ZS BRITISH BIRDS With which was Incorporated in January 1917, “The Zoologist.” AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED CHIEFLY TO THE BIRDS ON THE BRITISH LIST I. J. Ferguson-Lees P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst Photographic Editor: G. K. Yeates Volume XLIX 1956 EDITORS E. M. Nicholson and W. B. Alexander A. W. Boyd H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD. 5, Warwick Court * London * W.C.l r V. .. r V 1 K I » 7 V f ! 7 \ A. ■; ^' i 'U/ii/ry/ .n v; V> . '1 1 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS COLOURED PLATE Plate I Plates 1-3 Plate 4 Plate 5 Plates 6-7 Plate 8 Plate 9 Plate 10 Plates 11-12 Plate 13 Plate 14 Plate 15 Upper: Black Duck {Anas rubripes), male and female. Lower: Ring-necked Duck {Aythya collaris), female AND M.ALE. {Painted by Peter Scott) ... ... facing PLATES IN BLACK AND WHITE Female Great Grey Owl {Strix nebiilosa): Sweden, 1955. {Photographed by Oscar Moberg) ... ... facing Upper: Male Green Woodpecker {Picus viridis), show- ing faecal matter between the mandibles. {Photographed by A. McCormick) Lower: Female Harlequin Duck {Histrionicus histrion- icus) : Shetland, October 1955. {Photographed by Maeve Rusk) ... facing Upper : Black Kite {Milvus migrans) : Germany. {Photographed by Ilse Makatsch) Lower : Black Kite {Milvus migrans) : Germany. {Photographed by S. Waurisch) ... ... facing Black Kite {Milvus migrans) : Germany. {Photographed by S. Waurisch) ... ... White-rumped Sandpiper {Calidris fuscicollis) : Norfolk/ Lincolnshire, 1956. {Photographed by J. Cunningham) facing Upper: Nesting-habitat of Pink-footed Goose (/In^er arvensis brachyrhynchus): Kross argil. North-central Iceland, June 1954. {Photographed by Niall Rankin) ... Lower: Nesting-habitat of Pink-footed Goose {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus) : Gorge of the Skjalfandafljot AT Hrafnabjorg, Nortii Iceland, June 1954. {Photo- graphed by G. K. Yeates) ... facing Upper: Nest and eggs of Pink-footed Goose {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus): Hrafnabjorg, North Iceland, June 1954. {Photographed by Null Rankin) Lower: Nest-site of Pink-footed Goose {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus): Hrafnabjorg, North Iceland, June 1954. {Photographed by Null Rankin) ... Pink-footed Geese {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus) : Kross.argil, North-central Iceland, June 1954- {Photographed by G. K. Ye.ates) ... Pink-footed Geese {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus): Krossargil, North-central Iceland, June 1954- {Photographed by Null Rankin) Pink-footed Geese {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus): Krossargil, North-central Iceland, June 1954- {Photographed by G. K. Yeates) ... Pink-footed Geese {Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus): Krossargil, North-central Iceland, June 1954- {Photographed by Niall Rankin) page 49 24 140 H' ,76 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS J'lafe 1 6 f‘late 17 Plate 18 Plates 19-20 Plate 21 Plates 22-23 Plate 24 Plate 25 Plate 26 Plate 27 Plate 28 P/afe 29 Plate 30 Plate 31 Plate 32 Plate 33 Pink-footed Geesf, (Anser arvensis brachyrhynchus): Hrafnarjorg, North Icf.land, June 1955. (Photographed by Arnold Benington) facing Male Wheatear (Oenanthe oenanthe) approaching nest- tin: Dungeness, Kent. (Photographed by Eric Hosking) facing Upper: Herring Gull’s (Larus argeiitatus) egg partly buried in shingle: Dungeness, Kent. (Photographed by Eric Hosking) Lower: Melodious Warbler (Hippolais polyglotta), Bardsey Island, 20TI1 August 1955. (Photographed by Huvv Jones) ... Coal Tit (Parus ater) about to feed artificial nest- ling GAPE used in taking FOOD-SAMPLES FOR ANALYSIS. (Photographed by John Markham) ... -\dult Lesser White-fronted Goose (Anser erythropus): Laplan6. (Photographed by P. O. Swanberg) ... Lesser W^hite-fronted Goose (Anser erythropus) on nest: Lapland. (Photographed by P. O. Swanberg) Upper: Lesser White-Fronted Geese (Anser erythropus) IN FLIGHT. (Photographed by P. O. Swanberg) ... Lower: Lesser White-fronted Goose (Anser erythropus), NEST AND eggs: Lapland. (Photographed by P. O. Swanberg) Upper: Habitat of Greenland White-fronted Goose (.4)i5(,’r albifrons flavirostris). (Photographed by C. T. Dalgety) Loiver: Greenland White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons flavirostris), nest and eggs: West Greenland. (Photographed by C. T. Dalgety) ... White-fronted Goose (.4ii.