycatcher {Muscicapa hypoleuca). Return in subsequent summers to the place of birth or nesting has been shown in the following cases : — Of birds marked as young, 7 in the second year, i in the second and third, 3 in the third, i in the fourth and i in the fourth and fifth. Of birds marked as adults. VOL. XLV.] BIRD-RINGING COMMITTEE REPORT. 271 26 (25 females, i male) in the second year, 3 in the second and third, I in the third. In nearly all cases the locality was Gloucestershire and Dr. Bruce Campbell was responsible for both ringing and recovery. There is also one record showing migration : — NA.759 Spurn Bird Obs., 21.8.51. Braganga, Portugal, 12. 9. 51 No. Ringed. Recovered. Willow- Warbler {Phylloscopus trochilus). RINGED AS YOUNG. L.3387 Capel Curig, N. Wales, 1.7. 51, by Les Sables d’Olonne Cowin, Crellin, Moss and Pool. (Vendee), France, 5.9.51. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. F.6131 Isle of May Bird Obs., 27.8.50. Invergordon (Ross), 6.5.51 [120 m. N.N.W.]. J.6548 Lundy Bird Obs., 22.4.51. Pontrilas (Hereford), 4.7.51, nesting, [95 m. N.E.] Wood- Warbler {Phylloscopus sihilatrix) . The following record again shows the south-easterly trend. NJ-433 Ullswater (Westmor.), 6.7.51, Near Florence, Italy, young, by F. C. Gribble. 18.9.51. Whitethroat {Sylvia communis). K.2539 Ruislip (Middx.), 6.7.50, young. Near Cherbourg, France, by London N.H.S. 6.5.51. MB. 056 Spurn Bird Obs., 7.9.51, Saujon (Charente Inf.), full-grown. France, 20.9.51. Mistle-Thrush {Turdus viscivorus). 236996 Minstead, New Forest, (Hants.), Icklesham (Sussex), 5.1.52, 21. 4. 51, young, by R. Elmes. [100 m. E.]. Song-Thrush {Turdus ericetonim). RINGED AS YOUNG. PS. 168 South Shields (Durham), 14. 5. 51 by F. G. Grey. 22535 Shrewsbury, 1.6.51, by Shrews- bury Sch. PL.818 Waltham-St. -Lawrence (Berks.), 11.6.51, by J. Field. TK.44 Margaretting (Essex), 27.5.51, by Mrs. Upton. Cire d’Aunis (Charente Inf.), France, 24.12.51. Portland (Dorset), 8.12.51, [150 m. S.]. Fecamp (Seine Inf.), France, 6.1.52. Stourport (Worcs.), 7. II. 51, [125 m. N.W.]. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. PX.596 Isle of May Bird Obs., 18. 10.51. Sunderland (Durham), 3.2.52, [100 m. S.S.E.]. S. 4190 Leith, Edinburgh, 17.6.51, by Toomebridge (Antrim), J. Wightman. 9.11.51. T. 5120 Spurn Bird Obs., 2.7.49. Near Doncaster (Yorks.), 4-3’52, [51 m. W.S.W.]. 272 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. No. Ringed. Recovered. X.8832 Lundy Bird Obs., 23.2.51. Llancarfan (Glam.)_ I5-7-5I. [60 m. E.N.E.p YX.747 Isle of May Bird Obs., 19.4.50. North Sea, [ca. 58°N 40° E.], 2. 10. 51. T.4996 Spurn Bird Obs., 9.10.49. Beynes (Seine-et-Oise), France, 4.11.51. RA.707 Ditto 15. 10.51 Near Libourne (Gironde), France, 29.2.52. SX.269 Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., 3. 10.51 St. Medard-en-Jalles, (Gironde), France, 9-3-52. RA.856 Spurn Bird Obs., 10.11.51. Near Agen (Lot-et- Garonne), France, 18. II. 51. S.2071 Ditto 18. 10.51 Sondica (Vizcaya), Spain, 26.10.51. SX.286 Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., 7. 10.51 Carpesa, (Valencia) Spain, 19.1.52. Redwing {Turdus musicus). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. PJ-536 Fair Isle Bird Obs., 28.10.51 Roermond (Limburg), Holland, 8.12.51. SX.097 Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., 24.12.50 Near Taranto, South Italy, 7.1.52. Blackbird {Turdus merula). RINGED AS YOUNG. The following two records show northward movement, within the country, on the part of birds in their first autumn or winter ; — S.7803 West Bromwich (Staffs.), 18.6.51, Bodedern, Anglesey* by D. R. Mirams. 21.2.52, [125 m. N.W.]- PE. 786 Maidenhead (Berks.), 25.4.51, Shifnal (Shropshire), by J. Field. 4-9-5r, [105 m. N.W.]. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. The following records show movement, but in cases where more than one migration season had intervened the results are not easy to interpret. There are, however, clear cases of (i) autumn migrants at Fair Isle and elsewhere reaching localities farther south and in Ireland during the winter ; (2) birds ringed on migration or in winter in this country being in Scandinavia in summer ; and (3) birds which were in this country in one winter remaining in Scandinavia in a subsequent one. R.6964 Fair Isle Bird Obs., 29.10.51. Near Halkirk (Caithness), 1.2.52. PJ.541 Ditto PJ.866 Ditto PJ.799 Ditto 246820 Ditto 29.10.51 Taynuilt (Argyll), 24.11.51. 18. 10. 51 Holywood (Down), 25.1.52. 5. 10.51 Milford (Donegal), 27.1.52 10.10.49 Kilgarvan (Kerry), -.12.51 VOL. XLV.] BIRD-RINGING COMMITTEE REPORT. 273 No. OE.747 PX.306 XL.584 PF.787 PA. Ill V. 6776 RA.300 24388 PJ133 SP.636 PJ.069 PL.594 PF.868 PF.866 PJ.190 16226 PT. 151 RJ.906 RA. 065 SP.650 PT-635 PJ-3I2 W. 0267 PH.608 Ringed. Avoch (Ross), 29.10.47, by J. Lees. Isle of May Bird Obs., 29.10.51 Ditto I-4-49 Ditto 30.10.50 Milton Bridge (Midlothian), 1 1. 3. 51, by C. Hodgkinson. Masham (Yorks.), 8.8.51, by R. Chislett. Spurn Bird Obs., 4.1 1.50 Gibraltar Point Bird Obs. , 1 4 . 1 1 . 49 Fair Isle Bird Obs., 26.10.50. Ditto II. 3. 50 Ditto 23.10.50 Isle of May Bird Obs., 30.10.50 Ditto 2.4.51 Ditto 2.4.51 Fair Isle Bird Obs., 28.10.50 Isle of May Bird Obs., 22.10.50 Richmond (Surrey), 27.12.50, by London N.H.S. Skokholm Bird Obs., 24.10.50 Spurn Bird Obs., 9. 11.49 Fair Isle Bird Obs., 14.3.50. South Shields (Durham), 9.1. 51, by J. C. Coulson. Fair Isle Bird Obs., 9.2.51. Ilkley (Yorks.), 10. 3. 51, Wharfedale N.S. Highclere (Hants.), 14. 1.5 1, D. Summers-Smith. Recovered. Wick (Caithness), 24.6.51, [70 m. N.N.E.]. Lowestoft (Suffolk), -.3. 52, [310 m. S.S.E.]. Seaton Sluice (Northumb.) 29.10.51, [90 m. S.S.E.]. Magherafelt (London- derry), 25. II. 51. Near Banchory (Kincar- dine), 1. 4.51, [85 m. N.], Drogheda (Louth), -.3.52. Wexford, 23.2.52. Broughton (Peebles) , 14. 1. 52 [230 m. N.W.]. Straumsnes (Nordmore), Norway, 2.9.51. Angvik (Nordmore), Norway, 28.12.50. Hareid, Alesund, 2.4.52. Norway, Ringsaker, -.10.51. Norway, Fana, Bergen, 29-3-52. Norway, Froylandsdal, Bergen, Norway, 21. 1.52. Kongsberg, Norway, 3-5-5I- Drammen, N or way , 28.5.51 Island of Hidra (Vest- Agder), Norway, 21.3.52 Grindheim, S. Norway, 23-7.5I- Near Risor, S. Norway, 28.3.52. Varing (Vastergotland), Sweden, 16.2.51. Near Goteborg, Sweden, 3I-3-52. Kjellerup (Jutland), Denmark, 1.7. 51. by Hillerod (Zealand), Denmark, 5.7.51. by Near Kappeln, Schleswig- Holstein, 3.6.51. 274 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV, Ringed. Recovered. Wheatear [CEnanthe cenanthe). RINGED AS YOUNG. Skokholm Bird Obs., 1.7.49. Mimizan (Landes), France, (Nested at Skokholm in 1950 21.8.51. and 1951). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Fair Isle Bird Obs., 31.8.51 Maubeuge (Nord), France 10.11.51. Ditto 21.7.49 Canete de las Torres (Cordoba), Spain 1.9.51. Isle of May Bird Obs., 30.8.50. Near Soderhamn, East Sweden, 9.5.51. Whinchat {Saxicola rubetra). Isle of May Bird Obs., 8.5.51, full- Near Coimbra, Portugal, grown. 20.9.51. Stonechat {Saxicola torquata). There are the following records of a species of which very few have previously been recovered, and of which indeed, only small numbers have been ringed. RINGED AS YOUNG. D. 9881 Troon (Ayr), 20.4.50, by F. D. Paisley (Renfrew), 31. 1.52, Walls. [23 m. N.]. BD.838 Ditto 12. 5. 51 Kilwinning (Aj'r), 2.1.52, [8 m. N.]. Robin {Erithacus rubecula). Of the first of the following records it may be remarked that the country in direct line between the two points is mountainous. RINGED AS YOUNG. J.3891 Newtonmore (Inverness), 26.5.51, Tomnavoulin (Banff), by R. Perry. 11.1.52, [36 m. N.E.]. J.3696 Edenhall (Cumb.), 12.5.50, by W. Avranches (Calvados), Howe. France, 28.1.52. Of the following records the last six relate to five birds ringed during the remarkable " rush ” of Robins observed on the east coast of Great Britain in October, 1951, and one in 1950. It will be seen that later in the winter the movement of these birds had extended as far as western France, eastern Spain, the Balearic Isles and Italy — altogether a most interesting series of recoveries. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. M.7739 Avoch (Ross), II. 4. 51, by John Queen Camel (Somerset), Lees. i.i 1.51, [460 m. S.]. E. 5999 Ditto I3-3-50 Hellifield (Yorks.), 10.3.52, [260 m. S.S.E.]. No. Private Ring M.2361 F.ooii K9558 L.0402 VOL. XLV.] BIRD-RINGING COMMITTEE REPORT. 275 No. Ringed. Recovered. M.9738 Burley-in-Wharfedale (Yorks.), 28.4.51, by V. Huddleston. Conisbrough (Yorks.), 23-3-52, [38 m. S.E.]. L.3942 Sunninghill (Berks.), 31.7.50, by Ash and Ridley. Tring (Herts.), 9-7-5I- [27 m. N.]. MB. 765 Spurn Bird Obs., 3. 10.51 Near Aigrefeuille (Char- eute Inf.), France, 10.2.52. MH.014 Ditto 13. 10.51 Near Bourg (Gironde), France, 17. 12. 51 MB. 25 1 Ditto 1. 10.51 San Luis, Isle of Minorca, 20.12.51. MB. 288 Ditto 1. 10. 5 1 Piombino (Livorno), Italy, 12. II. 51. J-6155 Cley Bird Obs., 21. 11.50 Canet lo Roig (Castellon), Spain, 7.1.52. NS.574 Ditto 2. 10.51 Alayor, Isle of Minorca, -•3-52. Swallow {Hirundo rustica). RINGED AS YOUNG. Eight birds w'ere recovered at or near the place of marking in their second year, and i in its third. One of the following cases shows a rather less accurate return to the native area in its second year, and another shows fidelity to the birthplace at the age of i6 years — the bird is stated to have been seen at the same spot in intermediate seasons. The other two records show migration to South Africa in the first year. L.7672 Maidenhead (Berks.), 27.8.50, by Wonersh (Surrey), 13. 7. 51, J. Field. [25 m. S.S.E.]. LK.620 Cley (Norfolk), 13.6.35, by R. M. Near where ringed, 1.6.51. Garnett. NV.265 NE.333 Grandhome, Aberdeen, 18.7.51, by Miss Garden. Braintree (Essex), 22.8.51, by London N.H.S. Mimosa, Cape Prov., South Africa, 15. 12. 51. East London, Cape Prov., I5I-52. RINGED AS ADULTS. One recovered at the previous nesting locality in the follovdng year ; i in the following year and the one after. House-Martin {Delichon urbica). NN.287 Kirkbride(Cumb.),29.6.5i,young, Chesterfield (Derby), by R. H. Brown. 28.9.51, [130 m. S.E.]. Cuckoo {Cuculus canorus). 213168 Spurn Bird Obs., 16.5.49, ad. Souk-el-Arba, Tunisia, I7-4-5L [36° 28'N : 8° 47' E.]. 237921 Bishops Stortford (Herts.), Sutton Bridge (Lines.), 29.6.50, young, by P. S. Burns. -5.51, [63 m. N.]. 276 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. No. AN.5970 Ringed Recovered. Barn-Owl [Tyto alba). Cawthorne (Yorks.), 11.8.51, Ruddington (Notts.), young, by M. Barras-Smith. 3. 12. 51, [52 m. S.S.E.]. Merlin {Falco columbarius). 335477 Callander (Perth), 1.7. 51, young, Knockvennie (Kircudbr.), by J. F. Anton. 9. 10.51, [90 m. S.]. Kestrel {Falco tinnuncuhis). RINGED AS YOUNG. 348554 349969 334052 Wooburn (Bucks.), 21.6.50, by Thearle and Hobbs. Sunninghill (Berks.), 9.7.50, by Ash and Ridley. Richmond Park (Surrey), 15.6.48, by London N.H.S. Basingstoke (Hants.) 10.7.51, [29 m. S.W.], Broadmayne (Dorset), 2. 12.51, [90 m. S.W.]. Coln-St.-Aldwyns (Glos.), -.5.51, [yom.W.N.W.]. 342050 407347 AN.4356 345004 AD. 5640 344082 305440 344519 362803 RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Spurn Bird Obs., 22.8.51. Wisbech(Cambs.), 15.10.51, [65 m. S.]. Common Buzzard {Buteo buteo). RINGED AS YOUNG. Cumberland, 18.6.50, by R. H. Ingleton (Yorks.), 30.10.51 Brown. [37 m. S.]. Dartmoor (Devon), 20.6.51, by Newquay (Cornwall), H. G. Hurrell. -.11.51, [57 m. W.S.W.]. Montagu's Harrier {Circus pygargus) North Wales, 15.7.51, young, by Bressuire (Deux Sfevres), E. K. Allin. France, 15. 9. 51. Hen-Harrier {Circus cyaneus). Orkney Mainland, 23.7.50, young, Sanday, Orkney, 2.7.51. by E. Balfour. Sparrow-Hawk {Accipiter nisus). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Fair Isle Bird Obs., 17.9. 51. Gibraltar Point Bird Obs. 16.9.49 Ditto 10.4. 51 Belmullet (Mayo), 24.9.51, by by R. F. Ruttledge. Rocheserviere (Vendee), France, 21. 10. 51. Valdres, Norway, 14. 7. 51 Holstebro (Jutland), Denmark, 1.4.52. Shannon Airport (Clare), 28.10.51, [iiom. S]. Heron {Ardea cinerea). RINGED AS YOUNG. There are 10 recoveries from distances up to 46 miles from place of birth. Particulars of the following case of emigration to France have only lately been established : — 500820 Walland Marsh (Kent), 1939 or St. Flovier (Indre-et- 1940, by B. T. Brooker. Loire), France, 17.10.45. VOL. XLV.] BIRD-RINGING COMMITTEE REPORT. 277 No. Ringed. Grey Lag-Goose [Anser Recovered. anser) . RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. 127341 Kirkcudbrightshire, 28.3.50, by Severn Wildfowl Trust. Where ringed, 5. 12.51. 130008 Ditto 16.1.51 Montrose (Angus), 18.1.52. 130006 Ditto 16.1.51 Shannon Airport (Clare)’ 2. 12. 51. 130007 Ditto 16.1.51 Skagafjord, N. Iceland, 25-5-5I- 127345 Ditto 28.3.50 Lagarfljot, E. Iceland, 2.8.51. White-fronted Goose [Anser albifrons). Birds ringed at the New Grounds, Gloucestershire, in February, were recovered in November and December of subsequent winters — 2 in the second, 3 in the third— in N.W. Germany, 4 of them near Leer in Ostfriesland, and the other in Schleswig-Holstein. There is also the following record showing movement within a week : — SWT. I Slimbridge (Glos.), 22.2.52 East Flanders (Mth. of Schelde), 29.2.52. Pink-footed Goose [Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus) . Of birds marked in October 1951, mainly in S.E. Scotland and Fife, 12 were recovered later in the same winter within 50 miles, and 27 at more distant localities in Great Britain. The records indicate a common southward trend, with some crossing to the west coast : some birds were recovered in the North of Scotland late in the season. Other birds ringed in Great Britain were recovered there, some- times near the original locality, in subsequent winters — ^38 in the second, i in the third, 3 in the fourth. 129662 S.E. Scotland, 15.10.50, by Severn Wildfowl Trust. 127336 Solway Area, 22.3.50 130263 S.E. Scotland, 23.10.50 129984 Lincolnshire, 6.12.50 Husdalen, N.E. Green- land, 29.5.51, [73° 30'N: 21° 34' W.]. Cape Hope, N.E. Green- land, -.8.51, [ca. 70° 25' N; 22° W.]. Central Iceland, 25.7.51, [64°33'N.: i8°47'W.] Ditto, 25.7.51. {To be concluded in the October number). (278) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XLII. THE GREAT WHITE HERON, THE GLOSSY IBIS, THE SQUACCO HERON. Photographed by Arthur Brook. (Plates 61-64). We are publishing this month photographs taken in Hungary by Arthur Brook of some of the rarer Herons. The largest and most gaunt of them, the Great White Heron (Egretta alba), (Plate 61) is the rarest in this country, only seven occurrences being listed in The Handbook. During the past year however it has been recorded in Cornwall and Dorset; details are given elsewhere in this issue (p. 201-292). The species has a world-wide distribution, but in Europe is confined to the south-east, extending west to Hungary and Austria. In 1949 however it bred in Czecho- slovakia for the first time, in an area in Bohemia where in the past few years Night-Herons and Purple Herons have become established. This is perhaps another example of the northward extension of range which in a number of species is following climatic change in recent years. The Glossy Ibis {Plegadis jalcinellus) (Plates 62-63), is another species which breeds in all continents of the world. It used to visit this country sufficiently frequently to be known to wild- fowlers as “Black Curlew’’, but very few indeed have appeared in the past 20 years or more. In Europe its breeding range is rather similar to that of the Great White Heron, but it extends further west in the Mediterranean area. The Squacco Heron {Ardeola ralloides) on plate 64 shows well the parti-coloured bill which is a distinctive feature in the field at reasonably close range. The bird is a rare vagrant to this country from S. or S.E. Europe; a recent occurrence is reported on page 293. P.A.D.H. (279) THE POST-FLEDGING DISPERSAL OF JUVENILE TITMICE. BY Ivan M. Goodbody. The dispersal of young" birds away from their birth-places has been studied for a number of species by different authors. Kluijver (1951), Koskimies (1948), Kratzig (1939) and Plattner &. Sutter (1946, 1947) have all made studies of dispersal in the Great Tit [Parus major), while Butts (1931) and Odum (1941) have made similar studies for the Black-capped Chickadee [Parus atricapillus). Butts (loc. cit.) and Odum (Joe. cit.) are agreed that there is a good deal of movement of Chickadees in July and August imme- diately after the breeding season, and Odum (p. 533) states: “The large number of unbanded juveniles appearing in the wood in July and August is evidence of the quick separation and move- ment of the juveniles”. Plattner & Sutter (loc. cit.) give tables showing that very few juvenile Great or Blue Tits [Parus cccruleus) move farther than 4 km. from their birthplace in the first few months of life, while Kratzig [loc. cit.) found for the same species that the movements of the juveniles were quite erratic in every way and that the habitat into which they moved bore no relation to the habitat of their birthplace. While many of the studies of dispersal in other species deal solely with the distance from their birthplace at which birds settle down to breed, special mention may be made of the work of Farner (1945) on the American Robin [Turdus migratorius), von Haartman (1949) on the Pied Flycatcher [Muscicapa hypoleuca) and Hornberger (1943) on the Stork [Ciconia ciconia). Werth (1947) analysed the ringing records for juvenile Blackbirds [Turdus merula) and Song-Thrushes [T. ericetorum) and has shown that very few birds have moved more than five miles from their birthplace in the first twelve weeks of life, but that during this period there is a steady increase in the number of birds found away from the place of ringing. The present paper is the result of work carried out at the Edward Grey Institute, Oxford, during the spring and summer of 1950, and is an attempt to demonstrate both the rate and distance of dispersal in a wild population of Great and Blue Tits. The problem was suggested to me by John Gibb and R. A. Hinde who had found in the previous year that there was in fact a fairly abrupt dispersal movement of juvenile tits both into and out of the wood where this work was carried out. The juveniles become independent of their parents about two weeks after leaving the nest, when they begin to gather into separate flocks. The evidence suggests a very rapid explosive dispersal of young birds out from the breeding area to distances up to one mile or further. A full report of this work together with the original data for the transect BRITISH BIRDS. 280 [VOL. XLV. counts, etc., has been deposited in the Alexander library at the Edward Grey Institute. Study are.^ and topography. The field work was carried out on the Oxford University estate at Wytham, Berkshire, and the country immediately surrounding" it. The main study area (Marley Wood) consists of 55 acres of mixed deciduous woodland with four narrow belts of mainly deciduous woodland extending from it in such a way as to enclose triangular areas of arable and pasture land on the south-east and west sides respectively (Fig. i). To the north-west lies the much FIO.I SKETCH MAP OF WYTHAM ESTATE AND SEACOURT British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 01. Great White Heron {Egretta alba). At nest -with young. Hungary. [Photographed by Arthur Brook). British Birds, vol. xlv, PI. 62. Glossy Ibis [Plegadis J aid nellus). WITH YOUNG. Hungary. {Photographed by Arthur Urook). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 63. Glossy Ibis {Plegadis falcinellus) . AT NEST. Hungary. {Photographed Arthur Brook). Hritisli Birds, \'ol. xlv, I’l. (54. Sou.\cco Heron [Ardeola raUoides). ON NEST. IIUNG.VRY. [lAwtogya plied by Arthur Brook). VOL. XLV.] DISPERSAL OF JUVENILE TITMICE. 281 larger Great Wood connected to Marley by the Singing Way. Marley Wood is separated from Oxford city by the low-lying water meadows of the Thames. The two areas of woodland extending out from Marley on the west side are named Jew’s Harp and Singing Way respectively. For further details see Gibb (1950). Material and methods. In Marley Wood the Edward Grey Institute had already in use two hundred nestboxes for titmice (Gibb, 1950) and the population of Great Tits and Blue Tits occupying these was used as material for the investigation. In 1950, 35 pairs of Blue Tits and 32 pairs of Great Tits nested in these boxes, and 248 young Blue Tits and 191 Great Tits were successfully reared. Each young bird was given three rings before leaving the nest — a numbered ring for individual identification, and on each leg a single coloured ring which was the same for all birds in each part of the wood ; for this purpose the wood was divided into three sectors so that all the young birds in sector i had a red ring, in sector 2 a yellow ring and in sector 3 a black-and-white ring on each leg. In this way all the young birds encountered could be recognised as having come from a particular sector of the study area. Experience had shown that when a bird was colour-ringed on one leg only, an unnecessary amount of time was wasted trying to see both legs to ascertain whether or not a bird was ringed. All juvenile Great Tits and nearly all the Blue Tit juveniles from Marley Wood were colour-ringed before leaving the nest, but at least three, and probably more, pairs of Blue Tits nested in natural holes where the young could not be ringed. After the young had left the nest regular transect counts were made in Marley Wood and the Singing Way to determine the proportion of ringed to unringed birds in each area.* On these transect counts each area was divided into sectors ; in Marley there were three sectors corresponding to the sectors used for colour-ringing, and in the Singing Way there were four sectors each 250 yards long extending from Marley to just beyond the junction between the Singing Way and the Jew’s Harp. In Marley a transect usually took three hours — one hour to each sector; In the Singing Way a transect usually took two hours — one half hour to each sector. Transects were always made before mid-day as it was found that after this time birds appeared to be less active and not so easy to see. As far as possible a similar route was taken on each occasion but deviations were made from side to side to look for birds which were heard calling. Observ.^tions. The results of the transect counts have been summarized In Table I for the Great Tit and Table II for the Blue Tit. June 25th * It had originally been intended to make counts in the other three out- lying areas as well, but this eventually proved to be impracticable. 282 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. is regarded as the date on which broods had become sufficiently independent of their parents for counts to be made of individual birds ; before this date counts were made of individual broods, and in Table I and II these have all been lumped together for the three weeks June 4th to 25th. After this date counts were made of individual birds and ha\e been grouped for fortnightly periods. For each period the figures given are the percentages of ringed birds in the total number seen. Observ'ations were discontinued after September i6th as by this time it had become increasingly difficult to separate juveniles from adults (the juveniles having moulted most of their characteristic juvenile feathers), and hence any movements of juveniles were liable to be confused by move- ments of adults. Taking the figures for the Great Tit first (Table I), Table I : Percentage of marked juvenile Great Tits on different DATES (a) WHERE RINGED (b) AW.\Y FROM WHERE RINGED. (a) Marley Wood (where all (b) Singing Way (where no YOUNG ringed). YOUNG RINGED). Period. Total counted % Ringed Total counted %Ringed 4.vi-24.vi 21 71 — — 25.vi-8.vii 40 72 50 8 9.vii-22.vii 30 33 28 14 23.vii-5.viii .. 33 18 40 15 6.viii-i9.viii .. 8 37 25 16 20.viii-2.ix 8 37 9 22 3.ix-i6.ix 14 14 6 0 Notes, (i) The first period is of three weeks and refers to individual broods '• each of the other periods is a fortnightly interval and refers to individual birds. (ii) In Marley Wood the changes between the period 9.vii-22.vii and the preceding period, and between 3.ix-i6.ix and the preceding period are statistically significant. Differences have been tested for significance by the test. it will be seen that in Marley the percentage of ringed birds had dropped from an initial 100% to 72% by the time the young were independent, thereafter continuing to drop (except for an apparent rise in August) down to only 14% by the time observations were discontinued. In parallel, the figures for Marley-ringed Great Tits in the Singing Wa}' show a steady rise with no irregularities throughout the first five periods after the young had become independent. By the time the young were independent 8% of the birds were Marley-ringed individuals and this figure had risen to 22% by the fifth period, though during the last period only six individuals were seen, none of them ringed. The figures for the Blue Tit (Table II) show a similar trend. The initial percentage of young birds in Marley, which were ringed, is somewhat uncertain (probably about 75%) hence the extent of the drop in the first few weeks in also uncertain. By the time the young had become independent of their parents the percentage of ringed young Blue Tits in Marley was 41%, there- VOL. XLV.] DISPERSAL OF JUVENILE TITMICE. 283 after dropping- during- the following six weeks to 26%, and after a small rise in the fortnight Aug-ust 20th to September 2nd, it had fallen to 23% by the time observations ceased. In the Singing- Way a trend in the opposite direction was apparent, but not in such a marked manner as in Marley. By the time the young had become independent 18% of the birds in the area were individuals ringed in Marley ; thereafter a small rise in this percentage is discernible but with a fall during August 6th to 19th, so that in the last two fortnightly periods the figures are 28% and 25% respectively. Table II ; Percentage of marked juvenile Blue Tits on different DATES (a) WHERE RINGED (b) AWAY FROM WHERE RINGED. (a) Marley Wood (where all (b) Singing Way (where no YOUNG ringed). young ringed). Period Total counted % Ringed Total counted % Ringed 4.vi.