>:er albifrons): Alaska, 1950. (Photographed by Niall Rankin) .\dult White-fronted Geese (Anser albifrons): Gloucestershire, March 1956. (Photographed by J. V. Beer) Upper: White-fronted Geese (.4i7.tc)' albifrons): Gloucestershire, 1947. (Photographed by Philip \\’ayre) Loxver : Immature White-fronted Geese (Anser albifrons): Gloucestershire, March 1956. (Photographed by J. V. Beer) facing Rock Thrushes (Monticola saxatilis): Hungary. (Photographed by K. Koffan) ... ... ... facing Male Rock Thrush (Monticola saxatilis): Hungary. (Photographed by K. Koffan) Female Rock Thrush (Monticola saxatilis): Hungary. (Photographed by K. Koffan) MaI.e Rock Thrush (Monticola saxatilis): Hungary. (Photographed by K. Koi'fan) Female Rock Thrush (Monticola saxatilis): Hungary. (Photographed by K. Koffan) PAGE G7 216 2U 264 Plate 34 Plate 35 Plate 36 Plate 37 Plates 38-40 Plate 41 Plates 42-43 Plate 44 Plates 45-52 Plate 53 Plate 54 Plates 55-56 PZate 57 PZoZe 58 Plate 59 PZate 60 Plate 61 Plate 62 Plate 63 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Male Rock Thrush {Monticola saxatilis): Hungary. (Photographed hy K. Koffan) Rock Thrushes (Monticola saxatilis) in flight: Hungary. (Photographed K. Koffan) ... Male Rock Thrush (Monticola saxatilis) feeding young: Hungary. (Photographed by K. Koffan) ... facing Nesting-site of Gyr Falcon (Falco rusticolus) : North Iceland, June 1954- (Photographed by J. H. Sears) facing Gyr Falcon (Falco rusticolus) with young: North Iceland, June 1955. (Photographed by Arnold Benington) Upper: Gyr Falcon (Falco rusticolus) with young: North Iceland, June 1955. (Photographed by Arnold Benington) Loivcr: Young Gyr Falcons (Falco rusticolus): North Iceland, June 1954. (Photographed by J. H. Sears) ... Juvenile Gyr Falcon (Falco rusticolus): North-west Iceland, June 1952. (Photographed by F. S. R. Cerely) Upper: Pratincole (Glareola pratincola) ... Lower : Black-winged Pratincole (Glareola nordmanni). (Drazvn by P. J. H.ayman) ... ... ... facing Barred Warbler (Sylvia nisoria): Sweden, June 1955. (Photographed by P. O. Swanberg). ... ... facing Habitat of Citril Finch (Carduelis citrinella): Sardinia, July 1953. (Photographed by R. Vaughan) ... facing Male Citril Finch (Carduelis citrinella): Sardinia, July 1953. (Photographed by R. Vaughan) Female Citril Finch (Carduelis citrinella): Sardinia, July 1953. (Photographed by R. Vaughan) facing Crane (Grus grus) at nest: Germany, April 1952. (Photographed by Ilse Makatsch) ... ... facing Upper: Breeding-ground of Crane (Grus grus): Dovrefjell, Norway. (Photographed by M. D. England) Lower: Nest and eggs of Crane (Grus grus): Dovrefjell, Norway. (Photographed by Ian C. Rose). ■\dult Crane (Grus grus) at nest: Dovrefjell, Norway. (Photographed by M. D. England) ... Crane (Grus grus) settling on nest: Germany, April 1952. (Photographed by Ilse Makatsch) ... Crane (Grus grus) at nest: Germany, April 1952. (Photographed by Ilse Makatsch) ... Upper: Crane (Grus grus) on nest: Germany, April 1952. (Photographed, by Ilse Makatsch) ... Lower: Newly-hatched Crane (Grus grus) swimming. (Photographed by Ilse Makatsch) Upper: Young Crane (Grus grus): .S. Karelia, U.S.S.R., June 1955. (Photographed by I. Neufeldt) f.ower : Juvenile Crane (Grus grus): S. Karelia, U..S..S.R., October 1955. (Photographed by I. Neufeldt) PAGE 265 312 313 354-5 394 395 440 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PAGE Plate 64 Juvenile Crane {Grus grus): S. Karelia, U.S.S.R., September 1955. {Photographed by I. Neufeldt) facing 441 Plate 6^ Female Osprey {Pandion haliaetus): Sweden, 1955. {Photographed by M. D. England) ... ... facing 488 Plate 66 Pair of Ospreys {Pandion haliaetus) at nest: Sweden, 1955- {Photographed by M. D. England) Plate 67 Fem.ale Osprey {Pandion haliaetus) incub.ating : Sweden, 1955- {Photographed by M. D. England) Plate 68 Male Osprey {Pandion haliaetus) incubating, female ABOVE. {Photographed by M. D. England)... Plate 69 Pair of Ospreys {Pandion haliaetus) at nest: Sweden, 1955- {Photographed by M. D. England) Plate 70 Upper: Male Osprey {Pandion haliaetus) on nest: Sweden, 1955. {Photographed by M. D. England) ... Lower: The hide used for photographing the Ospreys •{Pandion haliaetus). {Photographed by M. D. England) 4 Plate 71 Breeding-habitat of Ospreys {Pandion haliaetus): Sweden, 1955. {Photographed by M. D. England) Plate 72 Nests of Ospreys {Pandion haliaetus): Central Sweden, 1955. {Photographed by M. D. England) ... facing 489 ERRATUM In the captions to plates 5, 6, 7, 57, 60, 61 and 62, as printed beneath the photographs, the locality is wrongly given as “.'\u.stria” ; these photographs were all taken in the Oberlausitz which is East Saxony and therefore part of Germany, not Austria. In the case of the Cranes this error is particularly unfortunate because, as has been pointed out to us by several correspondents, this species has not been known to breed in .Austria in recent years. We take this opportunity of apologising to Mrs. Use Makatsch for the mistake. BRITISH BIRDS BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MONTHLY MAGAZINE Edited by E. M. Nicholson \V. B. Alexander A. \V. Boyd I. J. Ferguson-Lees P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst Editorial Address : Fordlands, Crowhurst, Sussex. Photographic Editor: G. K. Yeates Monthly 3s. Yearly 30s. h _ ; Contents of Volume XLIX, Number i, January 1956 i ’■ Page ; Editorial: Scientific and English names i ^ The autumn 1953 invasion of Lapland Buntings and its source. By Kenneth Williamson and Peter Davis 6 Photographic studies of some less familiar birds. LXIX — Great Grey Owl. Photographed by Oscar Moberg (plates 1-3) 26 A Raven roost in Devon. By H. G. Hurrell ... ... ... ... 28 Nest-sanitation and fledging of the Green Woodpecker. By II. R. Tutt (plate 4, upper) 32 Notes: — Harlequin Duck in Shetland (Dr. Maeve Rusk and Miss I. M. N. Ryan) (plate 4, lower) 36 Twirling of Kestrels (Dr. C. Suffern) 37 Crane in Orkney (E. Balfour) ... ... ... ... ... ... 38 Crane in Suffolk (R. Wolfendale) 38 >i .\ggressive display of young Curlew (Miss M. D. Crosby) 39 Song-flight of Wood Sandpiper on passage (D. G. Andrew) 39 ' White-rumped Sandpiper in Midlothian (John Hoy, A. J. Smith and i D. G. -Andrew) 39 ■i White-winged lark in Hertfordshire (Bryan L. Sage and R. Jenkins) 41 ■ Greenish Warbler at Fair Isle (Kenneth Williamson and Miss A’alerie M. Thom) 4^ ’ Greenish Warbler on the Isle of May (A. G. S. Bryson) 43 ■ Richard’s Pipit in Co. Donegal (E. M. Nicholson) 44 Unusual Yellow Wagtail in Shetland (Kenneth Williamson) 45 Scarlet Grosbeak in Yorkshire (J. K. Fenton and Lt.-Col. 11. G. Brownlow) 46 Book Reviews: — . The Birds of the British Isles. By D. -A. Bannermann and G. E. Lodge. Vol. IV 47 Fifty Years of Birdwatching. By A. M. C. Nicholl 48 Coro-Coro — The World of the Scarlet Ibis. By Paul .A. Zahl ... 48 Cover photograph by Eric Hosking: Crested Tit {Pants cristatus) BRITISH BIRDS EDITORIAL SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES Three years have gone by since the British Ornithologists’ Union’s Check-List of the Birds of Great Britain and Ireland was published. Now that some of the dust has settled it is possible to look afresh at the main problems which were in part resolved and in part left over or even aggravated by that event. At much inconvenience and in some haste the Editors of British Birds promptly adopted from the New Year of 1953 the revised arrangement of orders and families, starting with the divers and ending with the sparrows. We were, however, compelled by the numerous deficiencies of the Check-List which we pointed out at the time {antea, vol. xlvi, pp. 1-3 and 114-116) to make many reservations over following it in other respects. Other detailed and critical comments were published, notably by Col. R. Meinertz- hagen and Mr. K. Williamson {Ibis, 1953, vol. 95, pp. 365-369). The British List Sub-Committee responsible for the Check-List was dissolved in December 1952, and was replaced a year later by two new B.O.U. Sub-Committees with limited terms of refer- ence. The first was a British Records Sub-Committee to advise on the authenticity of records of species or races proposed for inclusion in the British List, under the chairmanship of Mr. A. W. Boyd. The second was a Taxonomic Sub-Committee, to advise on taxonomic questions, and more particularly the validity of species or races included in the British List or