-24.vi 26 6g • — — 25.vi-8.vii 94 41 78 18 9.vii-22.vii gi 34 73 16 23.vii-5.viii 51 31 lOI 22 fi.viii-ig.viii 100 26 47 6 20.viii-2.ix 42 33 36 28 3.ix-i6.ix 61 23 16 25 Notes (i) See Table I. (ii) In Marley Wood the changes between the period 25.vi-8.vii and the preceding period, and between the period 20.viii-2.ix and the preceding period are statistically significant. In the Singing Way the changes between the period fi.viii-ig.viii and the pre- ceding period, and between the period 20.viii-2.ix and the pre- ceding period are statistically significant. The above figures for both Great and Blue Tits indicate a steady movement out of Marley and into the Singing Way. The latter movement is of course less noticeable as the birds from Marley scatter in various directions and only some of them enter the Singing Way. Although most of the differences shown in Tables I and II are not based on sufficient data to be statistically significant (but see footnote to table) they suggest that some^^hing in the nature of an explosive dispersal occurred about the time that the juveniles became independent of their parents, and that while young birds from Marley disperse outwards, young from elsewhere come into Marley. In 1949 John Gibb and R. A. Hinde (personal com- munication) making observations on the percentage of ringed birds in Marley in successive weeks, obtained evidence for a similar explosive dispersal. Reference should also he made to the marked drop in the percentage of ringed Blue Tits in the Singing Way in the period August 6th to 19th, and the similar, but smaller, drop in Marley at the same time. In 1949, John Gibb (personal communication) found a similar and significant drop in the percentage of ringed 284 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Blue Tits in Marley, rising- again later, and he has suggested that this may indicate a passage of juveniles from other areas going through at this time. The initial movement away from the breeding territories starts while the young birds are still being fed by their parents. In this phase the adults and young wander freely into the territories of other birds without molestation. Outside .\re.vs. As far as possible areas outside the study area were searched from time to time to see if any ringed birds had moved out there. Obviously the further that one goes from Marley the smaller are the chances of finding ringed birds. The two principal areas searched in this connection were the Wytham Great Wood and the Thames valley area between the wood and Oxford city (here called Seacourt). Great Wood. Extensive searches were made on three occasions (July 20th, August 6th and 17th). Out of a total of 219 juvenile tits observed no ringed birds were seen. Seacourt. This is a large area of farmland— chiefly water meadow — with small patches of Willow [Salix) copse and some low hedges. No large tit flocks were seen as in the woodland areas, the birds usually being collected into small parlies. Search was made on six occasions between July 25th and September 13th, and ringed tits were seen on eleven occasions. Hence there is an appreciable movement of birds into this low-lying area of hedges and fields, whereas no movement was detected into the large woodland area of the Great Wood. This could possibly be correlated with the abundant supply of water in the Seacourt area and the comparative shortage elsewhere. The furthest from Marley that any bird was recorded were two Blue Tits seen together on August 5th i mile N.N.E. from the centre of Marley Wood. (One of these was a yellow-ringed bird from the south- west sector of the wood, the other a black-and-white-ringed bird from the northern sector). Other localities. In a visit to Cowleaze copse (i mile south-west of Marley) on July 22nd, 2 ringed Blue Tits and i ringed Great Tit were seen out of 8 Great and 9 Blue Tits seen. An extensive search of the farmland to the south and west of the Wytham estate on August 8th gave no results, but scarcely any tits at all visit this area. In frequent visits to Higgin’s copse (J^ mile S.S.W. of Marley) no ringed tits were ever seen. Summary. I. The post-fledging dispersal of juvenile titmice was studied in the summer of 1950 in a piece of mixed deciduous woodland near Oxford. VOL. XLV.] DISPERSAL OF JUVENILE TITMICE. 285 2. 248 young" Blue Tits and 191 young- Great Tits were marked with a colour ring on each leg, so that all the birds hatched in the study area could be identified as such, wherever seen. 3. Regular counts of the number of ringed and unringed tits were made in the study area and in a strip of woodland outside it, from June 4 th to September i6th. 4. The evidence suggests that an explosive dispersal of young birds takes place within a week or two of leaving the nest, and thereafter birds continue to move outwards from their birthplaces. 5. A marked rise in the percentage of unringed juveniles both in the study area and in the outside area in mid-August suggests the possibility that there may be a passage of juveniles at about this time. 6. While no ringed birds were found in a large woodland area I mile away, several were located in low-lying water meadows ^ mile away. The furthest away any bird was recorded was i mile to the N.N.E. Acknowledgments . The author gratefully acknowledges the award of a Maintenance Grant from the Nature Conservancy during part of the time that this work was in progress. He is also particularly indebted to Dr. David Lack, F.R.S., Director of the Edward Grey Institute, and to John Gibb for much valuable advice and assistance both while the work was in progress and during the preparation of this manuscript. John Gibb, R. A. Hinde and T. Myers also gave assistance in the field work particularly with the ringing of both adults and young. References. Butts,. W. K. (1931) "A study of the Chickadee and White-breasted Nuthatch.” Bird Banding, ii : 1-26. Farner, D. S. (1945). ‘‘ The return of Robins to their birthplaces.” Bird Banding, xvi ; 81-99’ Gibb, John (1950). “ The Breeding Biology of the Great and Blue Tit- mice.” Ibis, 92 : 507-539. Haartman, Lars von (1949). " Der Trauerfiiegenschnapper. I. Ortstreue und Rassenbilding.” Acta Zool. Fenn., 56 : 1-104. Hornberger, F. (1943). ” Einige Ergebnisse zehnjahnger Planarbeit im Storchforschungsbreis Insterbung der Vogelwarte Rossiten.” J. Orn., 91 : 341-355- Kluijver, H. N. (1951). "The Population Ecology of the Great Tit, Parus m. major L.” Ardea 39: 1-135. Koskimies, J. (1948) " Talitiaisen, Parus major L. vaellugsista Suo- messa.” Ornis Fennica, 25 (2) : 28-35. Kratztg, F[. (1939). “ Untersuchungen zur Siedlungsbiologie walde- ■wohnender Hohlenbruter.” Ornithologische Abhandlungen Beihefte der Zeitschrift Deutsche Vogelwelt. Odum, E. P. (1941). "Annual cycle of the Black-capped Chickadee.” Auk., 58 : 314-333 and 518-535 ; 59 : 499-531- Plattner^ j. and Sutter, E. (1946, 1947). " Ergebnisse der Meisen und Kleiberberingung in der Schweiz (1929-1941).” Orn. Beob. 43 : 156-188 ; 44 : 1-35- Werth, I. (1947) The tendency of Blackbirds and Song-Thrushes to breed in their birthplaces.” Brit. Birds, xl : 328-330. (286) NOTES. Starlings attacking Chrysanthemum and Pansies. — Mr. M. J. Rogers informs us that on April ist, 1950, he watched a Starling [Sturniis vulgaris) attacking a Chrysanthemum. Leaves were torn off, pecked into shreds and left on the ground, but were later carried off with other nesting material. Mr. R. G. Finnis reports that on April 25th, 1951, he watched a Starling carrying off a bunch of pansy leaves, presumably to a nest. The bird had attacked yellow pansies, flowers and buds of which were scattered about. Exceptional passage of Lapland Buntings in Norfolk, 1950. — The late autumn and early winter of 1950 were noteworthy for the remarkable immigration of Lapland Buntings {Calcarius lapponicus) which was observed at Cley, Norfolk. The first two were seen on September 13th and remained till the 25th, feeding on the seeds of sea-aster and samphire. The presence of two or three additional birds was suspected on the 20th while single birds were seen on the 27th and 28th. All were exceptionally tame. The second and main arrival began in mid-October and between then and the end of the year a flock (or flocks) of 35 to 40 were seen constantly on a field of young winter wheat behind Cley beach. Without exception these later birds were absolutely unapproachable and, but for their distinctive notes, might easily have been overlooked. They fed in association with Snow- Buntings [Plectrophenax nivalis) and Sky-Larks {Alauda arvensis) Forehead and sides of crown darW brown, CenCre buffish Whitiih ColVar, rusty nape L.vpland Bunting (Calcarius lapponicus) Winter male. Drawn by R. A. Richardson. VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 287 and the startling manner in which the latter species springs from beneath one’s feet may have been the cause of the Laplands’ nervousness. The only notes heard were those rendered in The Handbook as “ticky-tick, teu”, although the “ticky-tick” phrase was usually more than tri-syllabic, in fact often comprised six or more syllables. It was variously compared with “the chattering of a House-Sparrow [Passer domesticiis)''’ (W. B. Alexander), “the twitter of a Linnet [Carduelis cannabina)” (R. S. R. Fitter) and “the toneless rattling of quarrelling Yellow Buntings [Emberiza citrmella)” (R.A.R.). The clipped “teu”, or “teuk!”, was less frequently used except as a contact note by a lost bird anxious to join up with others, and usually quite separately from the rattle, not with it as indicated in The Handbook. The general pattern of these notes, which were almost exclusively flight-notes, tallied closely with the Snow-Bunting’s equivalents but they were altogether harder and flatter and lacked the rippling, silvery quality of the latter. By mid-January, 1951 all had gone, but a single bird, presumably on return passage, was seen on March 17th, 1951. R. A. Richardson, Peter Jackson. Short-toed Lark at Great Saltee, Co. Wexford. — On September 20th, 1951, at Great Saltee Island Major R. F. Ruttledge and I had glimpses of what appeared to be a small, pale lark with an unfamiliar note. On September 23rd I was able to identify a similar bird — probably the same individual — as a Short-toed Lark [Calandrella brachydactyla); it was seen again on the 25th and 26th. Though it was rather shy I was sometimes able to approach to within 20 yards, and the following description is based on a number of observations. Upper-parts pale buff-brown, narrowly streaked dark brown on forehead and crown, almost unstreaked on nape, streaked again on mantle and back. Superciliary stripe pale buff, not very conspicuous. Wings beautifully marked with rich dark brown, a feature remarked upon in the birds seen in Sussex and Suffolk [antea, p. 29). The colouring of the upper- parts and wings was much richer than is suggested by The Handbook plate, but it was, nevertheless, noticeably pale. Under-parts all whitish except for vague pale brown patches on sides of breast ; if these formed a continuous band across the breast it was darker at the sides ; no dark brown marks were noticed. Size about as Meadow-Pipit [Anthus pratensis) ; shape perhaps rather longer than Sky-Lark [Alauda arvensis). Bill short and blunt. Colour of soft parts not well seen, feet being 288 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. noted at different times as “yellowish?” and “pinkish?”. There was no crest, though sometimes the wind blew up the crown feathers. The best field character was the distinctive note. I described it as a rippling twitter, something like that of a Sky-Lark, but harder and approaching the call of a Linnet (Carduelis cannabina). Occasionally some more musical notes were heard. On the ground it could be picked out easily at a distance among Meadow-Pipits by its much paler and more buff colouring, while its whitish under-parts were conspicuous from front or side. The pale, rather greyish upper-parts, with dull white edgings to tail and trailing edge of wing, and white under-parts showed up well in flight. When the two species were compared in the air it looked rather smaller than a Sky-Lark, with a more rapid wing-beat. The bird sometimes associated with Sky-Larks, sometimes with Meadow-Pipits, and was sometimes alone. It kept to grass fields in the centre of the island and was occasionally lost among long grass and bramble patches. This is the second Irish record. Mr. Kenneth Williamson writes of the weather of September 20th to 23rd : “An extensive high covered the whole of south and central Europe at that time with, of course, easterlies on its southern side, becoming south-east over the Channel and Irish Sea. Of all the stations in the British Isles you were best placed on Great Saltee to collect what drift the anti-cyclone had to offer”. It will be noted that the record of a Brown-backed Warbler (below) at Great Saltee and of an Olivaceous Warbler at Skokholm belong to this period. P. W. P. Browne. Water-Pipit in Surrey. — Mr. E. I. Goulding reports that on March 24th, 1951, at Smart’s Heath, near Worplesdon, three or four unidentified pipits were flushed into a low tree. One of these remained to allow several minutes’ examination in bright sun- shine at less than 15 yards. A very conspicuous white eye-stripe, grey back and reddish colour on the flank and belly (not extending , as far as the throat), with a few streaks on the breast, showed it to be a Water-Pipit [Anthus s. spinoletta). Habituated fear response in Blue Tits. — It might be of interest to record that in the course of trapping operations near Sunninghill, Berkshire, in 1949 and 1950, a number of Blue Tits {Parus caeruleus), became very alarmed and called repeatedly with the usual alarm call, whenever the trapper entered the wood in which the trap was located. For some time this alarm was not associated with the trapper, but as soon as it was realised that this was so, efforts were made to examine the birds more closely. It was found that two or three of them were regular daily visitors to the trap, but whereas there were only about six birds initiating the alarm, it seemed that the other birds calling were responding VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 289 to these six. A similar response was obtained whatever the clothes the trapper wore, but if he sent some other person to the trap there was no response, unless he accompanied him. This response still continued after the removal of the trap, and it was suspected that one or more of these birds also recognized the trapper in other woods in the vicinity, as there were alarm calls from ringed Blue Tits for no other apparent reason. John Ash. Woodchat Shrike in Kent. — On July 5 th, 1948, I observed, on the banks of the River Stour near Sandwich, an adult male Woodchat Shrike {Lanius senator). Viewing it in good light, with the aid of x 8 glasses, I was able to make full notes of plumage details before the bird was disturbed by a passing train. These details agreed with those of a Woodchat Shrike which I recorded in Glamorgan, in 1947 {antea, vol. xl, p. 275), with the exception that this bird’s breast was of an even more brilliant whiteness. The bird flew off with a markedly undulating flight. G. R. Shannon. Pied Flycatcher breeding in Cheshire and Staffordshire. — On May 17th, 1951, in Dibbinsdale, Wirral, I saw a male and female Pied Flycatcher {Muscicapa hypoleuca). On May 24th and 31st, and on June 7th both birds were seen entering and leaving a hole in a tree. The male was singing. On June 14th the male was seen entering the hole at frequent intervals but no food could be seen in the bill On June 19th both birds entered the hole frequently. The birds were seen carrying food on four occasions and once the female emerged with a faecal pellet. On June 21st the male was seen to enter the hole eight times in twenty minutes, while the female entered three times. The male was in the hole for periods ranging from eight seconds to two minutes, with an average of thirty-eight seconds. The young birds could be heard in the hole. This would seem to be the first definite breeding record for Cheshire, though probable breeding has been recorded {antea, vol. xlii, p. 57). G. Pass and C. B. Williams. As there seem to be no recent records of the breeding of Pied Flycatchers {Muscicapa hypoleuca) in North Staffordshire the following notes may be of interest. 1948. April 28th. A cock seen, and heard singing in a wood near Moddershall a few miles from the city of Stoke-on-Trent. He was seen again on May 7th and 8th when he was prospecting holes in trees suitable for nesting and subsequently up to May 28th, after which he disappeared. No hen was ever seen, and he sang a great deal. 1949. April 26th. A pair was seen in the same area as in 1948, the cock showing an interest in a hole in a rowan tree, which aroused the fury of a pair of Blue Tits {Parus cceruleus). They were not seen again this year nor in 1950, but much of the wood is private and was not explored carefully. 290 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. 1949. April 20th. Dane Valley. — Two pairs on the Stafford- shire and Cheshire banks of the river respectively were seen examining' holes in trees, but little singing. There was no subsequent sign of them during weekly visits up to the end of June. 1950. May 10th. Dane Valley. — A cock seen and heard singing around “the knoll”. He spent much time examining holes in trunks. May lyth. Three cocks seen and heard, one near “the knoll” as on the loth, one 300 yards nearer the road above a carpet of bluebells, and another 400 yards beyond. May 315C The “bluebell” cock was singing particularly well, but the “knoll” cock was silent and was accompanied by a hen. The third cock had disappeared. June i4t/i. No cocks seen or heard, but the hen was now feeding young in a nest on the “knoll” which was placed only four feet up in an ash trunk. As this tree was placed on a down slope to the river the nest was on foot level. Though agitated she continued to feed her young, despite the presence of two humans within eight feet of her nest. June 2ist. Hen still feeding young. Cock not seen. June 28th. Young flown. No sign on this day or subsequently of any Pied Flycatchers. 1951. Two pairs nested. One unattached cock present until mid-June. P. H. Charlton. Brown-backed Warbler on Great Saltee, Co. Wexford. — I saw a Brown-backed Warbler {Agrobates galactotes ? syriacus) at Great Saltee Island on September 22nd, 23rd and 30th, and October 4th, 1951. On all four occasions it was in the same locality, on or near the bracken-covered hillside south-west of the Ring, and I believe that it was only the amount of cover that prevented me from finding the bird daily. I recognised the species at once for I had got to know it well — either syriacus or fatniliaris — in Arabia. Examination of skins shows that the bird could not have been a Rufous Warbler (A. g. galactotes), but separation of the two eastern races in the field in certain plumages is doubtfully possible, so this record cannot be attributed with certainty to one or other. Most of the following details were obtained at 10 yards range or closer during the first two days. Forehead, crown, mantle, back and scapulars similar in colour to Spotted Flycatcher {Muscicapa striata). Rump and upper tail-coverts chestnut. Superciliary stripe fairly narrow but noticeable, pale buff', bounded above by a line darker than the crown and below by a dark brown eye-stripe. Under- parts all pale greyish-bufiv Primaries dark brown, edged narrowly rich chestnut-buff; secondaries and primary-coverts dark VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 291 brown, edged pale buff. Tail-feathers rich dark chestnut with black subterminal band, quite as wide as terminal white band, formed by white tips. Bill greyish-flesh, lower mandible more flesh-coloured than upper ; feet flesh or pale greyish-pink. Size : about the same length as Rock-Pipit {Anthtis spinoletta petrosus), with which it was once seen in company, but stouter in body and longer in tail. When flushed it was reminiscent of a Hedge-Sparrow {Prunella modularis), but the longer, dull chestnut tail, tipped with white, and the very direct flight, low over g-round or bracken, were characteristic. Frequently during the first two days the bird fed in the open, when the shape, with drooping wings and tail cocked over back, brought to mind a huge Wren {Troglodytes troglodytes). Behaviour, however, resembled that of a Wheatear {Q^nanthe oenanthe), listening, peering and then darting forward for some insect, and perching on rocks where present. The only food which it was seen to capture was a large yellowish cater- pillar, but this was discarded. Every second or so the tail was raised quickly, usually unspread, to the vertical, or even further over the back, and then the contrast of brown back and chestnut rump could be well seen between the wings. Less frequently the wings were slightly spread and dropped forward from their normal, rather drooping, position. Sometimes the bird stood for a little while in a “dejected” attitude, with tail in line with the body ; then it was obviously a warbler. After September 23rd the bird seemed to retire into the bracken; both subsequent views were obtained after disturbing it from the edge of the cover. The only previous Irish record and the three other British autumn records all refer to the typical race, the Rufous Warbler. P. W. P. Browne. [Details of a Rufous Warbler seen in Sussex on September i2th, 1951, are to appear in our next issue. — Eds.] Robin’s nest used for two successive broods. — With reference to the notes on this subject {antea, pp. i75"6) Mr. W. E. Busbridge of Sevenoaks, Kent, informed me {in litt.) that towards the end of March, 1949, a pair of Robins {Erithacus ruhecula) built in a nesting-box on a tree in his garden and a clutch of five eggs was eventually laid. These duly hatched and the brood finally left the nest although he believed that several fell victims to a marauding cat. However, in due course, a second set con- sisting of six eggs was laid in the same box which contained the original nest. Hubert E. Pounds. Great White Herons in Cornwall and Dorset. — On May 29th, 1951, I saw a Great White Heron {Egretta alha) on the Godrevy Marsh, near Gurthean, West Cornwall. I visited the marsh about 8.15, in clear weather. I caught a glimpse of a large, shiny white bird 292 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. at the far end of the marsh and made my way under cover towards it. When about 150 yards distant I put up a Common Heron [Ardea cinerea) which flew off, disturbing" two others of the same species and a white bird of similar size. The Common Herons flew upstream, but the white bird, after making- towards some trees where it seemed about to perch, turned round and flew towards me, passing- about 80 yards from me and about 150 feet up. I had clear views with my x 6 glasses and later with x 20 telescope. It was a pure white heron with yellow bill and dark legs and identical in appearance to the Great White Heron I had seen at Loe Pool in 1948 [antea, vol. xlii, p. 392). It gained height and flew off to westward. I did not observe a dark tip to the bill, nor was a crest visible. No note was uttered. Subsequent visits to the marsh by Mr. A. G. Parsons and myself showed no trace of the bird. R. H. Blair. On August 5th, 1951, when near Ridge, Wareham, Dorset, my attention was drawn to a very large white heron-like bird at some distance — perhaps a mile — ^away. In full sun it was brilliantly white, but it disappeared^ at once into a dyke. Later it was seen flying directly towards me. The flight seemed not quite typical of the Common Heron, but more gull-like, the wings not being brought down so far on the downstroke and not so drooped. The bird came to within 50 yards before turning aside. The impression of its size, as I noted at the time, was that it was as large as a Common Heron, or up to a quarter larger. The head, neck and breast were well seen. There was no noticeable mane or crest and there was certainly no trace of colour, though the light had now deteriorated very badly, with heavy clouds and drizzle, and in this light, at close quarters, the bird looked off- white. The bill was well seen and was yellow. It turned aside and I had a good view of the back and wings. There was just a shade of difference between the tone of the primaries and that of the rest of the wing— only as much as could be caused by the different incidence of the light — the primaries appearing a shade darker than the rest, like the two whites in the advertisement of a popular washing powder. The bird disappeared behind a wharf and I failed to find it again. I have no note on leg-colour unfortunately. The possibility that the bird was an albino Common Heron seems to be excluded by the fact that I did not see a pink eye, which so complete an albino would be likely to have, though I had an excellent view of the head and looked carefully at it: furthermore the difference in size and especially the difference in manner and appearance in flight point to its having been a different species, the Great White Heron. A. J. Bull. VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 293 Squacco Heron in Sussex. — On April 29th, 1951, I was attracted by a harsh call repeatedly coming' from the trees surrounding a house in Manor Road, Brighton. It came from a bird which proved to be a Squacco Heron [Ardeola ralloides). It was seen many times from about 15 yards and upwards through x 6 binoculars, and remained for eight hours, from 13.00 till dusk, though it had gone the next morning. The plumage was mainly buff, darker on the back and lighter — ^nearly -white — on the under- parts ; there was a very slightly darker line through the eye. The tail was very short. The beak was dark horn-colour, darker at the tip, and long for the size of the bird ; the legs were yellowish buff. A harsh “kwark” or “kwok” was uttered about every 10 seconds, in flight and at rest. In flight the wings appeared very angular and square tipped. When alighting the bird glided to a position above a tree, closed its wings and dropped steeply into the branches, sometimes into the middle of the tree. After making the above notes I consulted The Handbook and studied museum skins of all the herons on the British list. I then returned and saw the bird again and was left in no doubt as to its identity. The weather at the time was very cold with sleet and snow showers ; the wind was south-westerly. M. J. Dawson. Red-breasted Goose on Montgomeryshire-Shropshire border. On March 4th, 1950, Miss J. Nacnair, Mr. Hotchkiss and I visited a locality on the borders of Montgomeryshire and Shropshire, where we found some 650 White-fronted Geese {Anser albifrons), two Barnacle Geese (Branta leucopsis) and a very small goose about the size of a Sheld-Duck [Tadorna tadorna). Seen broadside on, the main feature which caught the eye was a white lateral line dividing the dark upper-parts from the dark lower- breast. The bird then turned towards us and revealed its rufous breast and white, marbled head-markings. It was in fact a Red- breasted Goose (Branta ruficollis) — probably a gander since it ran at and drove off other geese which came near. Later, in flight, when its markings and small size were very evident, it led a large skein of White-fronts. As it was within about ten yards of the county boundary, we drove it, and the Barnacle Geese, into Shropshire, so that the two species may now be recorded for both counties. W. A. Cadman. [Details of this occurrence were submitted to British Birds immediately after the observation was made, and we apologise to Mr. Cadman for this belated publication due to an oversight. An apology is also due to Miss Macnair, Editor of the Montgomeryshire Field Society’s Report and Notes for 1950, for the criticisms made [antea, p. iii) of the record as published there. Mr. Cadman informs us that widespread enquiries were made at the time, but these failed to produce any evidence that this bird had escaped from captivity. — Eds.] 294 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Goosander breeding in Cumberland. — Major-General G. F. Johnson has sent evidence that a pair of Goosanders {Mergus merganser) nested near Brampton, Cumberland, in 1950. So far as we are aware this represents an extension of the bird’s recorded breeding" rang^e, thoug"h it has been established for some time in Dumfriesshire, and Mr. E. Blezard kindly informs us that it has nested on the River Eden for some seasons. Red-breasted Merganser nesting in Cumberland.