in communications to the Ibis, under the chairmanship of Colonel R. Meinertzhagen. At the Xlth International Ornithological Congress held at Basle in May and June 1954, Professor Stresemann took the initiative in an informal discussion aiming to promote better co-ordination particularly in the policy and practice of European ornithological journals on such matters. As we had pointed out in adopting the altered arrangement, it brought us into line with most other countries. It was felt, however, that avoidable confusion was caused by some countries following the one order while the rest followed the other. It was agreed at that meeting that the “Wet- more ’’ order, beginning with the divers and ending with the Passerines, should become the accepted usage in Europe as it already was in the Americas and elsewhere. An international 2 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX committee of editors of ornithological journals was set up with the object of achieving a standard arrangement of genera and species within the Wetmore sequence of orders and families, and it is understood that the Check-list of Birds of the World by J. L. Peters and his colleagues will form the basis of the sequence to be adopted. The British Trust for Ornithology issued in 1953 (with the co- operation of the Records Committee of the Ornithological Section of the London Natural History Society) a Field List of British Birds other than rarities of, in most cases, less than 50 recorded occurrences. The Check-List order and numbering were followed, but the English names followed the usage of British Birds where it differs from the Check-List, except in not admitting “Dunnock” as an allowable alternative to “Hedge Sparrow”. Another development since the Check-List has been the pro- longed consideration by the International Commission on Zoolo- gical Nomenclature of a number of recommendations for generic or specific names differing from those which were adopted by the Check-List. This has aggravated the dilemma which we have pre- viously pointed out [antea, vol. xlvi, p. 115) whether to follow the B.O.U. Check-List or whether to conform with the B.O.U.’s earlier (1951) ruling that International Commission’s decisions should be observed. To us the second of these courses seems preferable, and this alone would undermine the title of the Check-List as an authori- tative guide to be followed automatically. Having briefly reviewed events since the Check-List was pub- lished, we must next discuss equally briefly the present situation as regards the British List, the order of scientific classification used in it, the choice of scientific names, and the use of English names. With the setting up of the new B.O.LI. Sub-Committee on additions to the British List, we are now working in the closest co-operation with the B.O.LL on this matter. We conduct joint deliberations into the claims of any new bird, and by mutual con- sent no record has been admitted by either party that is not acceptable to both. Thus by the time the record of a new species appears in British Birds it has already been considered by the B.O.U. Sub-Committee. It is hoped that in this way risks of divergence or confusion in the treatment of new records will be virtually eliminated. It must, however, be recognized that accord- ing to the best modern practice some past decisions aft'ecting the inclusion or exclusion of birds from the British List cannot be regarded as satisfactory; this was illustrated by the paper on “.American land-birds in Western Europe” by W. B. .Alexander and R. S. R. Fitter (antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 1-14). The task of revision is heavy, but it cannot be indefinitely postponed. The order of the scientific classification has been discussed already, arising out of the Basle meeting. It is clearly essential that the same arrangement should be adopted so far as possible in every country and that once adopted it should not be changed again unless for some overwhelmingly strong reason and by VOL. XLix] SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES 3 international agreement. It is to be hoped that the uniformity for which so much has been sacrificed is now in sight. Certainly the great majority of County Reports and other new publications in Great Britain