— Mr. D. F. Owen informs us that on July 6th, 1950, he disturbed a female Red- breasted Merg"anser (Mergus serrator) from a clump of osiers at a locality in North Cumberland. The duck was followed by six four-day-old ducklings. Mr. E. Blezard has confirmed that this is the first definite record of nesting in the county, though this has been suspected for several years. American Pectoral Sandpipers in England in 1951. — Numbers of American Pectoral Sandpipers (Calidris melanotos) reported in 1951 are nearly equal to those reported in the previous year when we considered that a minor “invasion” occurred (vide antea, vol. xliv, pp. 250-252). Records for 1951 are spread more widely through the year and include one for February in Devon and one for the end of May in Cornwall, both very unusual months for the species to occur in Britain. These two records may possibly refer to birds “left over” from the 1950 invasion or on return migration. The publication of full descriptions and photographs may have made many of the g'reatly increased body of observers more alive to the distinctive features of this species ; in other words many more observers are now “pectoral-sandpiper- conscious” than used to be the case. It is extremely difficult to say whether this is of itself sufficient to account for the apparent increase in the number of occurrences. The records below bring the total to approximately 100, one-third of which are too recent for inclusion in The Handbook. The descriptions supplied to us are being filed for reference ; there do not seem to be any points calling for special comment. Records include: — Cornwall — One, Marazion Marsh, May 3ist-June ist (Rev. J. E. Beckerlegge ; J. C. C. Oliver) ; one, Tresco, Scillies, August 25th [21st Report of Cornwall Bird-Watching &■ Preservation Society). Devon. — One, River Clyst, Exe Estuary, February nth (R. F. Moore, S. C. A. Hunt, J. E. Moore) ; one, Exe Estuary, September 15th to 19th (R. G. Adams, R. F. Moore, F. R. Smith, W. K. Welton). Middlesex. — One, Perry Oaks sewage farm, August 3ist-first half Sept- ember (London N.H.S.). Suffolk.- — One, Walberswick, July 16th (Miss B. A. Coney, G. Jobson). Yorkshire. — One, Cherry Cob Sands., River Humber, September 4th-8th (John M. Laws, Miss F. E. Crackles, G. H. Ainsworth, H. O. Bunce, J. Lord and others). Sociable Plover in Northamptonshire. — On October 20th, 1951, at about 12.00 B.S.T., Miss C. K. James and I put up a party of some twenty Lapwings (VaneUus vanellus) from the eastern end VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 295 of Northampton sewage farm. With them was a peculiar looking bird which immediately separated from the flock, flew straight towards us and over our heads at not more than forty feet, then turned towards the north and flew speedily away, rising as it flew, until it was lost to sight. Comparing notes of what we had seen immediately after the bird disappeared, we recorded the following features ; (i) A large patch of white in the wing, covering, apparently, the whole of the secondaries ; this was the feature that immediately drew our attention to the bird, at perhaps fifty yards distance, when it flew up. (2) Much white and some black on and round the tail as the bird flew away (H.G.A.). (The possibility occurred to me that it might be a White-tailed Lapwing- [Chettusia leucura), a species familiar to me in North India, so I looked specially to see the colour of the tail and noted that it was not wholly white). (3) Pied appearance as it flew away froi-n us (C.K.J.). (4) Body-colour huffish (C.K.J.). (5) Bill rather long and narrow compared with a Lapwing’s (H.G.A.). (6) Wing rounded like a Lapwing’s but narrower than in that species. (7) Bird more slender, and perhaps smaller, than the Lapwings as it flew up with them. C.K.J. thought she heard an unfamiliar whistle as the Lapwings flew up, but the bird was silent as it flew over our heads. All the above features seem exactly to fit the Sociable Plover {Chettusia gregaria), and I think there can be no doubt that it was a bird of that species. I have seen Sociable Plovers in Eg-ypt some years ago and as the bird flew over our heads I thought it was probably of that species but did not recall any of the distinc- tive characters, and was not sure that the striking wing patch fitted that bird, until I was able to consult The Handbook in the evening. H. G. Alexander. Continental Oyster-catcher in Britain. — ^J. L. Peters, in 1934 {Check-list, vol. 2), records the Continental Oyster-catcher {Hcematopus o. ostralegus) as a winter visitor to the British Isles, but the subspecies has not been admitted to The Handbook of British Birds (vol. 4, p. 421), nor has it been mentioned in the additions or the corrections in vol. 5. However, the Continental Oyster-catcher can now with absolute certainty be included in the list. A bird, ringed Stavanger Museuni Norway 42226 as a chick on June 27th, 1948, at Bakholmen, in Solund (61 °5' N.lat — 4°3o' E.long.), western Norway, by Mr. T. Serck-Hanssen, was picked up dead on July 3rd, 1950, on the beach of the estuary of the River Camel, near Padstow, North Cornwall. It had then been dead about a week or so, as we are informed by Mr. H. G. T. Adams, Enfield, Middlesex, who found the bird. 296 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. A recovery in England is a little against the rule for Norwegian Oyster-catchers. Other birds, ringed partly as downy young, partly as passage migrants, have been recovered in Denmark, Holland, Belgium, northern and western France, thus following the well known south-western route. One cannot conclude that the Cornwall bird had wintered in England. Most likely on its way home, it had attached itself to a flock of British Oyster- catchers and followed them towards their breeding-grounds, crossing the Channel instead of turning east and north via Holland and Denmark. The type locality of Linnaeus’ H. ostralegus is the Swedish island of Oland, but the breeding range of the subspecies includes the whole of Norway as well as Sweden. Holger Holgersen. Sirs, — The Ibis for April 1953 will include a group of papers on Visible Migration (particularly in passerine birds) as observed in various countries. The newly-formed Sub-committee on Visible Migration of the British Trust for Ornithology (see below) feels that this opportunity should be taken for summarizing existing knowledge of the subject in Britain, and a report for the Ibis is being prepared at our request by Mr. D. W. Snow, Edward Grey Institute, Botanic Garden, Oxford. It is hoped to cover not only existing published information but also unpublished information. May we therefore appeal to readers of British Birds who have made a study of this problem anywhere in Britain to send their data to Mr. Snow by September 13th if possible and at latest by October ist. Observations should include the main species taking part, with dates, the main directions of flight (especially in relation to wind) and numbers passing per hour where counted. Only summarized information is required. Casual records are not wanted unless of special interest. Sending these data to Mr. Snow does not, of course, in any way preclude the observer from publishing his own data in detail now or later. We feel that the proposed report .should do much to advance research on the subject, and therefore hope that readers of British Birds will help to make it as complete as possible. The above-mentioned .Sub-committee on Visible Migration has been formed by the B.T.O. in view of the growing interest in the subject, to help to achieve greater co-ordination in observation, recording and publication. For 1952, its two aims are (i) to prepare the above-mentioned survey of existing knowledge, and (ii) to try out recording techniques with a few invited observers. We are not soliciting further help in 1952, and would stress that we are in no way seeking to discourage or prevent those individuals or groups already in the field; indeed such individual effort is in every way to be encouraged. LETTER. VISIBLE MIGRATION IN BRITAIN. To the Editors of British Birds. David Lack (Chairman). C. Norris. E. R. Parrinder. Eric Si.mms. Bruce Campbeli. (Secretary). 9 Have you obtained your copy of The Popular Handbook of British Birds For further details please turn to the front of this magazine. 9 9 9 A LITTLE BIRD told me (a) that Nest-boxes should be affixed in autumn, and (b) where B.T.O. type boxes can be obtained from! Large Tit or Robin Nest-boxes (as recommended by B.T.O.) l2/9d. each. Smaller size, lO/lld. Peanut Feeders I l/9d. Tit Bells 8/6d. “ Clearview ” Window Trays i0/9d. Catalogues at 3d. each: — “Bird Sanctuary”, “Garden Ornaments ”, “ Bird Ringing Equipment ”, and “ Nature Gifts ”. Obtainable only from DEPT. II, GREENRIGG WORKS, WOODFORD GREEN, ESSEX. ■ ■ ■ ■ •55* ■ ■ ■ ■ •!5> ■ ■ •5J. ■ ■ •U* ■ ■ •55* ■ ■ •W- ■ ■ •55* ■ ■ ■ ■ •55* ■ ■ •55- ■ ■ ■55« ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •55* Birds of the Channel Islands RODERICK DOBSON ‘ A book which will be taken down from naturalists’ bookshelves on innumerable occasions. Without doubt the finest work on Channel Island ornithology that has been published to date.’ — Jersey Weekly Post 48 Illustrations 305 net Island of Skomer JOHN BUXTON and R. M. LOCKLEY An account of a survey of the natural history of Skomer Island made by the West Wales Field Society. ‘ It will be valued by all interested in our natural history.’ 29 Illustrations — Manchester Guardian 185 net STAPLES •55« ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •U* ■ ■ •HP ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •!5* ■ ■ ■ ■ •55* ■ ■ •55* ■ ■ •SJ* ■ ■ •5J. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •55- ■ ■ SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS 9/- for 3 lines (minimum); 3/- for each extra line or part thereof. For the use of a Box Number there is an extra charge of I/- ; Advertisements for a particular issue should reach this office by the 21st of the preceding month. All communications to be addressed to : — H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C.I. SKOKHOLM BIRD OBSERVATORY remains open well into October. Accommodation for naturalists, 4 guineas per week. Details from Warden, Dale Fort Field Centre, Haverfordwest, Pembs. WANTED.— W. Beebe’s A MONOGRAPH OF THE PHEASANTS in four volumes. Please write to H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., the publishers of this work. AUTUMN MIGRATION EN QUIRY.— Chaffinch, Skylark, Meadow Pipit, Starling. 1951 Report & 1952 Programme, 3rd year of enquiry, 6d. Available from B.E.N.A., 92 Rydes Hill Road, Guildford, Surrey. TAXIDERMY. — Birds, animals and fish carefully stuffed and mounted by a skilled taxidermist. H. F. Ashton, 39 Larkman Lane, Norwich. “BRITISH BIRDS,” volumes I to 30, 1907-37, original brown cloth, £22 lOs. Od., carriage paid. Witherby’s Handbook, latest edition, £7. Other bird books for sale. List from Ewen Kerr, Kent Street, Kendal, Westmorland. BIRD BIOLOGY COURSES organised by the British Trust for Ornithology. In the July issue of British Birds the cost of these courses was stated to be 3^ gns. This should be 5^ gns. and the publishers offer their apologies for any inconvenience that has been caused by this error. Printed in Gt. Britain by Witherby & Co., Ltd., London, W.C.I. Published by H. F. & G. WITHERBY. LTD., 6 Warwick Court, W.C. 1 BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST BRITISH BIRDS EDITORS. E. M. Nicholson and W. B. Alexander - A. W. Boyd P. A. D. Hollom - N. F. Ticehurst I. J. Ferguson-Lees Editorial Address : Fordlands, Crowhurst, Sussex. Contents of Number 9, Vol. XLV, September, 1952. page Reports from Bird Observatories, 1951 (continued from page 244) : — Lundy Bird Observatory ... ... ... ... ... ... 297 Great Saltee ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 299 Reports on the movements of some commoner summer migrants at British Bird Observatories (continued from page 256) : — Redstart (R. K. Cornwallis and A. E. Smith) ... ... ... 306 Black Redstart (R. A. Richardson) ... ... ... ... ... 307 Wheatear (P. J. Conder) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 308 Lesser Whitethroat (A. G. S. Bryson) ... ... ... ... ... 310 Pied Flycatcher (G. H. Ainsworth and Ralph Chislett) ... ... 310 Whinchat (Dr. E. A. R. Ennion) ... ... ... ... ... 312 Spotted Flycatcher (Peter Davis) ... ... ... ... ... 312 Patterns of spring migration. By R. K. Cornwallis ... ... ... 314 Studies of some species rarely photographed. XLIII. The Buff- backed Heron. Photographed by G. K. Yeates ... ... ... 317 Notes on the Grey Wagtail. By Henry Boase ... ... ... ... 317 Notes on the courtship display of gulls. By Henry Boase ... ... 320 Notes : — Some notes on the behaviour of House-Sparrows (K. E. L. Simmons) 323 American Water-Pipit in Ireland (P. W. P. Browne) ... ... 325 Wood-Warblers in Sutherland ... ... ... ... ... ... 328 Notes on Blyth’s Reed-Warbler in India (M. D. Lister) ... ... 328 Rufous Warbler on Kent/Sussex border (B. S. Milne, K. H. Palmer and E. H. Pilcher) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 329 Blackbird’s nest in use six times in three successive seasons (Raymond F. Bawtree) ... ... ... ... ... ... 330 Alpine Swifts in Surrey and Roxburghshire (J. F. Burton ; W. S. Medlicott) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 330 Purple Heron in Norfolk (R. A. Richardson) ... ... ... ... 331 Red-throated Diver taking off from the ground (Dennis F. Harle) ... 331 Probable Buff-breasted Sandpiper in Lancashire (N. Harwood) . . . 332 Yellowshank in Cheshire (E. L. Arnold) ... ... ... ... 332 Bonaparte’s Gull in Sussex (D. D. Harber) ... ... ... ... 333 Comparative aggressiveness of the first-year and adult Black-headed Gull (R. G. Pettitt) 333 Reviews : — The Sea Around Us. By Rachel L. Carson ... ... ... ... 334 Wandering Albatross ; Adventures among the Albatrosses and Petrels in the Southern Ocean. By L. Harrison Matthews 335 The History of American Ornithology before Audubon. By Elsa G. Allen ^ 335 Letters : — The Birds of Wiltshire (Cyril Rice) ... ... ... ... ... 336 The Alexander and B.T.O. Libraries (Professor A. C. Hardy, Major- General H. P. W. Hutson and Dr. A. Landsborough Thomson) ... 336 BRITISH BIRDS Number 9, Vol, XLV, September. 1952. REPORTS FROM BIRD OBSERVATOIIteS;p l*> 5J4 (Continued from page 244). ' * 1 LUNDY BIRD OBSERVATORY, 1951. BY Peter Davis SEPMff NumSre ® Rutumn movements were outstanding, snrmv sL t*o commoner migrants, particularly of warblers m average i°d '^^re well above the ^ "T ""“y unusual occurrences. Altogether a'nSTnlTyeTr”''^'' "™»fr yet This brief report summarises the records of the rarer birds seen ro,^ Unwersity College, Exeter (price 2/6) Golden Oriole (Onolus oriolus). ^ A hen in Millcombe, June 6th. Chaffinch {Fringilla ccelehs). Many of the autumn birds were considered to be “ Continentals ” d four males trapped November-December were ascribed to the mid-European form, hortensis. cti,oriuea to me [Red-headed Bunting {Emberiza hruniceps). An adult male from July 14th to 20th, and a female or wmter bird from September 30th to October 3rd 1 Oi^OLAN Bunting {Emberiza hortulana). our (an adult and three juveniles) on September nth twn Sdf « - th^ a Two adult males, one caught in a drop-net October xfifH • eu ringed bird seen again on thi 19th. First mcrnd for“^^^^ Lapland Bunting {Calcarms lapponicus). heard in flight, September 25th. Wood-Lark {Lullula arborea). ^ Single birds, April 3rd, 5th and May nth, two October 21st There is only one previous record for the island Tawny Pipit {Anthus campestris) '^hat was probably a different indi vidual on the 29th. Second and third records for Lundy Ked-backed Shrike {Lanius collurio). A juvenile, September 14th, trapped the following day. 298 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Red-breasted Flycatcher {Ahiscicapa parva). Single adult females, October 5th and November 2nd. Second and third records for the island. ICTERiNE Warbler {Hippolais icterina). A juvenile trapped September gth, and one adult the following day. An unringed juvenile seen on the loth was caught on the nth, and a fourth bird was watched on the 20th. There is only one previous record. Melodious Warbler {Hippolais polyglotta). One taken in the Garden Trap on July 30th. First record for Lundy. Dartford Warbler (Sylvia undata). A bird of the year in St. John’s Valley, October 28th. Not previously recorded. Song-Thrush (Turdus ericetonmi). Most of the autumn birds were of a small, dark variety. An individual resembling philomelus was caught on November 21st. Redwing (Turdus musicus). A bird of the Iceland race (coburni) was trapped on November 6th. Black Redstart (Pcenicurus ochrums). Single birds, February 24th, April 20th, 24th and 25th, May 20th and 2ist. One September loth, one 30th. Seen on fifteen days in October (six, i6th, the most), two November ist, and one bird present until the end of the year. Hoopoe (Upupa epops). Three or four April i6th, one 20th and 21st, and one June 30th. Hen-Harrier (Circus cyaneus). An adult male on November 13th. There are only two other records in this century. Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis). One, a probable first-year bird, on April 17th and i8th. Mallard (Anas platyrhyncha). A drake November loth, a cluck November i8th, 19th, 21st, and two on the 23rd and 24th. The first post-war records. Black-throated Diver (Colymbus arcticus). An immature bird seen at close quarters on November ist. First record for the island. Grey Phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius). One in Landing Cove, September 17th. Wood-Sandpiper (Tringa glareola). One at Pondsbury, September 5th to i6th, caught on the 7th. Dotterel (Endromias morinellus). One at the North End, September 7th Common Gull (Larus canus). A first-summer bird on March 30th. There are no other records since the war. Coot (Fidica aira). One in the Hotel garden, December 15th, found in a dying con- dition the following day. VOL. XLV.] REPORTS FROM OBSERVATORIES, 1951. 299 GREAT SALTEE, 1951. BY Robert F. Ruttledge The island was manned from April 2ist to May 19th and from September 17th to November gth, 1951. A daily record of local weather conditions and a schedule of migrants was maintained. All records of more notable species are fully substantiated by notes entered in the Field Record Book. Study of migrations of the commoner species received particular attention ; trapping and ringing were encouraged and 477 birds of 35 species were trapped, examined and ringed. Following southerly winds on April 24th and 25th there was a spell of N. or N.E. wind up to May 2nd. Winds were between E.N.E. and S.S.E. to 4th after which, until nth, N.E. and E. winds were regular. On 12th, a day of variable winds, that in the evening was W. A N. wind the next two mornings veered southerly each day and was then succeeded by N.W. wind on 15th and by N.E., occasionally E., to 19th. Winds fell light or moderate throughout the period except on May 1st, 6th and 9th when they reached forces 6 to 7. From May nth to 15th they fell very light. Fog was experienced all day on April 24th ; haze on May 4th, 6th and loth to 12th. Otherwise visibility was good generally. There were two showery days, otherwise no rain fell. Up to September 27th the wind was between S.S.E. and S.W. and light generally, but increased on 22nd and reached gale force on 24th. From October ist to 6th there was light N.E. wind followed by three days of light southerlies. A N.N.E. wind, force 3, on October loth was followed by S.E. to S.S.W. breezes to i6th. October 1:7th to 23rd were, on the whole, days of N.N.W., sometimes W., winds, seldom strong. A period of southerlies set in on 24th reaching a gale from the S.S.E. on 26th and 27th. From 29th bright weather with light or moderate winds between N.E. and W. held until November 4th, when more unsettled weather set in. An E.N.E. gale in the night of November 4/5th was followed by a N.W. gale the next night and morning of the 6th. Winds then fell light or moderate E. to S.E., with rain squalls and drizzle to Novem- ber 9th. There was fog on October i6th and on the morning of 30th. Between October 3rd and 12th a few days were hazy ; on others there was mist or drizzle. Visibility was otherwise mainly good. The following observations are extracted from the records : — Starling {Sturnus vulgaris). On April 22nd, 14, then dwindling daily. In May one to three on most days. There was a heavy movement at the end of October, reaching a peak of over 1,000 on 30th. Intensive movement was renewed on November 4th, reaching a peak on 7th (2,000) and 8th (over 5,000). 300 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. Direction of flight was very definite. , Early in October the small numbers seen moved E. or S.E., after which the opposite direction, towards the mainland, was taken. From November 7th to 9th arrivals came from the S.W. and departures were to the N., N.W. and N.E. Movement took place chiefly in the early morning and evening. Greenfinch {Chloris chloris). Small numbers October 12th to November 8th ; maximum on October 28th (12). Goldfinch {Carduelis carduelis). A very few in the last half of April. A few most days from October 9th to November ist. Most on October 17th (35) ; 12 on November 8th. Siskin {Carduelis spinus). One ringed on October i8th remained until 21st, feeding on thistle seeds. One October 26th to 29th. Linnet {Carduelis cannahina). The small numbers seen almost daily in April and early May were almost invariably flying N.E., and in the early morning. A few almost daily, September 24th to November 9th. The chief October movements took place on 5th (100) and 23rd (70). Chaffinch {Fringilla ccelebs). Up to October 13th the few seen were moving N. to S. ; thereafter the movement was generally to N.E. On 26th birds arrived all morning from N.W., heading into a S.S.E. gale. On November7th to 9th arrivals were from the S.W., the birds leaving the island flying N.E., passage being most marked from sunrise to ii.oo hrs., but taking place all day. Numbers fluctuated between October 6th and November 9th, but often exceeded 50. On October 30th, 200 were noted ; on November 7th, 1,000, 8th, 250 and 9th, 270. On some days males predominated, on others females ; the latter being as a rule more numerous from October 21st to 25th. Males were numerous between October 31st and November 9th. Those seen in the field and handled on and from November 7th were clearly of a different stock from the ones previously seen. Males of the first migrants were extensively coloured “ terra-cotta '* on the under-parts ; the later arrivals were rosy salmon-pink on the breast and flanks. Brambling {Fringilla montifringilla). Individuals in very small numbers were noted on most days from October nth to November 8th ; most on November 7th (13). [Red-headed Bunting {Emberiza bruniceps). A male was present on September 22nd and 23rd.] Wood-Lark {Lullula arborea). Very confiding individuals were seen on October 15th and 26th to 28th. They were identified by John Weaving and R.F.R. by their typical note and their broad buffish-white eyestripes. The last occurrence noted in Ireland was in September, 1927, in Co. Dublin. VOL. XLv.] REPORTS FROM OBSERVATORIES, 1951. 301 Short-toed Lark {Calandrella hrachydactyla). One, September 23rd to 26th {antea, p. 287-288). The second Irish record. Sky-lark {Alauda arvensis). Autumn passage started in earnest on September 26th and was noticeable daily to November 9th. Passage was at its height (after a large scale movement on October 4th) between October nth and 19th. Little movement then took place until 23rd when a daily increase commenced and continued to 29th ; thereafter a decline. Movements were most confusing, but it seems that possibly there were two main ones, that of birds departing to the south having come from between N. and N.E., the other of birds flying to the mainland, moving N.W. and E.N.E. Tree-Pipit [Anthus trivalis). Single birds were identified by P. W. P. Browne, who is familiar with the call note of migrants, on September 28th and October 5th. One was recorded from Tuskar Lighthouse, which is within sight of Saltee, having struck the light in the first week of October. Meadow-Pipit [Anthus pratensis). Prom April 22nd to May loth there was a passage of numbers up to 20 to 25. A daily movement took place from September i8th to October 19th, numbers often exceeding 150. The main move- ment was at the end of September and in the first week of October. After October 20th numbers were small. Erom September i8th to October 2nd, birds arrived from between N. and N.E. ; little was seen of departure, but some took place between W. and S. Northward movement commenced on October 2nd and on 5th there was a two-way passage. On loth a large scale movement to the east was in progress ; on i8th birds arriving from the ‘south left to N.E. American Water-pipit [Anthus spinoletta rubescens). One was present from October 8th to i6th. It was trapped, carefully examined and ringed (see p. 325). An addition to the Irish List and the second for the British Isles. Yellow Wagtail [Motacilla flava). One recorded on May 3rd ; two on loth ; one on 12th and 19th. From September 21st to October ist one to four were seen each day (but on 23rd five or more and on 29th none). Arrivals were from N.E. and all were identified at close quarters as M. f. flavissima. Other flava wagtails were seen in flight on October ist to 3rd. Pied Wagtail [Motacilla alba yarrellii). Seen singly on September 28th and on four days in October ; two on October 14th. White Wagtail [Motacilla alba). From three to five were on the island daily from September i8th to 28th ; on 19th eleven ; 22nd seven. Only adults or birds the rump of which was clearly seen are admitted. Birds not subspecific- ally identified passed intermittently from September i8th to October 302 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV, 23rd, but chiefly during the first week of October. Spotted Flycatcher {Muscicapa striata). Passage of small numbers from May 6th to 17th. Intermittent passage from September 20th to October 4th ; four on ist. Pied Flycatcher {Muscicapa hypoleuca). On September 20th and October 3rd there were three, then inter- mittent passage to October 9th. A total of 15 was seen and is noteworthy as there are only some 40 Irish records. Eight were trapped and ringed. Continental Goldcrest {Regulus regukis regulus). The only Goldcrest seen during the spring period was a female trapped on May 2nd. The bird was markedly grey on the back and sides of the neck and ear-coverts, giving the impression of a grey ” stole ” around the neck. So similar was it to the Goldcrests that R.F.R. had examined in Fair Isle, which were clearly of Continental stock, and to skins recently seen, and so different from the birds normally found in Ireland, that it was obviously of Continental origin. The wind was N.E. increasing from moderate to strong on the night of May ist/2nd and an area of low pressure lay immediately to the south, so that birds moving northwards along the French coast would be likely to get a drift into the Irish Sea. This forms the second record of the Con- tinental Goldcrest in Ireland (see antea, vol. xliv, p. 175). A female trapped on November 7th had much the same character- istics and when compared with a typical R.r. anglorum taken at the same time, and with skins, was greyer on the upper-parts and matched the t5/pical form. Goldcrest {Regulus regulus). One to three were seen daily from October 4th to 13th, three on 19th, two on 20th, one on November 7th and two fresh arrivals on 8th. Chiffchaff {Phylloscopus collyhita). Spring passage virtually ended on April 21st, a few stragglers being seen during the next week. P.W.P.B. believes that there was a passage of abietinus from October 4th to 8th ; an opinion based largely on the call note which was very different from the typical call of the Chiffchaff. This strikingly different note was also heard by R.F.R. and J.W. on 14th and 15th. A " northern ” bird was trapped on October i8th. The crown was markedly brown, upper-parts brownish, only slightly tinged olivaceous ; breast and flanks buff ; belly very white ; slight yellowish tinge on the under tail-coverts ; throat and cheeks buff. On the same day and the next single " northern ” birds were identified in the field by the same general characteristics. At Skokholm probable “ northern ” Chiffchaffs, judged on the striking note, were reported on October 2nd. Others were reported as trapped at Portland Bill. VOL. XLV.] REPORTS FROM OBSERVATORIES, 1951. 303 Willow-Warbler {Phylloscopus trochilus). A “ rush ” took place on April 25th (300) after a night of fog and S.W. wind. A smaller “ rush ” on May 2nd (80) like the first, passed on the following day. There were smaller influxes on nth and 13th. From a study of the weather charts it seems probable that these birds were British breeding-stock moving in. Northern Willow-Warbler {Phylloscopus trochilus acredula). A high percentage of these was noted. Eight were trapped and careful notesdf their plumage recorded. Some variation was found, but on the whole the birds were typical of this form. The eye-stripe was very pale, upper-parts, cheeks and sides of the neck were brown- ish and there was a lack of yellow on the under-parts. In one case there was hardly any yellow at or under the carpal joint ; in another, with an almost white eye-stripe, the only yellow, except under the wing, was a faint wash on the tibia. Birds identifiable as acredula were noted from April 26th to May 19th, six being present on 13th. As R.F.R. suspected in May, 1950, that a proportion of the Willow- Warblers were of the northern form, and as a study of the weather charts shows the improbability of westward drift, it seems likely that this race may normally follow a route so far west. Grasshopper-Warbler {Locustella ncevia). One or two were seen on most days during the spring visit. Reed-Warbler {Acrocephalus scirpaceus). One was clearly seen on October 3rd by P.W.P.B. who is familiar with the species. Identification was substantiated by notes of the plain brown upper-parts, chestnut tinged rump, hardly perceptible eyestripe,- white throat and whitish buff under-parts. The tail was fairly long and rounded. Sedge-Warbler [Acrocephalus schoenohcBnus). Main arrivals, April 26th, May 2nd, iith to 13th. A constant passage throughout the first half of May. Garden-Warbler [Sylvia horin). One only, on May 13th, as compared with almost daily occurrence of one or more in early May, 1950. Thin passage during the first week of October. Blackcap [Sylvia atricapilla). Individuals appeared at the end of April and in early May. Males were noted on eight days from September 21st to November 7th ; females singly on October 28th and 29th and November 7th. Whitethroat [Sylvia communis). Passage, which was in progress on our arrival, reached a peak on April 26th. Whitethroats were numerous on May 2nd ; there was a second peak on nth and 12th, after which numbers declined. Single birds were seen at the end of September and early in October, the last on 20th, 304 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. Lesser Whitethroat {Sylvia curruca). The fifth to be recorded in Ireland was identified by P.W.P.B. on October 7th. This is a species with which lie is familiar, but a full description was recorded in confirmation. Brown-backed Warbler {Agrobates galactotes). One, first identified on September 22nd and seen subsequently on three days, is the first recorded in Ireland {antea, p. 290-291). F I E LDFARE ( Turdus pilaris ) . Movement was most marked between November 5th and 9th ; largest numbers passing on 7th (200). Song-Thrush [Turdus ericetorum). There was only a thin movement from October ist to November 8th, except between October 14th and 17th. All handled when compared with skins were clearly assignable to the British form [T. e. ericetorum). Redwing [Tvirdus musicus). Only a few appeared early in October. The first influx took place on i8th and 19th, a second between November 5th and 7th. Ring-Ouzel [Tiirdus torquatus). Two to seven were seen each day from October 2nd to nth ; one on 19th and one on November 9th. Blackbird [Turdus mertda). There was almost continuous passage over the whole autumn period. The heaviest movement commenced in mid-October, with peaks at the end of that month and again on November 7th and 8th. There was no indication of separate passage of sex or age groups. Wheatear [Qinanthe cenanthe). Passage was of small numbers only during both periods, but was most pronounced in the last week of April and the first week of May ; in the second half of September and early October, maximum num- bers being noted on September 19th and 20th and on October 3rd. Whinchat [Saxicola ruhetra). Slight movement was noticed throughout the spring period, and on most days from September 22nd to October 13th. Stonechat [Saxicola torquata). Seen daily in small fluctuating numbers from September 20th to November 9th. Redstart [Phcenicurus phcenicurus). A male, April 21st ; female 22nd and a pair on the next day. A female on September 30th ; a male on October 7th and single female or immature birds on 8th, loth and nth. Black Redstart [Phcenictirus ochrtirus). There was intermittent passage from October 7th to November 7th. The maximum, six, seen on October 22nd, included an adult male. This male remained on the island for three days. Robin [Erithacus ruhecula). Single birds came on April 22nd, May 2nd and 15th. Autumn VOL. XLV.] REPORTS FROM OBSERVATORIES, 1951. 305 passage was most noticeable from October 19th to 21st and from November ist to 4th. Numbers were small and never exceeded nine on September 19th and 20th and October ist. Those trapped and compared with skins were referable to E. r. melophilus. Hirundines. Very large numbers, mostly Swallows {Hirundo rustica), passed both in spring and autumn. Movement in spring was generally to N.E., sometimes N. or N.W. In autumn direction of flight was usually southward, occasionally to W. or E. On September 29th, while many were moving south, there was a determined movement to N.E. and N.N.E. On October 2nd the greatest number of any day were on the move, flying mostly E.N.E. This migration was at its height between 06.45 and 08.15 hrs. (G.M.T.). Swift {Apus aptts). From May ist to 8th a few passed daily, then none until 14th, after which increasing numbers were seen up to 19th when the island was vacated. Direction of flight was generally from southward to N.E. Hoopoe {Upupa epops). One, April 23rd. Cuckoo {Ciiculns canorus). A few passed through intermittently from April 25th until the island was vacated on May 19th. Short-eared Owl [Asia flammeus). One, April 22nd ; one October 27th and 28th. The wing charac- teristics were clearly noticed. Common Heron {Ardea cinerea). Four arrived from the N.N.W. on September 22nd, on which date six were present. Bittern* {Botaurus stellaris). One was seen at close quarters on September 25th. Turtle-Dove {Streptopelia turtur). One or two on most days from April 21st to 26th and from May 3rd to 14th, but there was no marked passage as in 1950. Single birds were seen on several days between September 21st and October 12th. Whimbrel [Numenius phceopus). The last seen in autumn were four on November 4th. Turnstone {Arenaria inter pres). A small but constant passage was in progress from the end of April to mid-May. In autumn numbers were highest during the last week of September. There was marked migration on October 7th, 8th and 9th and again from November 5th to 8th. Lapwing ( Vanellus vanellus). Migration in early October reached a peak on 6th (42) ; there was a minor peak on 24th (23). British Lesser Black-backed Gull {Larus fuscus graellsn). Except on four days passage was noted from September i8th to 306 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. October 4th, with maximum numbers on September 21st. Irregular passage from October nth to the end of the month, usually of single birds, but of twelve on 12th and six on 17th. Great Skua {Stercorarius skua). One, the white wing patches of which were noticeable on this otherwise dark brown bird with heavy flight, was seen on September 22nd. [The observations made at this station are of such interest for comparison with those of the recognised Bird Observatories that we are glad to include here Major Ruttledge’s notes. Little mention has been made in these reports from the Observa- tories of the remarkable “ rush ” of Robins on the east coast in October, 1951, but this will be fully discussed in a paper by Mr. David Jenkins to be published within the next few months. — Eds.]. REPORTS ON THE MOVEMENTS OF SOME COMMONER SUMMER MIGRANTS AT BRITISH BIRD OBSERVATORIES IN 1951. (Continued from page 256). REDSTART. Observatory Bird /days Max. No. recorded in a day No. of days on which recorded earliest latest Fair Isle 50 I I 16 2 V. 29 V. Isle of May 167 30 25 23 iv. 24 V. Monks’ House 15 2 9 21 iv. 12 V. Spurn Pt. 26 6 13 20 iv. 20 V. Gibraltar Pt. 7 2 6 22 iv. 19 V. Cley 9 2 7 18 iv. II V, Skokholm 3 I 3 20 iv. 7 V. Lundy 9 3 7 20 iv. 21 V. Jersey I I I 2 V. 2 V. The pattern of Redstart {Phcenicurus phanicurus) movements was very much less clear in 1951 than it was in 1950 when, it will be remembered {antea vol. xliv, pp. 244-245), there were found to be two rather clearly defined “ waves ” reaching the east coast Observatories. In 1951 the first arrivals reached the western stations and the eastern ones from Monks’ House southward between April i8th and 22nd, and the first were recorded from the Isle of May on 23rd. A major movement reached the Isle of May on May 2nd, when 30 were recorded, but this was only faintly reflected by two at Fair Isle and there were none at the more southerly stations. Movement continued fairly strongly at the Isle of May for the next nine days, but this was not matched at Fair Isle and only faintly reflected further south towards the end of the period. The main movement at Fair Isle was later — from May i6th to 24th — but was on nothing like the scale of the movement recorded VOL. XLV.] REPORTS ON SUMMER MIGRANTS, 1951. 307 in 1950, II being the greatest number recorded on any one day. This was only faintly reflected at the Isle of May and was not matched at all further south, only a very few single birds being recorded after mid-May. The tendency for greater numbers to be recorded at the more northerly stations was again seen, but the symmetry of the dine was upset by the Isle of May receiving a far larger number of Red- starts than Fair Isle in the first half of May. Information about sex-ratios is insufficient for any conclusions to be drawn. R. K. Cornwallis and A. E. Smith. BLACK REDSTART. With our present limited knowledge of the migrations of the Black Redstart [Phcenicunis ochrurus) and the virtual absence of ringed bird recoveries, apart from the one recorded {antea, p. 236), the following attempt to correlate the records from ten observation points is necessarily a tentative one and may weU prove incorrect in many respects as new facts become known. As suggested by Fitter {in Hit.) Black Redstarts on spring migration might be assigned to one of two main categories : (a) Wintering birds dispersing. {b) Wind-drifted accidentals from the Continent. Broadly speaking, therefore, occurrences before the middle of April come in category {a) and after that date in category (6). There is undoubtedly a considerable overlap between these two categories and waves i and 2 (see below) are perhaps best grouped under the heading " intermediate period ” until more is known about them. This theory, of course, takes no account of British breeding birds which, in any case, can be discounted in May and June except at obseryatories near to known nesting localities. In category {a) Jersey and Skokholm/Dale had single birds apparently wintering, but one in North Norfolk on January 27th was something of a mystery for in the writer’s experience a January Black Redstart in this locality is unusual. Lundy’s bird of Febru- ary 24th was probably a wintering bird beginning to move. In the Cley area the first Black Redstart of the spring appears with almost clockwork regularity during the third week of March, and 1951, with a bird on the 19th and 20th, was no exception. Jersey reported a male on the 24th and had the other Observatories been manned during March this movement might well have proved more widespread than the available data suggest. Thenceforward to the end of the season birds occurred in five small, but well-defined waves, the first and second, as noted above, being of doubtful status. Wave I Cley and district ... March 30th to April ist Spurn ... ... April 6th (i). Fair Isle ... ... April 2nd (i), 5th (i), 7th to 8th (i). 308 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. Wave 2. Skokholm and Dale April nth to 19th (except 12th) (i). Cley and district ... April 15th to 17th (cJ). There can be little doubt that Wave 3 consisted of wind-drifted Continental birds. It was certainly the most widespread of the spring involving five of the nine Observatories : Wave 3. Lundy April 20th (i), 24th (i), 25th (i). Skokholm and Dale April 24th (i). Monks’ House ... April 21st ((J). Isle of May ... ... April 21st to 23rd (i). Fair Isle April 24th (d*). Spurn, Gibraltar Point and Cley appear to have lain outside its scope. Wave 4 affected a comparatively narrow front; Spurn May 8th (i), 9th (i), 12th (i). Monks’ House ... May 12th ($). Isle of May ... ... May 3rd (d), 6th (i), loth (i). The fifth and final wave brought"single birds to Lundy and Gibral- tar Point (the latter bird a $) on May 20th. On the seven occasions when sexing of the birds in these five main waves was possible the five males occurred before May 3rd and the two females after that date which, although to be expected, is not without interest. There were the usual “ end of season stragglers ” as follows : . June 4th (i). ,. June 14th (d singing). . July 22nd (juv. possibly Norfolk- bred). . June 13th ($) “ . . . the latest spring record for the Island.” I am indebted to R. S. R. Fitter for reading the original draft and for making useful suggestions since incorporated. R. A. Richardson Lundy Cley and district Cley and district Fair Isle WHEATEAR. The first Wheatear (CEnanthe cenanthe) to be recorded by an Observatory was seen in Jersey on February 13th, 1951. This bird can, however, hardly be called a forerunner of the general spring migration, and the first birds of the spring migration proper were recorded on Lundy on March i8th, on Skokholm on the 19th, at Cley on the 21st, and at Seahouses on the 26th. No Wheatears were seen at Spurn until March 30th, or at Gibraltar Point until VOL. XLV ] REPORTS ON SUMMER MIGRANTS, 1951. 309 April ist. The Isle of May recorded its first birds on April 4th and Fair Isle on April 6th, 20 days after the first had been seen on Lundy. At the south-west Observatories, the peak of the first wave of migration was recorded on Lundy and Skokholm on March 30th, and this was followed by another smaller wave on April 4th-5th on Lundy and on the 4th-6th on Skokholm. A third marked wave was recorded at both Observatories on April loth. For four or five days after this, migration apparently slackened. On the east coast, the first wave of migration was recorded at Cley on April 4th, Gibraltar Point 4th-7th, Spurn 5th-6th, on the Isle of May on the 8th and on Fair Isle on the loth. This was followed by a second wave on the 8th at Cley, on the loth at Gibraltar Point and at Monks’ House on the 12th on the Isle of May and on the 15th at Fair Isle. Another small wave was recorded on the Isle of May on April 15th and on Fair Isle on the 21st, but there is no indi- cation of this further south. Gibraltar Point had a small movement from April I9th-22nd. There was a peak in numbers on the 21st and 24th at Spurn and apparently at Monks’ House on the 24th. On the Isle of May there were peaks on the 23rd and 25th, and on Fair Isle on the 30th, although there had been a decrease in numbers recorded on the 26th. The second part of the spring migration which would seem to include, at least on Skokholm, a large proportion of “ Greater ” Wheatears, began at Lundy on the I7th-i8th, on Skokholm on the igth and on Saltee on the 22nd (Ruttledge, 1951). This wave in the S.W. was spread over a week on Lundy and about six days on Skokholm, and the large number recorded over the period may have been a result of several individuals remaining on the islands for several days. Saltee records evident passage on April 29th and May ist, when Lundy and Skokholm record an increase in numbers. Further waves of migration passed Lundy on May 3rd, 6th, loth and 14th, and Skokholm on the 6th, loth and nth. Saltee records more passage on the 7th. On the east coast very little of this later migration was recorded at Cley, Gibraltar Point or Monks’ House, and Spurn was not manned between April 29th and May 4th, when a movement might have been recorded there. On the Isle of May there was an increase on the 2nd and 3rd and on Fair Isle on the 2nd and 4th when 12 “ Greater ” Wheatears were caught (the first to be trapped at Fair Isle that year). Another wave was recorded on the 5th and 7th at Spurn, and on the loth at Fair Isle. An increase at the Isle of May on the 12th was followed by an increase on the 14th on Fair Isle. There was an increase on the 19th at Spurn which was followed by an increase on Fair Isle on May 23rd. Generally speaking, it would seem that the pattern of the spring migration in 1951 followed fairly closely that of 1950. It would seem that the Wheatears reach the S.W. Observatories slightly 310 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. earlier than the southernmost of the east coast Observatories. This would agree with Stresemann's (1948) idea that Wheatears following the Atlantic seaboard move up earlier than those following transcontinental routes, P. J. Conder, References Ruttledge, R. F. (1951). “ Spring migration at Great Saltee, S.E. Ireland.” Fair Isle Bird Observatory Bulletin, No. 3, 1951. SxRESEMANN, E. (1948). " Die mittlere Eistankunft von Lanius collurio, Muscicapa striata, Oriolus oriolus, und (Enanthe asnanthe in Europaischen Brutraum.” Vdr Fdgelvarld, 7(1) ; 1-18. LESSER WHITETHROAT. The only Observatories to have more than one record of a single Lesser Whitethroat {Sylvia curruca) in the spring of 1951 are shown in the following table : — Maximum no. No. of days Observatory Bird/Days recorded in on which Middle any one day recorded date Fair Isle ... ... 102 50 20 May 22nd Isle of May ... ... 17 7 8 May loth Spurn ... ... ... 9 2 7 May 2nd Lundy... ...... 4 2 3 April 29th These figures show a trend similar to that of 1950 {antea, vol. xliv, pp. 240-241). A column for the “ middle date ” (half way between the earliest and latest records) has been added and this indicates that the migration is later in the north. The earliest record was Lundy, April 17th, and the latest Fair Isle, June loth. A. G. S. Bryson. PIED FLYCATCHER. The pattern that emerged in the spring of 1950, when numbers of Bird/Days increased progressively northward to a maximum of 45 at Fair Isle, did not hold for 1951. The table shows the Isle of May with 62 Bird/Days from May 2nd to nth, and Fair Isle with five only from May 17th to 22nd. Apart from the period April 21st to 25th, after which conditions held up most passage migration of passerines for a week, the Isle of May had birds before the more southerly Observatories on May 2nd (when one also occurred on Holy Island), Spurn was two days later than the Isle of May, but three days earlier than Cley or Gibraltar Point ; birds were in Jersey on May 15th and 17th. The latest dates of all were at Lundy and on the Yorkshire coast (May 27th-29th). Whether this irregular reversal of the pattern of 1950 was in part due to the return southward of birds that had reached a zone where conditions were neither suitable for crossing the North Sea, nor for remaining, V'e cannot even surmise from the data available. G, H. Ainsworth and Ralph Chislett. VOL. XLV.] REPORTS ON SUMMER MIGRANTS, 1951 311 cd 4-* o O' ON 00 Cl (M vC CO O o; >> 2. .fa PQ a> CO u <1; £ *0 O PP u d 4J TJ a o .\ckeo Meron (Ardeola ibis), .\nd.\lucia, S. Sp.mn. {Pliologni plied by G. K. Veatcs). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 09. Buff-Backed Heron {Ardeola ibis). Andai.ucia, S. Spain. Photographed by G. K. Yeates). British Ihrds, \'ol. xlv, PI. 70. BiiFF-B.\CKi<:n Heron [Ardeoln ihis). Ani).