are conforming so far as possible, but there is still an unfilled requirement for an up-to-date and authoritative European Check-List, since the otherwise admirable Field Guide to the Birds of Britain and Europe contains certain anomalies in arrangement similar to those of the B.O.U. Check-List; more- over, it may be regarded as certain that the order recommended by the international committee will be rather different, particularly as regards the sequence of the Passerines. Is it too much to hope that this requirement may be met before the 1958 Congress in Finland? As regards scientific names, the over-riding need once more is for uniformity and permanence based on authoritative and inter- nationally accepted rulings, and changes other than to achieve uniformity are becoming increasingly hard to justify. The Interna- tional Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is, we understand, considering the stabilization of a number of names which have SLiff'ered changes in recent years. This seems a most desirable step, and we propose to bring our nomenclature into line with their decisions as soon as these are published. In the meantime we continue to use the scientific names of the Handbook, with the following exceptions ; English name Handbook Current usage Divers Colymbus Gavia Shearwaters Puffinus Procellaria Cory’s Shearwater P. kuhlii P. diomedea Mallard A. platyrhyncha A. platyrhynchos Pink-footed/Bean Geese A. fabalis A. arvensis Golden Eagle A. chrysactus A. chrysactos Kentish Plover Leucopolius Charadrius Killdeer Oxyechus Charadrius Caspian Plover Eupoda Charadrius Grey Plover Squatarola Charadrius Golden Plovers Pluvialis Charadrius Dotterel Eudromias Charadrius Common Sandpiper Actitis T ringa Spotted Woodpeckers Dryobates Dcndrocopos Song Thrush T. ericetorum T. philomelos Black Redstart Ph. ochrurus Ph. ochruros Nightingale L. megarhynclia L. megarhynchos Bluethroats Luscinia Cyanosylvia Rose-coloured Starling Pastor Sturnus We also propose to follow the B.O.U. Check-List and other recent publica- tions in abandoning the tiresome use of diphthongs in scientific names. Finally we come to the controversial subject of English names. Following our previous Editorial we received a number of letters on this subject. Certain correspondents expressed general objec- tions to any change. Several commented adversely on attempts to reconcile British and American differences in naming a species known on both sides of the Atlantic, and among the American names objected to were “Yellowlegs” for “ Yellowshank”, “Bald- 4 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX pate” for “American W’igeon” and “American Nighthawk” for “American Nig'htjar”. Some objections were also raised ag'ainst droppings the preHx “Common” before, for example, “Buzzard”, “Partridge” or “Heron”. The use of “dialect names”, especially “Dunnock” and “ Yellowhammer”, also drew criticism. Gram- matical and other aspects of the omission of hyphens from many names were questioned by some, but the simplification was sup- ported by others. On the other hand, several correspondents arg^ucd that the changes did not go far enoug^h in certain direc- tions, and that in particular “Large Egret” should be adopted instead of “Great White Heron”; “Pied” and “Barred” Wood- pecker instead of “Great” and “Lesser Spotted”; “Least Crake” instead of “Baillon’s Crake”; “Merehen” instead of “Moorhen”; and “Moor Pipit” instead of “Meadow Pipit”, among others. It was also argued that English names in use in Asia should be adopted for birds originating in that part of the world and occur- ring here only as vagrants. There was little in common among the opinions received beyond the conviction with which they were expressed and the strong minority who disliked (either in principle or in its practical application) the adoption of transatlantic English names. number of correspondents advanced principles which in their view ought to be followed. Some thought that change causes so much trouble that it can only be justified “where the new name is markedly more suitable than the old, or where the new name has already become completely adopted”. Others argued the import- ance of consistency throughout, some reaching the conclusion that more extensive changes are needed to secure it, and others that