\lucia, S. Sp.mn. [Photographed by K. \'catos). British Birds, Vol. xlv, PI. 71. S i xe’. bc-t Common Heron &itterr\ Upper-ports', dull vinous brown "dusted with grey; scopulsrs polcr; Wing-<^uills midnight blue oluSte/ wi'th grey Darker crown. ^ Hind neck,; ru-fous Rising bird stroddles donglirig Legs backed with yellow. White 'Vi»,vigat\on lights' AS In Heron \ Underwing'. Oni^erpn drey- brown, locking plum And grey Covert'S of adult. Ext ro-long toes make -feet project -further. Rokish profile / -\ IndCrttAtjon. ^ Poochc^ e|*^cX of -foMed neck With Ion row j>f '^^rk ^VUck$ Very Jonj, narrow biti, y«Howish-horn {n\h>ature Purple heron, (ciey, io-v i95t.) 1? A' Rich and Son Purple Heron [Ardea purpurea). Immature, Cley, Norfolk, May, loth — 12th, 1951. [From a sketch by R. A. Richardson). I'l’i’iiR. -Vei.lowsuaxk {Triuga Jlavipcs). Ai.trinciiam, C'hesuiki;. Sei’TEMEEk, i<)5i. (See p. 33J). I.owiCK. — NuiUTiNGAEii [I.iisciiiici uiegui-liy m hu) . An i’ni'si'al nes t, m ade KNTIKICEV OE REi:i)S. XoREOI.K, (I’liotogyapliiu/ hv I’, riarke). (317) STUDIES OF SOME SPECIES RARELY PHOTOGRAPHED. XLIII. THE BUFF-BACKED HERON. [Photographed by G. K. Yeates). (Plates 65-70). The Buff -backed Heron [Ardeola ibis) has a more southerly range than the other herons on the British list, extending into Europe only in South Spain, where the photos in the present issue were taken. They are 'kindly supplied by G. K. Yeates. In addition to providing portraits of these dumpy, heavy jowled little herons, a good impression is conveyed of the crowded nesting colonies and the bird’s habit of feeding among cattle. This charac- teristic association renders very appropriate the Indian name of Cattle Egret. Even when cattle are not present the birds regularly feed in flocks on quite dry ground, and may thus be separated at long range from other white herons. P.A.D.H. [The Purple Heron [Ardea purpurea) has already featured in this series [antea vol. xl, plates 26-31), but we are glad to include among our pictures of the rarer herons a sketch made by R. A. Richardson showing the characteristics of a bird noted in Norfolk. Eds.] NOTES ON THE GREY WAGTAIL. BY Henry Boase The main object of these notes is to give an account of display behaviour seen in recent 3^ears in Angus and Perthshire. Some details relating to plumage, nesting and migration are also given. Plumage. After recent autumn moult, individuals may show a definite wine- pink tinge on the breast : seen in late August, 1910, on September nth, 1915, and September loth, 1944. This tint is quite fugitive and it appeared that the bird showing the colour on September nth had lost it by September i8th. The colour of the breast varies somewhat in depth, and in the earlier stages of the spring moult the fresh plumage can show almost an orange tint. Calls. Various single notes as " chik,” " chisk,” “ t’sit,” sometimes a double note “ tissit.” The juvenile call is duller as “ chip,” " chit.” Song. Trills of three or four notes with a tit-like quality. An unpaired male at a nesting place gave repeatedly a phrase ” tche-tche-tche ” ; variants of this heard at other times are ” t’sit-t’sit-t’soo ” and ” t’sit-t’sit-t’see ” ; four note triUs are ” t’swee-chwis-chwis- 318 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. chwis ” and “ t’see-t’see-t’see-t’say ”, the last given by a male in gliding flight on July 3rd in Strathtummel, at which time he was in company with a fledged brood. Once a more elaborate song was heard from a bird perched some twenty feet up in a birch : it was noted as “ chum-chum-chiddy-chiddy-chum-chiddy-chum.” The singer was in full view and seen to be singing, but the song does not seem to have much in common with the more usual forms. Song has been heard from a male in winter plumage on February 23rd, but is heard most frequently in March and April. Late song from males in company with fledged broods has been heard on June 3rd and July 3rd. Display. Initially, the song is used as a signal to passing females, as given by a solo male on April 12th repeated about once a minute. On April 3rd, 1949, a chase involving three birds was noticed near a nesting place, and the flight of one bird seemed unusual. All three birds had alighted together on a flat-topped dyke in full view. One bird was indifferent ; a second bird, rich in breast colour, was crouching with head low and tail depressed, facing the third bird, which was very erect in pose. Presently the chase was resumed and after a flight of about twenty yards the pursuer turned and flew in gliding flight back to the dyke — tail almost closed, wings very wide-spread and only the primaries fluttering with small amplitude. Later, the pair was seen and clearly the brightly coloured bird was not one of them. The male was giving the “ t’sit-t’sit-t’see ” trill. This special flight form was used by the male singing on July 3rd, 1939, in Strathtummel. On May 23rd, 1948, a more elaborate display was seen. The female was seen first, collecting whitish fibres at the water’s edge on a concreted strip forming the bank of the stream. A male appeared from the far side in fluttering flight with the body plumage notice- ably fluffed out. He alighted near the female and ran towards her with head held low and thrust forward, wings arched and fluttering, feathers of the rump raised, and the tail depressed and partly spread, finally rising in fluttering flight and attempting to tread her. She refused and turned away ; the male alighted and ran a little way in his previous attitude, but with wings closed and drooped, and then the action ceased. The male was calling during the display, but the noise from a spillway near by and a background of bird-song made the details uncertain. On another occasion, at the same place (April 7th, 1946), a male and female were seen apart, having been located by their calls. Presently the male flew over quite normally and attempted to tread the female without any preliminary display. She refused, and the male perched near by for a minute or two, then rose in flight to about 60 feet and departed calling. The female remained perched for at least a minute, then departed on the same line of flight. VOL. XLv.] NOTES ON THE GREY WAGTAIL. 319 Pairs are usual from the end of March, but couples have been noted on February 24th, and March 4th, nth, and 13th. Two birds seen together on March 20th had well-marked black throat patches as if both were males. A party of four was seen on March 26th, 1914 ; a trio on April loth, 1922, and solo males on April 12th and 19th. Some of the males seen in March are still without the black throat patch. Nesting. Most of the nests found have been in holes in masonry at a spillway ; twice nests have been seen on a ledge of a bridge structure, once in a rock cranny. The earliest date of building was April 2nd, 1950, for an unlined nest which was lined with feathers on April 9th ; another on April 5th, 1913 ; otherwise, most of the nests have been from mid-April onwards with the latest date of fresh building May 15th. On April 3rd, 1921, an old nest was found to have had the lining removed as if in preparation for rebuilding. The lining has been of hair in most instances with only one or two feathers. Eggs have been laid at intervals of a day, with clutches up to six eggs. The earliest eggs found are — ^two, on April 12th ; in another nest, three eggs on April 15th. The nest containing two eggs on April 12th was deserted after a third egg had been laid. A new nest was found near by on the 19th and this contained three eggs at least by the 23rd but there is no certainty that this belonged to the original pair. Both male and female have been seen sitting on the eggs, and once, at least, incubation began before the clutch was complete. No satis- factory incubation period was noted as the bird seems prone to desert; the figures available suggest a period of about eleven days rather than the twelve/thirteen days given in The Handbook. My earliest date for juveniles out of the nest is May 12th — equivalent to a full clutch about 19th April. In one instance, the young were fed for at least four days after leaving the nest. Feeding. During breeding season, on the rocky beds of small turbulent streams ; after the young have flown, some may feed on pasture near a stream in Highland glens. During passsage, may occur on wide river gravel beds ; even on ploughed land. In winter, small numbers feed at fresh water runnels on the sea shore or in tidal estuaries : some remain in or near nesting places throughout the winter. Migration. Some wintering birds may be in the nesting places in January and February : most arrivals at an Angus nesting site have been from the last days of March until mid-April, occasionally in the third week, if weather is bad. At Pitlochry, passage to nesting places was still in progress in mid-April, 1946, and late April, 1950. Early scattering after nesting has been noted by July ist ; the main dispersal is in August and the first half of September. Some 320 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. broods may remain together until the second half of August ; single birds remain in the glens well into the autumn, as at Glen Clova on September 14th, about Pitlochry in the last week of September, and in Strathardle on October 2nd. Wintering birds have been seen at favourite locations on the Tay Estuary by mid- September and records from October onwards generally refer to the same individuals. Small numbers have been detected in westward flight at Kingoodie on the Tay Estuary in August. Flocks. Anything more than a family party of six to eight birds is unusual. A part}^ of fifteen was seen near Dundee on July nth, 1918, and a similar party at Tayport about September loth, 1946. NOTES ON THE COURTSHIP DISPLAY OF GULLS. BY Henry Boase. The Handbook deals in considerable detail with the display of the Herring-Gull {Lams argentatns) quoting the observations of Goethe, Portielje, and Darling. The notes on Common Gull {L. caniis) and Great Black-backed Gull (L. marinus) refer mainly to the minor differences observed, compared with the behaviour of the Herring-Gull. The main outline of the behaviour detailed had been noted at breeding places. Some display has been noted in the wintering places in the Tay estuary quite away from the nesting areas. There is, for instance, a mutual display where the two birds posture alike. In its simplest form, it was noted on January 12th, 1919, when two adult Herring- Gulls in moult to breeding plumage, posturing with stiffly erected neck, bill level, swam to and fro in close company, sometimes in line ahead, sometimes abreast, sometimes in echelon. The same behaviour may occur on the mud-flats or the sands, and is generally accompanied by a muffled wailing, whether from one only or from both, has not been determined. On April 7th, 1923, this mutual display ended by the two birds facing and interlocking bills, tugging and wrestling for a minute or so. Two variants of a display, where a sudden up-throw of the bill takes place, while a sharp barking note is uttered, have been seen. In the one instance, on March nth, 1933, one adult walked towards a second adult standing on the flats, all the time calling. On near approach, it extended the neck stiffly erect and jerked the bill up vertically, calling a single sharp note. The upjerk and call were VOL. XLV.] COURTSHIP DISPLAY OF GULLS. 321 repeated several times. On the other occasion, on March gth, 1924, the two adults stood side by side, one in a normal standing attitude, the other with extended neck at 45-50 degrees, with the bill at right angles. At intervals, it swung the head and neck in line abruptly, giving then the sharp barking call. The inactive bird seemed indifferent ; the other took flight and flew around, rejoining it at least twice, and finally departed alone. On April 2nd, 1949, two adults in fine plumage were standing on the mud, facing one another each nibbling or stroking the other about the base of the bill and the cheek, and at times interlocking bills and gently shaking their heads. At other times, both, but one more often than the other, dipped the bill in the water at its feet and tossed the bill, then resumed the play. This was repeated at least three times in two minutes. A muffled wailing was heard during the display, but owing to wind and other calls could not be definitely associated with it. A minor display, seen on January 3rd, 1943, suggested the later displays associated with nest building. Two adults were standing together on a sea-wall. On approach, they dropped on to the tide about five feet apart, the one behind the other. The leading bird was calling a muffled “ wah ” note ; the other held a frond of sea- weed in its bill. After a dozen or twenty calls, the leading bird fell silent and the second bird called for a like period. Then both departed together. A different action altogether was seen on March 9th, 1936. At least three adults were circling low over a field, calling excitedly “ ee-ah ” rising to a short, sharp “ yeh ”. One bird alighted, and with arched neck showing a marked kink a short distance from the base of the head, the open bill pointing dov/nwards, walked alone stiffly and called a muffled “ 00-ee-ah ” wail. A second bird alighted and walked behind the first with spread wings raised over the back, calling with head and neck in normal pose. The third bird continued to circle overhead, and presently all three departed. A more elaborate ritual combining a mutual display and an active individual performance was watched on March 8th, 1925. Two adults were standing together on a seaweed-covered dyke. At times, one or both postured with stiffly arched, kinked neck and down-pointing open bill, uttering a soft, muffled, wailing note, walking to and fro on the dyke, sometimes side by side, sometimes one behind the other, sometimes facing and approaching one another. At times the wings appeared to be slightly raised from the sides. Presently one bird sat down carefully as on a nest, rose, walked round about the place with the rear of the body raised and the head held low as if examining the spot, and at intervals tugged at the seaweed fronds. The other bird got excited and tore at the sea- weed, just dropping the pieces secured and seeking more, pulling and wrenching with wide-spread swaying wings, but always aban- doning the pieces secured. Twice, this bird stopped weed-tearing 322 BRrnSH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. and called with outstretched inflated neck and wide-open bill in line at about 45 degrees, roaring sobbing notes, only to stop abruptly and resume weed-tearing. Unfortunately, the finishing of the incident was not noted. This display is clearly one of those usually associated with the nesting place and its neighbouring “ stand.” That it should have developed on a retaining dyke at a shore dump covered at each tide seems to rule out the site as the ‘‘ releaser ” for the display. Neither was there any assembly of Herring-Gulls in the immediate neighbourhood to stimulate the performers. The power to display may linger quite late in the summer, for on August 31st, 1919, two seeming adults, one at least showing winter plumage, behaved as follows. The winter plumage bird was ” brooding ” on a bunch of seaweed with the second bird near by, and both were calling a muffled ” weh-ah.” The sitting bird rose and turned towards the other, but not facing, and both called with extended neck and wide-open bill in line at 45-50 degrees, still calling the same note. The first bird then turned away and with extended arched neck and down-pointing bill, led a slow, waddling march over the mud, the second bird at times assuming the same attitude, but mostly with neck extended at 45 degrees and bill at right angles, calling at intervals the same wailing note. The performance lasted about ten minutes and ended by the first bird taking flight. It seemed to turn as if to see if the other were follow- ing but the latter departed in another direction. All these forms of display were seen on tidal water or on mud and sand twenty miles or more from the nearest nesting site on the Angus coast. Farren in his Bird Watching details the routine of the Black-headed Gull (L. ridibundus) in the early stages of occupying the nesting colony which he studied. He stated that the birds leave the colony in the evening to roost on fields some distance away, and return to the colony in the early hours of the morning before dawn. In the area about the Tay Estuary, there is marked flighting from the landward to the estuary at dusk during most of the year and this behaviour continues on a large scale to mid-April at least. In the second half of March and in April, the birds on the estuary, whether on the tide or on the mud-flats, become very noisy from deep dusk until about 23.00. So far as can be seen in the poor light, the birds gather in dense throngs and from these gatherings comes loud clamour for two or three hours. So far, there is no evidence of departure from the river until grey dawn. On one or two occasions watch was kept near the north shore in late March during the night without any indication of passing birds, whereas at grey dawn and at first light many do pass over to the landward. Dr. John Berry com- ments on this behaviour in an article which appeared in the Scottish Naturalist in 1931, but made no remark on the clamour. This noisy interlude must be some form of mass display, a social occasion, in the early stage of the breeding cycle. Unfortunately the darkness VOL. XLV.] COURTSHIP DISPLAY OF GULLS. 323 makes it impossible to ascertain the details of the behaviour. [We have received two other short notes recording displays from gulls in winter quarters away from the breeding grounds. Mr. C. F. Tebbutt records a “ wild flight display ” by a Common Gull at Eltisley, Cambs., on January nth, 1950 ; after its wild flight this bird twice attempted unsuccessfully to settle on the back of another. Mr. T. A. W. Davis records a case of an adult Black-headed Gull in summer plumage displaying to an immature in first-winter plumage ; the display agreed well with the “ forward display ” described in The Handbook. This incident occurred on March 5th, 1951, at Dale, Pembs., fully twelve miles from the nearest breeding colony. — Eds.] NOTES. Some notes on the behaviour of House-Sparrows. — These notes (which are additional to those already published, antea, vol. xliv, pp. 18-19 > 369-372) summarize intermittent observations on House- Sparrows {Passer domesticus) in Britain (work in progress) and in Egypt (in the winter of 1949-50, at Adabiya on the Gulf of Suez). (i) An association of a male with two females, first noted at Adabiya on February 2nd, 1959, was watched regularly until March i6th when effective observation ended until mid-April. The birds were seen together constantly in their daily routine. For the first month it was apparent that the relationship was predomin- ently social ; no display was forthcoming from the male and the birds moved about quietly together, the two females following the male from point to point. Their attachment to him was noticeable, if he flew off they immediately went after him and settled near, and, in addition, the two females were very close companions, keeping together and occasionally foraging without the male. When on February 28th a third female joined the association for a day, she too followed the male about but kept apart from the other two and thus introduced a third unit into the relationship. The first real appearance of apparent sexual factors was noted on March 7th, when the male displayed to one of the females (which reacted aggressively) while the other perched near. From then until March i6th, when observations ended, the association continued in its new character with more display, an increased localization of activities to the area of the future nest-site and signs that one of the females at least was beginning to respond sexually. When I revisited the site on April 13th, the male had only one mate (at the initial site anyway) and nesting was well under way. The House-Sparrow is stated by Daanje [Ardea, 30 : 1-42) to be 324 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. mainly monogamous. The few recorded cases of polygamy may have arisen from incidents such as that given above. The whole subject, however, deserves further study. (2) The reactions of the Adabiya male at the nest site on April 14th, when the female was probably brooding small young, is worth noting. As I approached, he would lean forward and, with puffed out throat and open bill, give a chattering note. In the air, the bird would fly round in a type of “ impeded-flight ” uttering a flat chirping, and on three occasions this behaviour drew up to eight other sparrows (both sexes) to the immediate vicinity, where they joined the male and demonstrated near me. This incident was another illustrating the noticeable “ contagiousness ” of sparrow behaviour. (3) The noisy, bowing display of the male House-Sparrow with head in and bill pointing, tail elevated, wings drooped and shivering (figured in Daanje, Behaviour 3 : 75) is well known. The activity of one or more males before a single female may consist solely or partially of such posturing, but the object of the participants, at higher intensity, is to peck her cloaca. Cloaca-pecking is obviously much more common than formerty supposed ; published records are mounting ; I have seen it, or attempts at it, on several occasions, and Derek Goodwin informs me that in his experience such behaviour is frequent. While on occasions the female will submit passively to such treatment (see Cooke, antea, vol. xl, p. 308), generally her responses to both display and attempts at cloaca-pecking consist mainly of pecking back indiscriminately and gaping. Bevan (ibid., p. 309) gives instances of the rough handling males may receive and I have seen one tossed unceremoniously (still displaying !) right over the female’s shoulder by a quick pull of the bill. Bowing display may occur when tlie female is thus uncooperative or when the male’s behaviour is of relatively low intensity. The encounters are very contagious, additional males being drawn to the scene by the rapid excited calling and the flurry of movement. (The calling is so characteristic that my dog has learned apparently to expect unwary sparrows on hearing it for she immediately rushes out into the garden and tries to catch one.) At times group activity has resulted after a disturbance by some predator (e.g. man, cats) when a male has been flushed near a female and has pursued (and once attacked) her in flight, displaying when she alighted, further males then joining in. A more or less identical bowing display is found in the Tree-Sparrow (P. montanus) (Daanje, loc. cit.) and the Spanish Sparrow (P. hispaniolensis) (personal observation), while Goodwin has seen cloaca-pecking in the latter. As The Handbook remarks, House-Sparrow sexual behaviour is not well understood. The whole range of activities outlined briefly above seems basically aggressive. Daanje (loc. cit.) has suggested that the male’s display has threat character and that tlie female reacts to it as such. Although the bowing display is VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 325 not typically a pre-coitional one and may take place fairly regularly in the winter months, sr;ch posturing and cloaca-pecking presumably have some sexual function and most records of the latter activity indicate that it occurs just before and during the breeding-season. I would tentatively suggest that, like courtship-feeding, cloaca- pecking may be derived from behaviour, functional at a later stage in the breeding-cycle, i.e., the pecking of the young to stimulate defaecation. I have in fact seen a male peck at the cloaca of a youngster just out of. the nest. While courtship-feeding itself has not been recorded in the House-Sparrow, I have seen a female unsuccessfully solicit food from her mate, when the pair were feeding chicks, though this was probably caused by my presence. K. E. L. Simmons. American Water-Pipit in Ireland. — On October 8th, 1951, I noticed a strange pipit among the Rock-Pipits {Anthus spinoletta petrosiis) at the Landing on Great Saltee, Co. Wexford. It was trapped and ringed (N9337) on October 9th, trapped again on October nth, and seen bj^ me on October 13th. Major R. F. Ruttledge and Mr. John Weaving saw it, October 13th to i6th. We believe it to have been an American Water-PipTt {A. s. ntbescens), the hrst for Ireland. I examined the bird in the hand as thoroughly as I could and, on January 5th, 1952, consulted Mr. R. Wagstaffe at the Liverpool Public Museum. He produced a large series of skins of various races of Anthus spinoletta, and very kindly read my description and measurements. From these characters alone, he was not prepared to state that the bird was certainly of the race ruhescens, on the principle that no racial determination, purely by plumage description and measurements, of an isolated specimen outside its normal range, can be really valid without at least reference on the spot to adequate comparative material. However, it will be seen below that in all ways that have been checked, this bird was typical of ruhescens ; and the evaluation of this record depends partly on other characters of the bird. After taking these into consideration, in my opinion the cumulative evidence is so strong that the identification approaches as near to certainty as is possible without killing the bird. In all events, it seems to eliminate the other races on the British list. I therefore feel justified in giving a somewhat lengthy and detailed report. Description, etc. Upper-parts olivaceous-bro^vn (buffer or browner than with Rock-Pipit), feathers with dark (blackish) centres except on hind neck, rump and upper tail-coverts, latter being somewhat darker and browner with very faint light edgings to longest. Sides of head — Lores greyish ; pale buff streak from bill to above eye, paler buff streak extending back c. 8 mm. from eye, both paler than underparts ; warm buff moustachial streak. On right side of head, a derange- ment of feathers above ear-coverts caused a small dark mark. Under-parts buff, deepest on under tail-coverts and flanks. Feathers immediately below bill whitish with some black bristles ; those of lower throat, breast and flanks with black-brown central streaks, otherwise under-parts unstreaked. Axil- liaries and under wing-coverts whitish-grey (silvery) washed buffish-yellow. 326 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. I have examined 14 skins of rubescens and consider the colour of the under- parts of this bird to have been typical of the race. Moreover, I have com- pared two feathers taken from the under-parts of the Saltee bird with skins, and the colour matches with feathers from a very buff specimen of rubescens. Wings. Primaries, secondaries and primary coverts dark grey-brown, paler on edge of inner web and edged pale buff on outer web, narrowly on third to fifth primaries, more broadly on secondaries. Greater coverts black- brown, tipped and edged on outer web warm buff-brown, median and lesser coverts black-brown tipped broadly pale buff. Little sign of abrasion on remiges or primary coverts. Tail-feathers. Outer pair black-brown with a long wedge of white covering most of outer web and much of inner web and with a slight pale brown tinge near tip of outer web. Penultimate pair with a 20 mm. wedge of white on inner web, outer web opposite this grey-brown, otherwise black-brown with yellow-buff fringe on outer web. Other tail- feathers blackish with slight buff fringe to outer webs, central pair browner edged vaguely pale buff. Tail-feathers ragged at the ends with some shafts slightly protruding. I have measured the tail-feathers of 8 skins of spinoletta, II of rubescens, three of blakistoni. On the penultimate feathers, only rubescens is fairly constant in showing much pure white (up to 24 mm.) : spinoletta usually shows much less white (o to 12 mm.) but one specimen at Liverpool, labelled of this race, has wedges 22 and 27 mm. long. Reference to standard works shows that Eurasian Water-Pipits in general have little white on penul- timate tail-feathers. Thus for spinoletta (Europe) " a small white mark at the tip ” (The Handbook of British Birds) ; coutellii (Middle East) “ only a very small spot at the tip ” (Nicoll’s Birds of Egypt) ; blakistoni (central, south and east Asia) “ only a slight speck of white at the tip, prolonged on the edge of the outer web into a very narrow huffish border ” (La Touche A Handbook of the Birds of Eastern China) ; japanicus (East Asia) “ an irregular whitish or pale greyish spot at the tip ” (La Touche, op. cit.). Soft Parts. Bill black-brown, yellowish-flesh at base of lower mandible, inside mouth pinkish. Iris very dark brown. Orbital ring whitish. Tarsus dark reddish-brown, toes blacker brown, greyish-flesh on under sides. Measurements. Right wing 86.5 mm. ; left wing 88.5 mm. Bill (from feathers, along culmen) 11.7mm. Tarsus2imm. For the last two characters, I have measured four skins of spinoletta and four of rubescens at the National Museum, Dublin, and have tried to do so in just the same way as on Saltee. Spinoletta gives bill (from feathers) 12.8 to 14.3 mm., tarsus 24.3 to 24.9 mm. ; rubescens gives bill 11.2 to 12.5 mm., tarsus 20.0 to 22.0 mm. (the fact that The Handbook gives 22-23 mm. for the tarus of this race shows that 1 have used a slightly different method of measurement). Weights. On October 9th at 08.50 hrs. G.M.T., 20.57 gm., on October nth at 17.00 hrs, 22.53 gm. Thirteen specimens of petrosus, weighed at Saltee about this time, varied between 23.12 and 27.14 gm. (average 24.96 gm.), indicating that the bird was of somewhat slighter build. Field Description. The bird was watched, for long periods, feeding with Meadow- Pipits (Anthus pratensis) and Rock-Pipits, at 10 yards range and closer. Compared with the latter it first gave the impression of being much buffer, particularly on underparts, and with a very buff moustachial streak. The streaking above was less noticeable and finer, looking more like rows of spots ; below streaking less extensive (absent from belly) but more sharply defined. Superciliary stripe about as Rock-Pipit. Pale buff edgings to wing-feathers much more prominent than on Rock-Pipit. White in tail did not show much except when the bird stretched itself (when white wedges on penul- timate feathers were just as striking as white on outer pair). Some- VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 327 times a white line was visible on one side or other of the tail as the bird fed. In flight the white showed well at times, but not invariably. Feet rather redder brown than with Rock-Pipit. The build was much slimmer than, but the length about the same, as a Rock-Pipit. Combined with a slightly shorter bill and oscil- latory motion of the body, this created a distinctive wagtail-like effect. The Rock-Pipit does wag its tail. But this bird did so almost constantly, except when walking fast, at a rate of 8-io wags per five seconds. Behaviour. The pipit was much addicted to one small area of a large bank of rotting seaweed just on the high-tide line at the base of a low cliff, and returned there repeatedly (after being trapped the second time, it was back feeding within lo minutes, having been released 100 j^ards away). Thus it was easily sieve-trapped. It quarrelled freely with Rock-Pipits feeding around it, as they did among them- selves, and frequently went into threatening attitudes, often retreat- ing before Rock-Pipits, but sometimes driving one away. Once I saw it crouch and cower momentarily when a Rock-Pipit called loudly near by. It also joined in local flock movements with the Rock-Pipits and flew up with them at roosting time. Feeding habits more dainty than Rock-Pipit, picking from surface of weed rather than rooting and gobbling. The combination of these characters — warm buff colour, wagtail- like appearance and delicate habits — gave the impression of another species rather than of another race, and it was eas}'^ to pick out the bird among Rock-Pipits with the naked eye at ten yards. Voice. Called much less than Rock-Pipit and hardly at all when flushed, but several notes were heard when the bird was excited and these were quite distinct from Rock-Pipits’ notes. Generally they were less loud but sharper and more incisive. When threatening a thin sharp “ yit-yit-yit ” or “ zi-zee ” or (with bill fully open) “ chi- chi-chi ”. When Rock-Pipits were calling before roosting it joined in with a single “ tsip,” repeated rapidly just before taking flight : “tsup-tsup-tsup-tsup-tsup-tsup” and “si-si-si-see.” When released from the hand it flew off with a shrill “ cheet-cheet-cheet-cheet- cheet,” reminiscent of a Wood-Sandpiper {Tringa glareola), but not very loud. A note of this type was once heard, uttered singly, when the bird was disturbed. It is interesting to observe that W. E. Clarke {Studies in Bird Migration, ii, 212) describes the only other British example as having an unfamiliar note. Previous Wind Conditions. Air Ministry weather charts show that, from October ist to 3rd, westerly winds in the north-west Atlantic were such that a bird flying south from Greenland could have been drifted east to Iceland, and indeed, on October 3rd, wind conditions appear to have been particularly favourable for a sustained south-easterly drift from 328 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. Greenland to the British Isles. Again, on October 7th, strong cyclonic winds centred south-west of Iceland might well have been expected to bear a bird south from Greenland and then east to the British Isles. Of course, these suggestions are merely speculative. P. W. P. Browne. [Major R. F. Ruttledge states that from October 13th to i6th, on w'hich date it was last seen, he and Mr. John Weaving had good opportunities of observing the bird and were able to confirm Mr. Browne’s observations. R.F.R. states that on viewing a large number of skins of various races the one he selected as resembling this bird proved to be rubescens. It is of interest to note that the current number of Rivista ItaUana di Ornitologia (xxii, pp. 59-61) records the first American Water-Pipit for Italy, a male having been obtained at Thiene, Vicenza, on November 13th, 1951. — Eds.] Wood-Warblers in Sutherland. — ^With reference to the occurrence of Wood-Warblers (Phylloscopus sibilatrix) north of Loch Broom {vide, antea, vol xliv, p. 98 and Bird Notes, vol. 23, pp. 253-260), Mr. W. B. Yapp reports that in the first week of June, 1951, he found Wood-Warblers in birchwoods at Doire Dubh in Ross-shire, near Drumrunie Lodge and at Bad Lonanach, Laxford Bridge, Sutherland. The last locality is three miles north of Loch Stack where the species was recorded in 1950 {antea, loc cit.). Mr. G. K. Yeates informs us that in May, 1946, he heard one singing in conifers round Loch Loyal Lodge, Sutherland. Notes on Blyth’s Reed- Warbler in India. — While in India during the recent war I came across Blyth’s Reed Warbler {Acrocephalus dumetorum) on several occasions, during the months of September and October near Delhi, Punjab, and in March and April in Bengal. I was in Delhi for only five months, but although I spent some two and a half years in Bengal I saw this species only in the spring of one year. At Delhi I found them among bush and bramble growth with small trees about the golf course. In Bengal they were among mixed tree and bush jungle, where they worked through the leafy heads of some large Mango trees {Mangifera indica), as well as the tangled undergrowth beneath them. The birds I saw usually appeared to be solitary ones. They would move about in rather a leisurely way inside the dense bramble and thorn-type bushes, coming out quite often onto exposed sprays where one could get good views of them ; sometimes they would work through the canopies of the trees, which were mostly not very large. Very often they did not appear to resent being watched, though any abrupt movement would send them diving into cover again, with a loud “ djo - djo - djo” (0 as in German). While foraging a soft “ tt - tt - tt ” was given, but this was sometimes given loudly as well, and I also heard a rather sparrow-like “chrrr ”. On several occasions I heard the song given, sometimes for minutes on end. This varied in loudness ; often it was given so quietly as to be barely audible three yards away, while at other times VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 329 it rose into a crescendo that lasted several seconds. The fact that there was usually no apparent division between the whisper and the loud song is some evidence of direct connection between sub- song and “ ordinary ” song ; and I could detect no difference in tone, pitch or general timbre. The notes comprising the song were very varied, sweet, pure notes being included in about equal pro- portion with comparatively discordant notes. Some of the phrases were warbled in the literal sense of the word, but the majority were given separately in a similar way to the song of a Sedge-Warbler {Acrocephahis schoenohcenns) or a Reed-Warbler {A. scirpaceus), though the phrases were as a rule strung together so rapidly as to give a general warbling effect. The following, compiled from notes I managed to make at intervals during the performance of one of the birds, gives a fairly good idea of the general nature of the song, but these notes do not represent any complete phrase and were not all given consecutively, as the song was given too rapidly to make a full record possible: ChUPCHUP-T — HEEE — HEEE — SEEE— -WK’WK — SE-SE-SA-SEU — ■ low high high falling high falling WK’wK — TSITSIWEEEA — TCK-TCK — WRIPWRIP — PICPICPICPIC low high low high high SEEEA — BRK’BRK’BRK — SEEA high low high low In the field the upper parts appeared slightly olivaceous brown, with a lighter eye-stripe, in the birds seen in the autumn, but a slightly warmer brown in the birds seen in Bengal in the spring. Under-parts pale greyish-brown. M. D. Lister. Rufous Warbler on Kent/Sussex Border. — On September 12th, 1951, following a heavy thunderstorm in the morning and southerly winds in the afternoon, B.S.M., whilst walking along the sea wall above the Wicks on the Kent/Sussex border, was surprised to observe a sandy-brown bird about the size of a Meadow-Pipit {Anthus pratensis), with a long chestnut tail, which he was unable to identify. When he had been joined by K.H.P. and E.J.P., the bird was pursued along the sea wall, when very clear and close views were obtained as it appeared to be in an exhausted state. Full plumage details were taken and upon consulting The Hand- book, the bird was identified as a Rufous Warbler {Agrohates galac- totes). The following observations were taken from combined field notes : — Upper-parts pale sandy-brown ; under-parts, chin and belly whitish ; breast pale buff ; crown pale sandy-brown ; a dark line passed through the eye with a white superciliary stripe ; wing- coverts dark brown flecked with paler edges giving a speckled effect ; rump and tail bright chestnut. When the tail was spread a black sub-terminal band edged with white was observed, the white being more apparent at the sides of the tail ; the general outline of the tail was rounded, Under-tail pure white. Legs light brown ; 330 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. bill light grey. The bird kept to the open and hopped along the shingle. At the end of a hop it drooped its wings slightly and cocked and fanned its tail holding it in a vertical position. Thi^ posture it maintained for several seconds at a time and is well shown in plate 34 of British Birds, vol. xl. The bird was frequently mobbed by Wheatears {(Enanthe cenanthe) and usually made for the cover of Horned Poppy and Sea Kale growing on the sea wall. B. S. Milne, K. H. Palmer, E. J. Pilcher. [Field note-books submitted to us by two of the observers contain additional confirmatory data and conclusive sketches of the bird. — Eds.] Blackbird’s nest in use six times in three successive seasons. — Following earlier records of the use of a nest by Blackbirds {Turdus merula) for three or more broods {antea vol xxxix, p. 43 ; vol. xl, pp. 85, 158 ; vol. xliii, pp. 120, 403), I wish to record that a nest of this species was built on a ledge inside a summerhouse in my garden at Horton-cum-Studley, near Oxford, in 1949, and three broods were successfully reared in that year. On May ist, 1950, I noticed that a hen Blackbird was incubating four eggs in the same nest, and four nestlings were successfully fledged in due course. The birds nested elsewhere for their later brood that season. On April 6th, 1951, the nest contained one egg ; two more were laid, but the nest was then deserted. On April 21st, 1951, I removed the three cold eggs. On 28th May, 1951, I noticed a hen Blackbird on the same nest, and five nestlings were fledged on June 24th, 1951. The nest has thus been used for three successive seasons, and of six broods attempted five have been successful. It was not apparent that any repairs had been done to the nest since it was built. I have records of the use of nests forj two broods by birds of two other species, and it is significant that in these two cases, as in the foregoing, the nests had been built inside a shed, or under a roof, where full protection from the weather was afforded. Raymond F. Bawtree. Alpine Swifts in Surrey and Roxburghshire. — At. 15.00 on April 25th, 1951, I saw an Alpine Swift {Aptis mdha) at Ash Vale. Its loud and long twittering, not un-musical, call first attracted my attention as it wheeled and circled low over some army huts near by, closely followed by the local pair of Swallows {Hirundo rustica). In flight it looked twice the size of the latter. The white belly and chin, brown upper-parts and breast band were all seen, as the bird flew low all the time I had it under observation. After about ten minutes it continued its solitary journey E.N.E. along the Ash Vale to Waterloo railway. The Handbook states that melba is silent on migration. The bird I saw used on three or four occasions the cry described above, which resembled that stated by The Handbook as being used in the breeding- haunts, J. F, Burton, VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 331 [I have heard Alpine Swifts call when apparentlv on migration. W.B.A.] At 18.30 on August 3rd, 1951, I watched an Alpine Swift near Hawick, Roxburghshire, for quite 10 minutes, hawking about, often only 20 yards from me and never higher than 40 to 50 feet up. I was able to see the white belly and lower breast and forked tail, clearly with x 8 prism glass. It was in company with our Swifts (A. apus) and all three species of our himndinidoe, about 100 all told, and after a thunderstorm some miles south ; wind south and very warm. W. S. Medlicott. Purple Heron in Norfolk. — From May loth to 12th, 1951, an immature Purple Heron {Ardea purpurea) was seen repeatedly, by several observers, in the dense reed-beds near East Bank, Cley, Norfolk. In size the bird was between Common Heron [Ardea cinerea) and Bittern [Botaunis stellaris) but was much more “ rakish ” than either. In flight, at a distance, the bird looked dull vinous-brown above with blue-black flight quills, the whole toned down with a delicate greyish “ bloom ”. The crown looked darker and the hind-neck rufous. A double row of dark flecks ran down the whitish fore- neck. The legs with their extra long, spidery toes were backed with brilliant chrome-yellow and projected further beyond the tail in flight than those of the Common Pleron. The wing-beats were faster than those of the latter species and the voice similar but higher-pitched, “ kak ! ” As mentioned in The Handbook the pouched effect of the folded neck of the flying bird and the consequent indentation between neck and breast were most marked. When at rest among the reeds the 'bird extended its incredibly long and thin neck to its extremity before lowering it and skulking away into concealment. On May 12th a Common Heron seemed to call the Purple up from the reeds and together they flew round the marsh giving a perfect opportunity for comparison before the Purple disappeared to the West. R. A. Richardson. Red-throated Diver taking off from the ground.— On January 13th, 1951, at the estuary of the River Stour in Kent, I saw a Red-throated Diver (Colymbus stellatus) sitting about 10 yards from the water's edge, and level with it. At my approach, instead of the usual flutter to the water, I was surprised to see the bird take off from the sand with little difficulty. It accomplished this by raising itself and with rapidly beating wings and flailing feet, pattered over the sand, becoming airborne within the space of about six yards. It flew strongly out to sea, and making a circular flight, returned to the exact spot that it had just vacated. In landing, the legs were trailing and held stiffly out from its tail, the breast hitting the ground in similar manner to the landing on water. 332 BRITISH * BIRDS. [vol. xlv. 1 then approached it again, and it repeated the manoeuvre exactly as before. On being put up for a third time it flew around, returning to a place some 8o yards further up the river, immediately taking up the crouched position usually associated with nesting. It later took off for the fourth and last time from the ground and flew out to sea. Dennis F. Harle. Probable Buff-breasted Sandpiper in Lancashire. — On August 19th, 1950, I visited the sewage farm which is situated on one bank of the tidal portion of the Ribble, on the Preston side of Freckleton. Here I found a conspicuous yellowish bird feeding with Dunlin (Calidris alpina) and Ringed Plover {Chamdnus hiaticula). I estimated its size to be about that of a Reeve {Philomachus pugnax). My binocular was X 10 but, at 25 yards, I could see, without this, that the bird was a stranger to me. It had dark brown upper parts, criss-crossed with buff ; thin pointed black bill ; round head ; dark brown crown ; almost pure yellow cheeks, throat, neck and upper breast, with no white whatever here and no eye-stripe. The only white which I observed was on the under-wing and rear under- parts. I had some difficulty with the colour of the legs which were dull, rather than bright, and I wrote them down as “ greenish- brown.” It fed on the mud during the half-hour that I had it in view and it avoided the narrow strips of water by using its wings to leap over them. In spite of the fact that The Handbook’s illustra- tion shows bright yellow legs and no white on the rear under-parts, the rest of the observations indicate that the bird was a Buff- breasted Sandpiper {Tryngites subruficollis). N. Harwood. [It may be pointed out that though the legs are shown as light yellow in The Handbook plate, they are described as ” dull orange ” in the text, and considerable variation has been shown to occur in the leg-colour of other waders such as American Pectoral Sandpiper. Furthermore Forbush {Birds of Massachusetts) describes the under- parts as ” passing into buffy-white on abdomen, flanks and under tail-coverts,” and the accompanying illustration by Fuertes shows a wholly white vent. Mr. Harwood has stated in litt. that he noted this area as ” whitish ” in the field. We feel, nevertheless, that in the case of a bird so rare in Britain, and now scarce even in its normal range, confirmatorj^ evidence of another observer is required. Unfortunately, the bird did not remain long enough to enable Mr, Harwood to obtain such confirmation. — Eds.] Yellowshank in Cheshire. — A Yellowshank {Tringa flavipcs) was present at Altrincham Sewage Farm, Cheshire, on September 8th and 9th, 1951, and was watched by many observers. It was easily approached when first seen and flew only short distances, without making any call. Although conditions were quite suitable for the various other waders on the tank, the Yellowshank never attempted to feed at any time whilst under observation. On the second day it became increasingly lethargic and eventually died VOL. XLV.] NOTES. 333 shortly after allowing itself to be picked up by Mr. C. A. Milner. The bird was given to the Manchester Museum for preservation and was found to be a juvenile female. The species has not pre- viously been recorded in Cheshire. E. L. Arnold. [We take this opportunity to refer briefly and belatedly to three records of Yellowshanks seen in 1950, in which year American waders were more numerous than usual in Britain. One was seen at Abberton reservoir, Essex, on July 15th (W. B. Alexander and Dr. E. A. R. Ennion) ; one at Minsmere, Suffolk, August 26th-28th (W. Robinson, I. Houston, J. G. Marshall, Brigadier H. M. Stanford and William Stanford) ; and one on the northern shore of Loch Crinan, Argyllshire, on November 3rd (A. J. Bruce). — Eds.] Bonaparte’s Gull in Sussex. — On June 24th, 1951, I saw a Bona- parte’s Gull {Lams Philadelphia) in first summer plumage feeding at the sewage outlet at Langney Point, Sussex. I had the bird under observation for more than ten minutes, often at close range, and noted the following particulars: distinctly smaller and slighter than a Black-headed Gull {L. ridibundus) ; flight more graceful than that of the latter species and very similar in the motions of wings and body to that of the Common Terns {Sterna hirundo) which were feeding with it ; descended to pick food off the surface in a more tern-like manner than the Black-headed Gulls which were present and also feeding in this way. The bird could be picked out from among Black-headed Gulls by these features alone. The head at first glance appeared grey but closer examination showed that this grey was not uniform but was mixed with some whitish. The bill was blackish. The legs could only be seen when the bird dropped them on approaching the surface to feed. They appeared to be dull brownish. The general coloration of the upper-parts was similar to that of first summer Black-headed Gulls except that it was rather paler than was the case with the dozen or so of the latter species in this plumage which were also present. There were black markings towards the tips of the secondaries and the adjoining primaries. The bird did not particularly associate with Black- headed Gulls, both arriving and leaving alone. This appears to be the first summer record of this species for Britain, all the previous nine known occurrences having been between November and April. D. D. Harber. Comparative aggressiveness of the first-year and adult Black-headed Gull. — I have frequently noted that the first-year Black-headed Gull {Larus ridibundus) seemed a much more aggressive bird than the adult, except when the latter was at a breeding colony. As this aspect of the species seems not to have been studied extensively, I began from 1948 onwards to note all the more aggressive and excitable phases of its behaviour, together with the plumage of the birds involved. Though the data are not extensive, they consistently bear out the point in a surprising fashion. They were collected entirely from the Norfolk Broads in 1948, 1949 and 1950. In 334 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. winter the Broads’ population of Black-heads is 8o-go% adult. In the spring the birds I saw outside the breeding colonies (data from which are not included) were 6o% adult. The results are tabulated below. In all cases of mobbing, snatching food from birds on the water, excitable aerobatics and quarrels with other Black-heads over three-quarters of the birds involved were in their first winter or first summer. Nos. of % of first- instances Adults First-years years A. Attempts to snatch food from birds on the water 18 3 15 involved 83 B. Mobbing of other birds, usually not for food . . . 20 4 16 80 C. Pursuits of other Black- headed Gulls (usually for food) 45 10 35 78 D. Aerobatics and excitable flight 65 8 57 88 A. includes Tufted Duck {4), Great Crested Grebe (5), Little Grebe (2), Moorhen (i). Coot (6). B. includes Kestrel (i), Marsh-Harrier (4), Heron (7), Bittern (i), Wigeon (i), Black Tern (i), Common Tern (2), Common Gull (3). It seems worthy of mention that my records show that the juvenile birds reach a peak of aggressiveness in the spring correspond- ing to the breeding season in adults. But the juvenile bird is also more active and aggressive throughout the year, tending to indulge in apparently purposeless mobbing as the two following records show. The first was recorded on January 5th, 1950, at Hickling Broad. An immature bird was seen to fly up to a line of some 60 Wigeon {Anas Penelope) some 50 yards long, and by calling loudly and hovering low over them, continually returning to obstinate birds, it caused every duck to move from that area to another part of the Broads. The second was recorded on September 4th, 1948, when a Moorhen {Gallinnla chloropus) which moved into a group of six adults was left alone until a first-winter bird arrived. Then the immature bird began to annoy and dive down upon the Moorhen, causing it to dive twice, while the adults took only a minor part in the action. In both these cases there was no question of obtaining food. It would be interesting to discover if this aggressiveness is a character of other immature birds especially of those species which do not nest in their first year. R. G. Pettitt. REVIEWS. The Sea Around Us. By Rachel L. Carson (Staples. 1951). 12s. 6d. It is a remarkable indication of the growth of interest in the oceans that this scientific account of them should have run through three impressions within the month of publication. It is excellently written and brings together clearly a great deal which would otherwise be difficult to trace and understand. The passages on bird life, although correct, are perha ps the most disappointing in that VOL. XLV.] REVIEWS. 335 they are comparatively meagre and are so largely concerned with land-based observations, to the neglect of a good deal which has been worked out recently about the distribution and habits of birds far out at sea. As this work seems destined to go through other editions it may be suggested that some revision in this respect would be worth while. It is however in the background which it provides for marine ornithology that the book is so useful and interesting. For example, an account is given of the relationship of changing ocean currents to climate, which goes far to explain the remarkable recent changes in the bird life of Greenland, Iceland and some other northern countries. The British Isles, having already enjoyed the full force of the Gulf Stream, have experienced much less marked changes. The suggestion that the increased melting of the ice may account for a rise in ocean levels which amounted on the east coast of the United States to as much as four inches between 1930 and 1948 has dis- turbing implications for the future of low-lying coastal areas. But The Sea Around Us is full of interesting things, "and it is fortunate that the publishers have been able to produce it at a price which by current standards is very reasonable considering the length and the standard of production. E.M.N. Wandering Albatross : Adventures among the Albatrosses and Petrels in the Southern Ocean. By L. Harrison Matthews (London : Macgibbon & Kee, with Reinhardt & Evans, 1951). 15s. This is an account of observations on the birds of South Georgia made over 20 years ago, though the exact dates do not appear. Most of the species referred to are illustrated in excellent photographs, and the heads of a number of them in black and white sketches, by the author. These, with the des- criptions in the text, many of which give a very good idea of the characteristic appearance or behaviour of the species, should help the reader unfamiliar with them to form true mental pictures of many of the commoner birds of the southern oceans. The reviewer must confess, however, that the description of the song of the Antarctic Pipit leaves him puzzled. The bird is said to resemble the Rock-Pipit a.nd to rise in short hovering flights singing a short but quite musical trill which reminded the author, not of that of the Rock- or Meadow- Pipit as might have been supposed, but of the Corn-Bunting ! The author’s opportunities for studying the breeding behaviour of most of the South Georgia sea-birds were evidently very limited and were largely gained by accompanying parties of sealers or whalers to the more remote parts of the island on raids to gather their eggs for food. On one of these raids 2,000 eggs af the Wandering Albatross were collected and this species, accord- ing to the author, does not nest every year and only lays a single egg. The accounts of these expeditions are enlarged by including the remarks and conversations of those who took part, quoted verbatim after over 20 years ; as might be expected the English spoken by these foreign seamen is full of expressions not heard in drawing-rooms and in the reviewer’s opinion its intro- duction is disagreeable and quite unnecessary. But apparently the book is not intended to please ornithologists, as it is dedicated " To Bird Lovers, especially those who love them piping hot, well browned and with plenty of bread sauce.” W.B.A. The History of American Ornithology before Audubon. By Elsa G. Allen. {Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc., New Series, vol. 41, part 3, 1951. $2.00.) This work is primarily an account of what is known of the lives of those travellers and naturalists through whose writings the avifauna of North America gradually became known to the world. In order to place them in proper perspective Mrs. Allen has dealt also with the history of the develop- ment of ornithology as a science and given accounts of the lives of most of the leading European ornithologists from Aristotle to Willughby and Ray, Linnaeus and Buff on. The greatest amount of space is naturally devoted to those who studied American birds in their native country, especially Mark Catesby, William Bartram, John Abbot, Vieillot and Alexander Wilson. The numerous illustrations are mainly reproductions of portraits or early pictures of American birds. W.B.A, 336 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV, LETTERS. THE BIRDS OF WILTSHIRE To the Editors 0/ British Birds Sirs.— A sub-committee of the Natural History Section of the Wilts Archae- logical and Natural History Society has been formed to prepare a Check-List of Wiltshire Birds. It would be grateful for any information your readers may have about col- lections of stuffed birds which may include specimens labelled as Wiltshire birds, and of game books containing records of shoots in the county. 184, Sheldon Road, Chippenham, Wilts. Cyril Rice, Chairman. THE ALEXANDER AND B.T.O. LIBRARIES To the Editors 0/ British Birds Sirs. — The Edward Grey Institute of. Field Ornithology at Oxford houses two libraries, the reference library of the Institute (now known as the Alexander Library) and the lending library of the British Trust for Ornithology. The Alexander library has become one of the most complete ornithological libraries in Britain. The use of it is, of course, by no means confined to the Institute staff. All members of the British Trust for Ornithology, of Oxford University and of the Oxford Ornithological Society have an equal right to use it as a reference library, while an increasing number of ornithologists from abroad visit Oxford specially in order to study there. Further, it has now been agreed that members of the British Ornithologists’ Union will be given similar privileges to members of the B.T.O. for working in the library. The Alexander Library has, in fact, become a national library for ornithological research. The library has grown up largely by donations from private individuals, including Mr. W. B. Alexander himself, while several distinguished ornitholo- gists have bequeathed their libraries or particular books. As a result the library is nearly complete so far as works on British birds are concerned, except for the expensive colour-plate books and other collectors’ pieces. For other parts of the world the cover is not as yet so good, except as regards ornithological journals, for which, thanks to generous donations from ornitholog- ical societies and institutions in all parts of the world, we have complete series for all recent years. The object of this letter is to ask ornithologists who are disposing of their libraries or of particular books to bear in mind the needs of the Alexander Library. We would be particularly grateful for gifts and bequests, but if this is impossible, for first offers before the books are sold to a dealer, so that the Institute may have the chance of buying at dealers’ prices. We are par- ticularly anxious to fill serious gaps in our collection of bird-books relating to Africa, which are the more serious now that we have so many visitors from that continent to work in the library during their leave. Other notable gaps include Groebbel’s Der Vogel, Phillips’ A Natural History of the Ducks and Casey Wood’s translation of Frederick II’s treatise on hawking. The Edward Grey Institute also houses the lending library of the British Trust for Ornithology, which consists of duplicates from tlie main library. By agreement between the Institute and the Trust, any book presented to the Institute which is already in the Alexander Library is transferred to the Trust Library, and conversely any book given to the Trust which is not in the Alex- ander Library is transferred to the latter. The lending library has grown up almost wholly from the gifts or bequests of members of the British Trust for Ornithology and is increasingly used by members of the Trust. It is as valuable a help to amateur research as the reference library, from which books cannot be lent. We would therefore ask all ornithologists to bear in mind the needs of these two important libraries. A. C. Hardy [Head of Department of Zoological Field Studies, Oxford). H. P. W. Hutson {Chairman of the British Trust for Ornithology). A. Landsborough Thomson {President of the British Ornithologists’ Union). Notes on The Birds of Farleigh & District This modest work, the outcome of nearly thirty years field-study and research, gives a detailed yet concise account ders upon the outer metropolitan suburbs. Apart from outlining the changes that have occurred in the status of a number of species during the past half century, a balanced survey of bird-life in the area as a whole is presented. As a contribution to Surrey avifauna this work should prove of value not only to naturalists and bird-watchers but also to librarians and natural history societies. and the North Downs Hubert E. Pounds of the bird-life in a rural corner of Surrey which now bor Bound in stiff paper covers 8s. 6d. (9s. post free) Distributed by H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD 5 Warwick Court, London, W.C.l SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS 9/- for 3 lines (minimum) ; 3/- for each extra line or part thereof. For the use of a Box Number there is an extra charge of I /- : Advertisements for a particular issue should reach this office by the 21st of the preceding month. Ail communications to be addressed to: — H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., 5, Warwick Court, London, W.C. I. WANTED W. Beebe’s A MONOGRAPH OF THE PHEASANTS in four volumes. Please write to H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., the publishers of this work. FOR SALE. — British Birds, Vols. xxxviii-xlii and Countryside, Vols. xiii and xiv. M. S. Batts, 17, Heslop Road, London, S.W. 12. WALBERSWICK This charming Suffolk coast village on the edge of the Dunwich marshes and within five miles of the Minsmere Sanctuary is an ideal centre for Bird Watchers. STAY AT THE BELL HOTEL Small ♦ Comfortable ♦ Warm 4 Good Food Moderate Terms ♦ Fully Licensed Telephone ; Southwold 3109 Printed in Gt. Britain by The Riverside Press, Ltd., Twickenham, Middx. Published by H. F. & G. WITHERBY, LTD., 6 Warwick Court, W.C.l. BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST BRITISH BIRDS EDITORS. E. M. Nicholson and W. B. Alexander A. W. Boyd P, A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst I. J. Ferguson-Lees Editorial Address : Fordlands, Crowhurst, Sussex. Contents of Number io, Vol. XLV, October, 1952. PAGE The breeding of the Gull-billed Tern in Essex. By G. A. Pyman and Maj.-Gen. C. B. Wainwright ... ... ... ... 337 On the Gull-billed Terns at “ De Beer ” near Hook-of-Holland in 1949. By Simon de Waard ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 339 Report on Bird-Ringing for 1951 (continued from page 277). By A. Landsborough Thomson, C.B., D.Sc. and Miss E. P. Leach ... 341 Studies of some species rarely photographed. XLIV. The Gull- billed Tern. Photographed by P. O. Swanberg, Simon de Waard and G. K. Yeates ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 357 Observations on the collection and burial of acorns by Jays in Hainault Forest. By M. R. Chettleburgh ... ... ... ... ... 359 Notes : — Jays and Magpies eating wasps (Derek Goodwin) ... ... ... 364 Starling imitating telephone bell (S. H. Chalke) ... ... ... 365 Greenfinch imitating Redstart (A. W. Cundall, P. Evans and J. Sears) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 365 Chaffinch building in deserted Song-Thrush’s nest of the same season (Edwin Cohen) ... ... ... ... ... ... 365 Fly-catching by buntings (Lt.-Col. J. K. Stanford) ... ... ... 365 Tawny Pipit in Essex (D. and E. Lack). ... ... ... ... 365 Male Red-backed Shrike begging food from female (K. E. L. Simmons) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 366 Spotted Flycatchers feeding nestling Blackbirds (John Southern)... 366 Double nest of Reed-Warbler (D. F. Billett) ... ... ... 366 Sub-song of Mistle-Thrush (A. A. Wright) ... ... ... ... 367 Blackbird using a Song-Thrush’s nest of the same season (Edwin Cohen) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 367 Nocturnal movements of Redwings (K. G. Spencer) ... ... 367 Three Robins feeding one brood (J. M. D. Harrison) ... ... 368 Black-bellied Dippers in the British Isles. 1950-1951 ... ... 369 Gannets mating at sea (A. J. Wallis) ... ... ... ... ... 369 Feral Pigeons eating frost (Derek Goodwin) .. . ... ... ... 370 Dunlin and other waders " coughing ” (P. W. P. Browne ; Dr. R. J. H. Raines) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 370 Winter feeding behaviour of Common Sandpiper (Bernard King)... 371 Gull-billed Terns in Sussex (D. D. Harber) ... ... ... ... 371 Lesser Black-backed Gull breeding in Kent ... ... ... ... 372 Request for information (L. S. V. and U. M. Venables) ... ... 372 Supplementary Notes (continued from page 77). ... ... ... 372 Reviews : — The Popular Handbook of British Birds. Edited by P. D. Hollom ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 374 British Waders in their Haunts. By S. Bayliss-Smith ... ... 375 Menaboni's Birds. By Athos and Sara Menaboni ... ... ... 376 Books Received ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 376 Letter : — Unusual accumulation of nesting material by Starlings (R. W. Crowe). ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 376 BRITISH”"B1RDS Number io, Vol. XLV, October, 1952. THE BREEDING OF THE GULL-BILLED TERN IN ESSEX. BY G. A. Pyman and C. B. Wainwright. The attractiveness to birds of the comparatively recently formed Abberton Reservoir, three miles south of Colchester in Essex, has already been described by Dr. J. W. Campbell (antea, vol. xl, pp. 78-82). This reservoir lies some miles north of the out- lying' marshes of the Blackwater Estuary and, at the same time, only about three miles south-west of the Colne Valley. It is divided by two causeways into Upper, Middle and Lower areas, totalling" some 1,210 acres, and when the water level drops sufficiently an island of about ii acres appears mid-way along, and near the northern bank of, the Lower (and by far the largest) reservoir, a magnificent sheet of water, 1,030 acres m area when the reservoir is full, and with a perimeter of over nine miles. Following an absence of several years, this island re-appeared during the summer of 1948. It was of a gravelly nature and gradually became largely covered with a variety of ground \egetation and a very few willow shrubs, but even up to early 1951, when it was again submerged, a good deal of its surface was covered with grass, quite thick in places, and there were even some bare gravelly patches. Such was the island that gradually became colonised by a remarkable population of birds. .A. number of pairs of Tufted Duck (Aythya fuligula), Shoveler (Spatula ciypeata), Mallard (Anas platyrhyncha) and Redshank (Tringa totanus) bred in the denser vegetation and Ringed Plover (Charadrius hiaticiila) on the gravelly patches, whilst an extra- ordinary, loose colony of Great Crested Grebes (Podiceps cristaius) nested in the shallows round the island. In 1950, when, following the prolonged drought, the area of the island eventually extended to some 30 acres, the water fell so rapidly that the Grebes’ nests were stranded on the mud, in many cases at considerable distances, up to 30 yards, from the water’s edge, and these stuck up as cones of mud, each with a hollow on the top. The extent to which the island was populated by birds during its previous appearances — when in any case it was comparatively limited in area — is not known, but in 1948 it was the nesting site of an indeterminate number of Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) from mid-summer onwards, whilst in 1949 it was colonised by 338 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. at least 250 pairs of Black-headed Gulls {Lciriis yidibundus), about 60 pairs of Common Terns and some ii pairs of Little Terns {Sterna albifrons). This appears to form the only instance of the last species breeding' inland in Eng'land, and is the more interest- ing as they nested in short grass or caked mud, and not on the gravelly patches. In 1950, the number of pairs of Black-headed Gulls had risen to about 1,000, whilst the population of Common and Little Terns remained at about the 1949 figures. On July 24th, 1949, R. V. A. Marshall and G. P., when on the margin of the reservoir, were mobbed by a pair of large terns whicli appeared from amongst Common Terns over the area of the island. From their behaviour the birds were assumed to be nesting on the island, and, from the restricted and overhead views obtained, they were thought to be Sandwich Terns {Sterna sandvicensis), a species with which the observers were unfainiliar. On July 2nd, 1950, G. .A. P. again encountered a pair of terns, in the same place, which were immediately recognised as belong- ing to the same species as that seen in 1949, by their striking- calls and fairly stout (but not verv long) and wholly black bills. About a week later, in Norfolk, G. .A. P. took the opportunity of studying Sandwich Terns at their breeding station and com- paring them with the Abberton terns ; having particularly noted their longer, invariably yellow-tipped bills and distinct call-notes, and also their more deeply forked tails and rather more slender form, he realised, as he had already suspected, that the Abberton birds were in fact Gull-billed Terns (Gelochelidun nilotica). In the meantime, R. A/k A. M. had watched at close range one of the birds flying low along the edge of the reservoir, when he noted the dark primaries in addition to the distinguishing features listed bv G. A. P., and had arrived at the same conclusion. On July 4th, 1950, C. B. W. found and ringed a nestling tern with a dark bill, while a tern with a black bill flew, screaming, about 50 feet over his head. He found this nestling healthy on the 5th and 6th and on each occasion one parent flew around protesting. On July loth one adult again flew round him, some 200 yards from where the nestling had been ringed, ljut he did not see the chick. On July 13th, a friend who accompanied C. B. W. to the island picked up this nestling dead another 50 yards further on. The nestling’s bill had by this time developed, and it was fairly obviously a Gull-billed Tern. The bird was preserved and it was examined the next evening by Dr. E. A. R. Ennion and W. B. Alexander. The identification was later confirmed by R. VVagstafl'e of the Liverpool Museum, where the bird is now preserved. No adult was seen after July loth, in spite of searches by C. B. AV. and others. VOL. XLV.] BREEDING OF GULL-BILLED TERN. 339 [Publication of this most interesting record of the first breeding in Britain of the Gull-billed Tern has been withheld until now in the hope that the birds would again return. However, the rainfall in the winter and early spring of 1951 and the duplication of the supply pipe-line unfortunately raised the water-level above the island during the breeding seasons of 1951 and 1952, so that no birds were able to nest on it, though in 1951 some 40 pairs of Common Terns attempted to breed on the concrete road-way around the Reservoir. No further reports of Gull-billed Terns have been received from Essex, and it seems likely that the island will remain submerged in the future, except for occasional short periods in early autumn. — Eds.] ON THE GULL -BILLED TERNS AT “ DE BEER ” NEAR HOOK-OF-HOLLAND IN 1949. BY Simon de W.y.\rd. O.n May 29th, 1949, A. M. van den Oord and the author found a nest with two eggs of the Gull-billed Tern {Gelochelidon nilotica) on the beach of “De Beer” near Hook-of-Holland. On June 19th another nest was found with two nestlings, and a third nest containing two eggs, one of which afterwards disappeared, was found on the 29th. The first and third nests were about 600 yards apart on a beach among low dunes with Common Terns (Sterna hirimdo) breeding in the vicinity. The second nest was farther away from the sea, in the middle of a small sandy plain between low dunes, with Black-headed Gulls {Larus ridibundus) and Common Terns breeding near-by. In all cases the scrapes were rather big and deep and practically without lining. The eggs of the first nest showed a marked difference in form and colour. One was greenish, the other yellow-brown and the dimensions were 49.1 x 36.2 mm. and 50.7 x 34-4 mm. respectively (F. P. J. Kooymans). On June i6th the yellow- brown egg showed cracks and on the 19th we found a young bird, already dry, and the shell still in the nest. The second egg hatched on June 20th. The birds did not remove the shells: the first was thrown out by a movement of the brooding bird and then blown away by the wind, and the second we took home in the evening. The nestling that hatched on June 19th (out of the darker egg) was dark, the upper-parts being almost evenly brownish-black. The bill was rather heavy and of a pink colour, with a black tip and a white egg-tooth. The legs were orange-yellow. The upper- 340 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. parts of the second nestling' were mouse-grey. The difference in colour between the nestlings is well shown in the upper picture on plate 8o. We saw the brooding- bird fed with a small fish by its mate. Three pellets were found ; one — about as big" as a hazel-nut — consisting of very small pieces of fish-bone and the other two of hairs and bones of mice. Kooymans saw one of the old birds hunting over the Green Beach where it picked up a nestling bird five times to drop it from a height of some metres. He ran towards it and chased off the Gull-billed Tern. The nestling' was found to be a few-days-old Avocet [Recurvirostra avosetta), which was dead. We were also able to obtain some data about the food of the young. On June 19th the first, just hatched, stayed under the old bird till about noon, when it beg-an to cheep and creep away, upon which the other adult, then standing near the nest, flew away and came back with a small insect which it gave to the chick plate 79). The brooding bird had left the nest for a short time, but returned immediately after the young had been fed and went on brooding. Twice again we saw that the chick was given an insect, after which it kept still, under the old bird. On June 2ist the larger nestling was fed with a small fish, which the adult brought in its bill. .Afterwards the old birds were seen a few times disgorging verj- small pieces of food which were given to the young. Particularly after the eggs hatched, the Gull-billed Terns were violently attacked by the Common Terns which were breeding near-by. They reacted by lifting their heads in a defensive manner, uttering an angry “arrrr”, opening their bills wide so that the reddish insides showed. They were also often attacked by Common and Little Terns {Sterna alhifrons) when flying over the beach. Usually they dodged the attacks without defensive movements or sounds, but when a Black-headed Gull came near the nesting-site, they became excited and uttered a loud “cha-ha, cha-ha”, and also “huhuhuhu” (u as in duck), the same note as the alarm (to get the right idea of these sounds they should be pronounced very nasally). When taking over at brood- ing, the incoming bird uttered the loud “cha-h;(, cha-h;/", some- times with its bill almost closed, sometimes with an open bill, in which case it was a very harsh and loud sound. The sitting bird made muttering noises, stretched flat on the nest and then in most cases flew off suddenly, at the moment when the other bird was very near. .Although all the eggs hatched in each nest, the young dis- appeared soon afterwards in every case, so that it seenis very probable that they did not live. I'he Herring-tiulls (Lnrus argoitaias), which breed at “De Beer” in some hundreds of pairs, are thought to be responsible for this. VOL. XLV.] GULL-BILLED TERNS AT “ DE BEER.” 341 [It is only since the recent war (c/. p 357) that the Gull-billed Tern has nested regularly — in very small numbers — in Holland, so that, although the gist of this paper has already been published in Ardea, vol. 37, pp. 161-167 (in Dutch), we are glad to print this account of one of the 1949 nests at “De Beer”, partly as an accompaniment to the photographs plates 78-80) and partly to supplement the Essex record with a few breeding details. — Eds.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. BY A. Landsborough Thomson, C.B., D.Sc., Chairman, AND E. P. Leach, Hon. Secretary, Bird-Ringing Committee, British Trust for Ornithology. [Continued from page 277). {Anas platyrhyncha). The following recoveries relate to birds ringed as full-grown in autumn or winter, mainly at decoys for the Wildfowl Inquiry Committee : — 9 recovered elsewhere in Great Britain in subsequent seasons ; 12 recovered in Holland in subsequent seasons ; and those listed below. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. No. Ringed. Recovered. 406203 Mochrum (Wigtown), 4.3.51, by Lord D. Stuart. Forsa, East Sweden, 1. 9.51. [61° 44' N., 16° 57' E.]. AN. 7004 Sunninghill (Berks). 14.2.50, by Ash and Ridley. Ringkobing Fjord, Den- mark, 12. 10.51. 926212 Colchester (Essex), 22.12.50. Pudasjarvi, Finland, autumn 1951. [65° 20' N., 26° 55' E.]. 928385 Slimbridge (Glos.), 13.9.50. Hauho, Finland, 26.4.51, [61° 15' N., 24° 30' E.]. 926539 Ditto 1 1.2.49. Vahakyro, Finland, 25.4.51, [ca. 63° N,. 22° E.]. 927443 Colchester, 28.2.51. Segeberg, Schleswig- Holstein, 28.7.51. 929227 Ditto II. II. 50 Tonning, Schleswig- Holstein, 2. 10.5 1. 928535 Slimbridge, 17.9.50. Husum, Schleswig- Holstein, 5. 12. 51. 926996 Colchester, 30.1.50. Bremerhaven, Germany, 2. 10.51. 342 BRITISH BIRDS. . [VOL. XLV. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. No. Ringed. Recovered. 928415 Slimbridge, 13.9.50. Fredrikstad, Norway. 19. 10.51. 927700 Ditto 28. 9. 49. Fallfors, (Vasterbotten), Sweden, 22.9.51. 928735 Ditto 4.10.50. Orsundsbro (Uppland), Sweden, 23.8.51. 925983 Ditto 27.12.47. Soderfors (Uppland), Sweden, spring, 1950. 927469 Colchester, 31.3.51. Ljustero, Stockholm, Sweden, 18.8.51. 927465 Ditto 10. 3. 51. Charlottenburg, South Sweden, -.10.51. 928252 Slimbridge, 1 1.9.50 Island of Samso, Den- mark, 28.10.51. 928657 Ditto 24.9.50. Tournehem (Pas-de- Calais), France, -.2.52. 928273 Ditto 1 1.9.50. Ardres (Pas-de-Calais), France, 20.1.52. 928630 Ditto 23.9.50. St. Valery (Somme), France, 12. 9. 51. 928230 Ditto 1 1.9.50. Lac de Grand Lieu (Loire Inf.), France, 2.9.51. 928815 Ditto 14.12.50. La Ferte-Bernard (Sarthe), France, 7. 12. 51. Teal (Anas crecca). There are again many records of birds ringed in autumn or winter, at decoys in England and Wales, for the Wildfowl Inquiry Com- mittee. Of these birds, there were recoveries later in the same winter or in the following spring from Ireland (8), N, France (5), Belgium (i), and Holland (4) ; and in subsequent seasons from Scotland (3), Ireland (24), N. France (15), Belgium (2), Holland (21), N. Germany (21), and Denmark (26). One bird ringed in Essex on January 25th was recovered in Seine Inferieure two days later. There are also 20 recoveries from Finland, mostly in the breeding season. The records from other countries, including the remainder of France, are listed below. The Guadalquivir locality is the farthest south of those from which Teal ringed in the British Isles have so far been recorded. 910043 Colchester (Essex), 13.12.50. 910150 Ditto 22.12.50. 908315 Peterborough (Northants.), 22.2.50. Junosuando, N. Sweden, 20.7.51. [67° 20' N., 22° 30' E.]. Gellivare, N. Sweden. 6.9.51. [67° 15' N., 20° 30' E.]. Gr4tra.sk. N. Sweden. 17-551. [65° 30' N-. 20“ E.]. VOL. XLV.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. 343 No. Ringed. Recovered. 905525 Pembroke, 9.12.50. Sorsele, N. Sweden, 3.9.51, [65° 30' N., 17° 30' E. 907711 Colchester. 24.1.50. Pite&, N. Sweden, 25.8.51, [65° 20' N., 21° 30' E.]. 910572 Ditto 6.2.51. Umeli, N. Sweden, 21.8.51, [63° 45' N., 20° 20' E.]. 91071S Ditto 28.2.51. T&kern Lake (Ostergot- land), Sweden, 19.8.51. 911475 Peterborough, 26.2.51. Hornborga Lake (Vaster- gotland), Sweden, 11.8.51. 910732 Colchester, 2.3.51. Ditto, 7. 10.51. 905714 Pembroke, 14.1.51. Vattern Lake (Ostergot- land), Sweden, 24.8.51. 909212 Colchester, 24.10.50. Near Vaxio, S. Sweden, -.11.51. 910066 Ditto 13.12.50. Ditto, 2.6.51. 909487 Ditto 12. II. 50. Osby, S. Sweden, 1.8.51, [56° 22' N., 14° E.]. 909874 Ditto 4.12.50. Kristianopel, S. Sweden, -.4.51. [56° 15' N., 16° ■ 3' E.]. 909379 Ditto 2.1 1.50. Revingeby, S. Sweden, 26.8.51, [55° 43' N., 13° 22' E.]. 906738 Slimbridge (Glos.), 3.4.50. Stenhag, S. Sweden, 22.9.51, [55° 54' N., 13° 26' E.]. 909527 Ditto, 17.9.50. Lund, S. Sweden, spring, 1951, [55° 43' N., 13° 12' E.]. 911843 Ditto, 1. 10. 51. Carnac-Plage (Morbihan), Erance, 6.10.51. 912579 Peterborough, 16.1.52. Champtoceaux (Maine-et- Loire), France, 27.1.52. 911692 Ditto, 2.9.51. Near Chateau briant (Loire Inf.), France, 17. 9. 51. 909188 Colchester, 23.10.50. Maillezais (Vendee), France, 9-3-5I- 910404 Ditto, 2 1. 1.5 1. Near Tonnay - Charente (Charente Inf.), France, 3-2. 52. 910696 Ditto, 27.2.51. Soulac (Gironde), France, 10. 12. 51. 912060 Peterborough, 23.11. 51. Belin (Gironde), France, I5-1-52. 344 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL XLV. A 0. Ringed. Recovered. 907793 Colchester, 14.2.50. Near Bidache (Basses- Pyrenees), !•' ranee, 24.2.52. 909779 Ditto, 24.11.50. Perrigny (Cote d’Or), France, 25.3.51. 909896 Ditto, 4.12.50. St. Louis (Bouches-du- Rhone), France, 30.12.51. 907774 Ditto, 9.2.50. Besate, N. Italy, 21. 12.51, [45° 18' N., 8° 57' E.]. 90756S Ditto, 20.10.49. lUantua, N. Italy, 3.1.51. 90S826 Peterborough, 21. 8. 50. Lubiano (Alava), Spain, 23-3-5I- 910870 Colchester, 21. 10. 51. ^hllavieja (Salamanca). Spain, 2.3.52. 905377 Pembroke, 31.12.49. Mouth of R. Guadalquivir, Spain, II. 2. 52. Garganey (Anas querquednla) . 9^0795 Colchester (Kssex), 2 1.4. 51, ad., Near Peschiera (Mantua), for M’ildfowl Inq. Ctee. Italy, 15.3.52. Wigeon (Anas penelope). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. 344484 Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., Hagested (Zealand), Den- 5- 1 -SO- mark, 10.11.51. O'' 4755 Pembroke, 1 2. 1. 50. Pieve Albignola (Pavia), Italy, II. 12. 51. RINGS ISSUED TO \\'lLDFOWL INQUIRY COMMITTEE. 910737 Colchester (Essex), 2.3.51. Ribble Estuary (Lancs.), -.10.51. [210 m. N.W.]. 910736 Ditto, 2.3.51. Strangford Lough (Down), 14. 9.51. 907291 Peterborough (Northants.), 6.3.49. Cockerham (Lancs.), Dec., 1950 or Jan., 1951, [140 m. N.W.]. 907239 Ditto, 4.3.49. Munnekezijl (Friesland), Holland, 25.1.52, 155° 18' N., 6° 18' E.]. 907210 Ditto, 28.2.49. Terschelling, Holland, 18.12.51. 907307 Ditto, 6.3.49. Ditto, 28.1.52. 907328 Ditto, 6.3.49. Lac de Grand Lieu (Loire Inf.), France, 25.1.52. 906690 Slimbridge (Glos.), 24.9.49. Montjean (Maine - et - Loire), France, 12. 2.51, [47“ 23' N., 0° 52' \V.]. VOL. XLV.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. 345 Pintail {Anas acuta). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. RINGS ISSUED Td WiLDFOWL INQUIRY COMMITTEE. No. Ringed. Recovered. 909583 Slimbridge (Glos.), 10.12.50. Loch Leven (Kinross), 12. 1.52. 928517 Ditto, 16.9.50. Lokka, Finland, -.8.51 [67° 50' N., 27° 43' E.] 909562 Ditto, 28.10.50. Nissum Fjord (Jutland) Denmark, 22.8.51. 928976 Ditto, 19. 2. 51. Texel, Holland, 2. 10.51. 906698 Ditto, 12.10.49. Kampen (Overijssel), Holland, -.10.51. 911857 Ditto, 19. 10.5 1. Algemesi (V alencia) Spain, 7. 12. 51. Shoveler {Spatula clypeata). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. RINGS ISSUED TO WiLDFOWL INQUIRY COMMITTEE. 403737 Slimbridge (Glos.), 11.8.49. Montdidier (Somme), France, 23.9.51. 909517 Ditto, 25.8.50. Le Havre (Seine Inf.), France, 28.8.51. Tufted Duck {Ay thy a fuUgula). RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. 345299 Or 3386 910583 907768 St. James’s Park, London, 21.12.50, by London N.H.S. Pembroke, 1.2.38. Colchester (Essex), 6.2.51, for Wildfowl Inq. Ctee. Ditto, 1.2.50. Langweer (Friesland),, Holland, 14. 12. 51. Barnes, Surrey, —.1.52. Kelty (Fife), 26.1.52. Saltsjobaden, E. Sweden. 1. 1. 52. Cormorant {Phalacrocorax car bo). Of birds ringed as young, 10 have been recovered in winter elsewhere in the British Isles, 9 on the northern and western coasts of France, and 2 in northern Spain. One bird was over twelve years old ; it was within 75 miles of its native locality. Shag {Phalacrocorax aristotelis) . RINGED AS YOUNG. 129079 Fame Is. (Northumb.), 27.7.51, by Northd. & Durham N.H.S. 129008 Ditto, 28.6.51. 507490 Maughold Head, I. of Man, 15.7.5 1, by Co win, Crellin, Moss, and Pool. Ballintore (Ross.), 6.3.52, [170 m. N.W.]. Carnoustie (Angus), 29-3-52, [75 m. N.N.W.]. Port William (Wigtown), -•3-52. 346 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. RINGED AS YOUNG. -Vo. Ringed Recovered. 507489 Ditto, 15. 7. 51. Parkgate, Wirral (Ches.), 1. 1.52. 506796 Fetlar, Shetland, 23.7.50, by P. M&loy, Norway, 8.3.51, Evans. [61° 9' N., 5° 2' E.]. Gannet {Sula hassana). One ringed as young and two as adults have been recovered in home waters in circumstances of no particular interest. Of birds ringed as young there have been recoveries from northern France (4), Holland (i), and Spain (2) — all within the first two years of life. There are also the following records — RINGED AS YOUNG. 505673 Bass Rock, 10.7.48, by Mid- lothian O.C. 501335 Ditto, 6.7.51, by I. V. Balfour- Paul. 507802 Ditto, 15. 7. 51. 507776 Ditto, 6.7.51. 500987 Ditto, 7.8.49, by I. -\ppleyard. 506499 Ditto,24.7.48,by Ash and Ridley. 508325 Ditto, 8.7.51, by Edinburgh -■\cademy O.S. South Uist, Outer Hebrides, 9.5.51. Stronsay, Orkney, 26.12.51. -\rzeu, Algeria, 27.12.51. Off Canary Is., -.10.51. Nordstrand, N. Frisian Is., 3-I-52. Terschelling, Holland, 12. 1. 52. -Vlgiers, 28.11. 51. Storm-Petrel {Hydrobates pelagicus). SS.476 Skokholm Bird Obs., 16.6.49, ad. At sea, 1.7. 51, [ca. 50° 40' N., 6° W.]. Manx Shearwater [Puffinus pviffinus). There are 18 records showing movement, all of birds ringed on Skokholm and mostly as adults ; 2 of the recoveries are from the British Isles, 13 from France (all but one in the period April — August), and 3 from Spain (all in March). There are also the three following recoveries, one from Brazil — the first record of a British ringed bird from South America — one from an inland localit3c and one from well to the north of the place of ringing. AX. 1631 Skokholm Bird Obs., 31.8.50, Chesterfield (Derby), young. 28.9.51, [195 m. N.E.]. AX. 4904 Ditto, 10. 9. 51. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 20. II. 51. AX. 2365 Ditto, 24.4.51, ad. Fairlie (-'^yr), 28.8.51. Fulmar Petrel { Fulmar us glacialis). 352285 Gairsay, Orkney, 26.7.51, young, Lowestoft (Suffolk), by R. Carrick. 9-3-52, [495 m. S.S.E.]. VOL. XLV.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. 347 No. 344577 346698 347489 329172 337622 359993 320988 347523 338968 SV.325 245602 246078 250608' 262780 Witherby AN.5434 260345 242252 249654 Wood- Pigeon {Columba palumbus). RINGED AS YOUNG. Ringed. Glenorchard (Stirling), 6.9.49, by J. Bartholomew. Andreas, I. of Man, 31.8.51, by Cowin, Crellin, Moss and Pool. Recovered. Lockerbie (Dumfries), 25.10.51, [65 m. S.S.E.]. Bodedern, Anglesey, 18.1.52. Stone-Curlew {Burhinus oedicnemus). Shirburn (Oxon.), 3.6..50, young, Torres Vedras, Portugal, by Thearle and Hobbs. 30.10.51. Oyster-catcher {Hamatopus ostralegus). RINGED AS YOUNG. Bressay, Shetland, 12.6.48, by Llanelly (Carms.), 27.8.51. R. A. Richardson. Fair Isle Bird Obs., 21.6.51. Newtonmore (Inverness), 16.7.51, by R. Perry. Kinordy (Angus), 6.6.50, by D. R. Anderson. Midlothian, 3.6.50, by D. G. Andrew. Cap Ferret (Gironde), France, 21.8.51. Portacloy (Mayo), 25.1.52. Dumfries, 10. 10.51, [112 m. S.] Wallasey (Ches.), 8.12.51. Skokholm Bird Obs., 15.6.50. He d’Oleron (Charente Inf.), France, 1 1.2.52. Ringed Plover {Charadrius hiaticula). Colchester (Essex), 28.7.50, full- Thyboron (Jutland), grown, by C. B. Wainwright. Denmark, 13.6.51. Golden Plover {Pluvialis apricaria). Kyle of Tongue (Suth.), 29.6.51, Westray, Orkney, -.12.51. young, by I. D. Pennie. Elsdon (Northumb.), 24.5.49, Blagdon (Northumb.), young, by Ash and Ridley. 31. 1.52, [20 m. S.E.]. Lapwing {Vanellus vanellus). RINGED AS YOUNG. Aultbea (Ross), 1.6.50. by P. A. Ray field. Newtonmore (Inverness), 26.6.51, by R. Perry. Keith (Banff), 4.6.47, by A. Watson. Seahouses (Northumb.), 6.6.51, by E. A. R. Ennion. Burgh Marsh (Cumb.), 20,5.48, by R. H. Brown. Langwathby (Cumb.), 8.6.49, by W. Howe. Come (Maine - et - Loire) , France, 13. 3. 51. Thurles (Tipperary) , 29.1.52. Lough Arrow (Sligo), -.2.52. Angle (Vendee), France, -•3-52. Bruff (Limerick), 21.2.52. Kilcock (Kildare), 20.2.52 348 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. No. 243421 261824 252067 254765 242512 252443 RINGED AS YOUNG. Ringed. Padiham (Lancs.), 12.5.48, by J. J. Boon. Ditto. 28.5.51 Recovered. Col ins town (Dublin), 26.1.52. Newmarket (Cork), 26.12.51. Slaidburn (Yorks.), G. A. Bowden. 10.6.51, by Camolin (Wexford) 6.2.52. Ditto. 10.6.51, by J. K. Fenton. Ilkley (Yorks.), 26.5.51, by Wharfedale N.S. Staines (Middlesex), 28.5.50, by London N.H.S. The Curragh (Kildare), 19.1.52. Loughor (Glam.) 20.1.52, [190 m. S.S.W.]. Overmeire, East Flanders, 4. II. 51. Common Sandpiper [Actitis hypoleucos). In the first of the following records the almost exact anniversary is interesting ; the reservoir where ringing and recovery took place is visited only on passage. RINGED .\S FULL-GROWN. SV.049 Colchester (Essex), 20.7.50, by C. B. Wainwright. Where ringed, 22.7.51. SV.248 Ditto. 25.7.50. Ditto. 15. 7. 51- SV.397 Ditto. 4.8.50. Ditto. 21. 7. 51. SV.4I4 Ditto. 9.8.50. Zogno (Bergamo), N. Italy, i7-5-5r- Curlew {Numenius arquata). It will be seen that the last bird in the following list was thirteen vears old. RINGED AS YOUNG. 337289 West Linton (Peebles), 19.6.51, Westport (Mayo), 12.2.52. by A. Watt. 314693 Uldale (Cumb.), 24.6.39, by Dumfries, 9.5.51. R. H. Brown. 333459 349997 344996 Langwathby (Cumb.), 11.6.48, by W. Howe. Kendal (Westmor.), 23.6.51, bv R. H. Brown. Loftus (N. Yorks.), 12.6.51, by R. Slater. Ardrahan (Galway), 1.1.52. Carrigtwohill (Cork), 12. II. 51. Dripsey (Cork), 1 8.11.51. 324606 346813 350521 Sedbergh (Yorks.), J. M. B. King. 25-6.51. by Mitchelstown (Cork), -.10.51. Slaidburn (Yorks.), J. K. Eenton. 10.6.51, by Bodyke (Clare), 29.8.51. Gisburn (Yorks.), J. J. Boon. 2.6.51, by St. Renan (Finistere), France, 7.1 1.5 1. Andreas, I. of Man, 4.6.38, by Where ringed, 6.5.51. Manx F.C. 303993 VOL. XLV.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. 349 Common Snipe {Capella galUnago). No. Ringed. Recovered. SV.500 Colchester (Essex), 16.9.50, ad. , St. Savinien (Charente Inf.) by C. B. Wainwright. France, 27.1.52. Jack Snipe [Lymnocryptes minimus) . K.4713 Loch Ronald (Wigtown), 8.12. 50, Where ringed, 13.11.51. by Lord D. Stuart. Woodcock {Scolopax rusticola). Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., 16.3.50 Denbigh, 11.1.52, [160 m. W.]. Sandwich Tern [Sterna sandvicensis) . There are 15 further records from West Africa, as far as Angola, all in the northern winter. There is also one from Spain and one from France. A bird ringed as young on the Fame Islands was recovered in Aberdeenshire, 120 miles north, two months later. Roseate Tern [Sterna dotigallii). RE. 250 Ayrshire, 7.7.50, young, by Axim, Gold Coast, -.11.50. F. D. E. Walls. Common Tern [Sterna hirundo). RINGED AS YOUNG. S.9648 Blakeney Point (Norfolk), 5-7.5I, by F. Hamilton. V.3769 ' Ditto, 12.7.47, by P. F. Hill. R.2592 Ditto, 2.8.51, by Norfolk Nat. Trust. Mirdum ' (Friesland), Holland, 19.8.51. Cayeux (Somme), France, 23-4-5I- Dakar, Senegal, 27. 12.51. Arctic Tern [Sterna macrura). It will be seen that the second bird listed below was ten years old. RINGED AS YOUNG. PV.029 Horse I., (Ayrshire), 27.6.51, by Near Durban, Natal, F. D. E. Walls. 29. II. 51. TK.878 Northern Ireland, 29.6.41, by Where ringed, -.6.51. Cowin, Ladds & Williamson. Black-headed Gull [Larus ridibundus). RINGED AS YOUNG. 342623 Leuchars (Fife), 28.5.50, by A. Vigo, Spain, 30.1.52. Cross. 349145 Pentland Hills (Midlothian), Egremont (Cumb.), -.12.51 24.6.50, by Midlothian O.C. [90 m. S.]. Ditto, 29.6.51, by D. G. Andrew. Dundalk (Louth), 22.1.52. Ravenglass (Cumb.), 8.7.51, by Paisley (Renfrew), 30.9.51, A. E. Male. [no m. N.N.W.]. 358268 356922 350 BRITISH BIRDS. [vOL. XLV. RINGED AS YOUNG. No. Ringed. Recovered. 356489 Ditto, 7.7.51. Yetholm (Roxburgh), 9.8.51, [95 m. N.N.E.]. 356427 Ditto, 7.7.51. Prestatyn (Flints.), 22.8.51, [70 m. S.]. 348666 Ditto, 10.7.50. Sutton-on-Trent (Notts.), 29.9.51, [135 m. S.E.]. 344220 Ditto, 7.7.51. Carnlough (Antrim), -.11.51. 356665 Ditto, 8.7.51. Magheralin (Down), 29.10.51. 358754 Slaidburn (Yorks.), 23.6.51, by Holmes, Hutton & Chippendale Bridlington (Yorks.), -.2.52, [90 m. E.]. 360701 Swillington (Yorks.), 17. 7. 51, by Davis & lies. Barnes (Surrey). 24.2.52, [170 m. S.S.E.]. 351920 Tregaron (Cardigan), 13.6.51, by L. G. Weller. Runcorn (Ches.), -.9.51, [90 m. N.N.E.]. 313514 Poole (Dorset), 3.6.50, by E. M. Cawkell. Near Marennes (Charente Inf.), France, 14. 12.51. 327850 Strangford Lough (Down), 16.6.49, by Dublin F.C. Auchencairn (Kirkcudbr.) 26. 1. ‘52. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. 342282 Kensington, London, 7.12.49, by London N.H.S. Saesing (Jutland), Den- mark, 30.6.51. 343764 Ditto, 29.12.49 Korsor (Zealand), Den- mark, 29.3.51. 338030 Westminster, London, 5.1.51, by London N.H.S. Eutin (Schleswig-Holstein) 1. 7.51. 332151 [315804] Ditto, 1.3.44. Hamburg, Germany, 21.3-52. Common Gull {Lams canus). 343375 Durness (Suth.), 16.6.51, young, by E. G. Holt. Millerhill (Midlothian), 7.2.52, [190 m. S.S.E.]. 329653 Rochester (Kent), 20.2.47, by P. A. Rayfield. Sottern Lake (Orebro), Sweden, 27.6.51. Herring-Gull {Lams argentatus). RINGED AS YOUNG. AE.2663 Black Isle (Ross), 17.7.50, by John Lees. Toward (Argyll), -.2.52, [125 m. S.S.W.]. AE.2637 Ditto, 17.7.50. Paisley (Renfrew), 6.1.52, [125 m. S.]. AE.2677 Ditto, 17.7.50. Barrhead (Renfrew), 8.6.51, [128 m. S.]. AD. 9787 Ditto, 3.7.50. Castle Douglas (Kirk- cudbright), 7.6.51, [185 m. S.]. VOL. XLV.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. 351 RINGED AS YOUNG. No. Ringed. AE.5432 Ditto, 17. 7. 51. AE.7012 AN.7101 Peel, I. of Man, 1.7. 51, by Cowin, Crellin, Moss and Pool. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Fair Isle Bird Obs., 5.7.50. Recovered. St. John’s Point(Down), 8.9.51. Ballywalter (Down), 30.11. 51. Strathaven (Lanark.), 24-3-5I- Lesser Black-backed Gull [Lams fuscus). Of birds ringed as young in Great Britain, 5 were recovered farther south within the country, 8 in France, 3 in northern Spain and 7 in Portugal other than the extreme south. Records from more distant localities, and also one from Belgium, are given in the following list. There are winter records, one from Spain and one from Portugal, of birds ringed as adults and released experimentally at some distance within Great Britain. AE.4808 AE.8153 AE.7520 AE.7809 AD. 6261 AE. 8107 AE.5963 AE.3131 AD.7544 407247 RINGED AS YOUNG. Fame Is. (Northumb.), 27.8.51, by Northumb. and Durham N.H.S. Pennine Hills (Lancs.), 29.7.51, by G. A. Bowden. Ditto, 8.7.51, by J. W. Watts. Ditto, 21. 7. 5 1, by Davis and lies. Skokholm Bird Obs., 16.7.49. Pennine Hills (Lancs.), 29.7.51, by G. A. Bowden. Ditto, 22.7.51. Ditto, 16.8.50, by Davis and lies. Ditto, 26.7.50, by G. A. Bowden. Antwerp, Belgium, 17. 12.51. Santo Antonio (Algarve) Portugal, -.2.52. Porto Santa Maria (Cadiz), Spain, 1.1.52. San Fernando (Cadiz), Spain, 24.1 1.5 1. Tetuan, Spanish Morocco, 23.3.51. Nemours, Algeria, 1. 1.52. Rabat, Western Morocco, 15.2.52. Agadir, Western Morocco, -.4.51. Santa Cruz, Teneriffe, 28.1.51. Great Black-backed Gull {Larus marinus). North Rona, 17.7.49, young, by Auchterhouse (Angus), I. Pennie. [59° 7' N., 5° 49' W.]. 1.6.51. Glaucous Gull {Larus hyperhoreus) . AN. 7285 Fair Isle Bird Obs., 14. 12. 51. Suderoy, Faeroes, II. 2. 52. Kittiwake {Rissa tridactyla). The following list includes one further transatlantic record. RINGED AS YOUNG. 356347 Fame Is., (Northumb.), 5.7.51, by Clacton (Essex), Northd. and Durham N.H.S. 16. 12.51, [290 m. S.S.E.]. 352 BRITISH BIRDS. [VOL. XLV. RINGED AS YOUNG. A'o. Ringed. Recovered. 347280 Ditto, 29.6.50. Wallasey (Ches.), 27.6.51. 341712 Ditto, 29.6.50. Off The Skaw, Jutland, Denmark, 30.6.51. 341696 Ditto, 29.6.50. Off Les Sables d’Olonne (Vendee), I'rance, II. 12. 51. 362531 Lundy Bird Obs., 25.7.51. Espinho (Douro), Portugal, -.1.52. 336766 Ditto, 10.7.50. Razorbill {Alca tor da). RINGED AS YOUNG. Change Is., Notre Dame Bay, Newfoundland, II-5-5I- A^.8845 Flannan Is., Outer Hebrides, 20.7.51, by D. G. Andrew. Egero, S. Norway, 7. 10.51. AX.8843 Ditto, 20.7.51. Near Kristiansand, S. Norway, -.11.51. AX. 8305 Puffin 1., Anglesey, 5.7.51, by Thearle and Hobbs. Pasajes (Guipuzcoa), Spain, 26. II. 51. AX. 3363 Skokholm Bird Obs., 13. 7. 51. Mimizan (Landes), France, 6.11.51. AT.7517 Ditto, 14.7.47. Llanes (Asturias), Spain, 20.2.48. AX. 7950 Lundy Bird Obs., 1 5.7.51. Vicedo (Lugo), Spain, -.1.52. 336057 Peel, I. of Man, 20.6.51, by Cowin, Crellin, Moss and Pool. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. Douarnenez (Finistere), France, 20.12.51. AX. 6035 Cape Wrath (Suth.), 25.6.50, by I. D. Pennic. Haugesund, S. Norway, 28.10.51. AT. 8041 Skokholm Bird Obs., 16.7.47. Cobo Bay, Guernsey, 26.3.52. AV.5587 Ditto, 9.7.49. Montfarville (Manche), France, 26.1.52. AV.4111 Ditto, 2.7.48. Lesconil (Finistfere), France, 21. 5.51. AN.6523 Lundy Bird Obs., 30.6.49. Guillemot {Uria aalge). RINGED AS YOUNG. Near Paimpol (Cotes- du-Nord), France, II-3-5-2- AE.2204 Cruden Bay (Aberdeen), 2.7.51, by K. Carrick. Bergen, Norway, 25.10.51. AE.2258 Ditto, 10.7.5 1. Egersund, S. Norway, -. 10.51 . AE.2254 Ditto, 10. 7. 51. Near Langesund, S. Norway, 26.12.51. VOL. XLV.] REPORT ON BIRD-RINGING FOR 1951. 353 RINGED AS No. Ringed. AX. 8401 Puffin I., Anglesey. Thearle and Hobbs. AX. 8385 Ditto, 6.7.51. AE.7356 Lundy Bird Obs., 25.7.5 AX. 8181 Ditto, 18.7.51. AD. 9078 Ditto, 20.7.51. AX. 8187 Ditto, 18.7.51. AE. 7148 Ditto, 20.7.51. AD. 9086 Ditto, 20.7.51. AX. 7912 Ditto, 15. 7. 51. AE. 7254 Ditto, 21. 7. 51. YOUNG. Recovered. 3.7.51, by Portrush (Antrim), 13. 10.51. Minard, Loch Fyne, (Argyll), 3.11.51. [. Inverness 3. 10. 51, [435 in. N.]. Near Nevin (Caerns), 23.9-5I. St. Helier’s, Jersey, -.8.51. St. Malo (lUe-et-Vilaine) France, 26.10.51. Le Pouldu (Finistere), France, 14. 9. 51. Near Douarnenez (Finistere), France, 27-9.5I. He de Re (Charente Inf.), France, 1.11.51. St. Jean de Luz (B.-P.), France, 13.2.52. RINGED AS FULL-GROWN. AE.1061 Mingulay, Outer Hebrides, 22.6.50, Near Bergen, Norway, by Myles Smith. 11.11.51. AE.1336 Cape Wrath (Suth.), 4.7.50, by Soster Is., Oslo Fjord, I. D. Pennie. Norway, 14.11.51. AN. 6731 Moorhen [GalUnula chloropus). Colchester (Essex), 9. 11.49, by C. B. Wainwright. Spijk (Groningen), Holland, 1 7.9.51. Coot {Fulica atra). AE.3906 Colchester (Essex), 15. 3. 51. by C. B. Wainwright. Near Heide (Schleswig- Holstein), Germany, 5-5-5I. Table I. Number of Birds Ringed. In 1951 M 1950 ,, 1949 ,, 194^ .. 1947 ,, 1946 ,, 1945 Grand Total (including- arrears) 1,040,458 Trapped Nestlings Total 49.364 36,379 85,743 42,112 33,994 76, 106 27,496 29,965 57.45 2 158 160 3.225 Shag . , . 2,512 20 174 194 2,706 Gannet 12,832 3 230 233 13,065 Petrel, Storm- 1.252 56 — 56 1,308 Shearwater, Manx 39.604 2,184 698 2,882 42,486 Petrel, Fulmar 1.003 193 131 324 1,327 Pigeon, Wood- 4.837 10 242 252 5,089 Dove, Stock- 1.173 14 96 I 10 1,283 Dove, Turtle- ... 831 10 16 26 857 Curlew, Common 3.943 15 261 276 4,219 Woodcock 5.480 TO 2 I 31 5,511 Snipe, Common 1,992 15 70 85 2,077 Dunlin 203 12 13 2 16 Sandpiper, Common 1,410 72 138 2 10 1,620 Redshank '^,020 14 106 120 3,140 Plover, Ringed 2,122 15 176 191 2,313 Plover, Golden 406 5 5 411 Lapwing 46,954 98 1,687 1,785 48,739 Oyster-catcher 2,962 17 260 277 3.239 Curlew, Stone- 279 12 12 2gi Tern, Sandwich 21,584 — 1,283 1,283 22,867 Tern, Roseate ... 1,290 — 154 154 1.444 Tern Common 21,860 6 1, 162 1, 168 23,028 Tern, Arctic 5,236 — 777 777 6,01'? Tern, Little 1,160 — 26 26 1 , 1 8(-, Gull, Black-headed 20,051 76 2,641 2,717 22,768 Gull, Common 3,094 12 232 244 3,338 Gull, Herring- 13,669 I 12 1,241 1,353 15,022 Gull, Lesser Black-backed 13,544 28 1,632 1,660 15.204 Gull, Great Black-backed 962 3 40 43 I,00S Kittiwake 3,g68 91 658 74‘) 3,817 Skua, Great , 855 I 4 5 860 Razorbill ... 7.057 51 228 279 7,336 Guillemot ... 3,617 270 679 940 4,566 Puffin ... ... 7,087 260 308 568 7,655 Crake, Corn- ... 62 1 7 — 7 628 Moorhen 2,383 264 14 278 2,661 Numbers Ringed in 1951 of Species not shown in the Table. (The figures in brackets show the Grand Total.) Hooded Crow 7 (172), Hawfinch i (129), Siskin 2 (26), Twite 68 (740), Scarlet Grosbeak 2 (5), House-Sparrow 3,284 (12,379), Little Bunting i (2), Corn-Bunting 14 (155), Red-headed Bunting i, Cirl Bunting 5 (m). Ortolan Bunting i (6), Snow-Bunting 15 (171), Wood-Lark 57 (190), Tawny Pipit i, American Water-Pipit i. White Wagtail 17 (144), Tree-Creeper 48 (790), Nuthatch 94 (1,014), Great Tit 1,752 (15,705), Blue Tit 5,009 (29,424), Coal-Tit 232 (1,795), Crested Tit 2 (4), Marsh-Tit 49 (647), Willow-Tit ii (77), Long-tailed Tit 26 (241), Goldcrest 236 (1,005), Bearded Tit i (42), Red-breasted J>ritish Birds, vol. xlv, IM. 7H. d >o H W c X Ifl H < W < w < o X 3 w w Csi CQ Uh o tip o < QC y. l-i'ilisli Mirds, \’ol. xlv, I’l. 74. ( iui.L-m u,KD Tkrn [GelochcUdon nilotira). Am'i.T AT .NEST. Rhone delta, June. 11)30. [Photopraphed hy G. K. A'ilatich). Jiritisli l-iiids, \'ol. xlv, I’l. 7'). Gull-billed Tern [Gelochelidon niloticu). Alighting at nest. Rhone delta, June, 1950. [Photographed by G. K. Veates). J5rilisli lairds, \'ul. ,\1\-, I’l. 7(i. Sandwich Fern [Sterna sandvicensis). Auci.t incubating. Hlakenev. Xoki-oi.k. [Photoj^vaphed hy C. . K. \'katic.s) . Jil itisli I'iirds, \'nl. .\1\ , Id. 77. Gull-billed Tern {Gelochelidon nilotica). .\nULT INCUBATING. RhONE DELTA, J I NE, I {Photographed bv (i. 1\. \'e.ates). Mrilisli I’irds, \'u|. I’l. ~s. C.ri.i.-Hii.i.Ki) Tkkn (('u'locheUdou iiilotird). Pair wirii two chicks, .nkar 1 Iook-cti'-I Iom.ani). JiM',, iohi. {Photo^rapilu’il hy Simon dk Waakd). lililisli Jiirds, \'ol. xlv. PI. 7!t. Gi’ll-billed Tern [Gelochelidon nilotica). I’.MR. ONE REEIMNO TNSECT TO NESTLING. NEAR HoOK-OE-Hoi.L.\Nn, Jl'NE, I94O. {I’lioiograplicd by Simon de Waard). J^ritish Birds, xl\-, I'l. SO. M ■r' ..Liia I'PPEK : C.III.I.-BIU.KI) TiiUN {GelochelidoH lulotica). I wo N'ICSTI.INOH. NEAR HoOIs-O K- 1 lo N 1 ), Jl’Xi:, (I’liotoi^i'dp/ted /n' SiMox m-; Waard). l.nwiCR : (kn.i.-Mii.i.Ki) Ticrx (Cudochelidoii uilotic