the task is impossible and therefore there should be no change at all. Several laid much emphasis on the ugliness or unwieldiness or unfamiliarity of certain names, or conversely on the advantages of changing to certain names which sound better, or are briefer or have established themselves as “coined”. It will be apparent from this summary that our hopes of a clear expression of some definite prevailing opinion were not realised, but that the variety of standpoints among ornithologists was strongly brought out by our correspondents, to whom we are grateful and whose often conflicting views have been most care- fully studied and compared. After careful consideration we decided that it would be best to allow more time for reflection, and for the changes published in 1952-1953 to be tried out in prac- tice, rather than to add fuel to controversy by publishing such a variety of strongly conflicting views so soon after the appearance of the Check-List, d'he thought which has been devoted to the problem by many ornithologists has not yet ]iointcd to anv generally acceptable course for the future, but the issues have been clarified and some progress is being made towards formulating a promising basis for discussion. In the circumstances we think that a period of stability and settling down will be most helpful, and we do not therefore pro- VOL. XLix] SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES o pose, so far as British Birds is concerned, to introduce any further chang-es at the present time, with three comparatively trivial excep- tions which we are already using, these being the omission of hyphens in the spelling of “Sparrowhawk” and “Paddyfield Warbler ” and the compression of the troublesome “ Sheld-duck ” into “ Shelduck,” on the analogy of the older name “ Sheldrake ” and following the practice adopted by Jean Delacour in The Water- fowl of the World. Looking back over the past three years it is evident that real progress has been made, even though more could have been achieved had the more conspicuous faults in the B.O.U. Check- List been eliminated during its slow and measured journey towards publication. In principle the revised arrangement of the British List is accepted by the large majority of British ornithologists. The use of the same arrangement by most of the European orni- thological journals is now in sight. The machinery of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, although slow- moving, does promise the eventual achievement of international uniformity in the use of generic and specific names, so that scienti- fic names will once more regain the world-wide meaning and usefulness which the apathy of most ornithologists had permitted to be nibbled away by generations of industrious pedants. The machinery for settling the validity of additions to the British List is greatly improved and is now working satisfactorily. As regards English names there is no such tidy solution, not through want of initiative but owing to serious doubts whether it is desirable to fetter the free development of this part of the English language by creating some authoritative body to give rulings on the subject. Certainly it would have been absurd to resign ourselves to inter- national chaos in Latin names, which are meant to be fixed and uniform', while imposing uniformity over English names, which are not. English names of birds are part of the English language, and should evolve with it. Nevertheless, it is obvious that exces- si\-e changing of English names is as undesirable as excessive rigidity, and here as in other fields some form of consultation between those mainly responsible for current practice may be advisable. It would be pleasant to be able to reproduce here a final agreed and authoritative and up-to-date version of the British List, but that is not yet possible. However, the number of additions since 1950 (when the Check-List closed) and the number of necessary other revisions make it desirable to have available a provisional revised British List bringing together the names and arrangement which the Editors are currently using until it can be superseded by an internationally agreed version. We should like to compile such a list as soon as possible after the decisions of the committees dealing with arrangement and nomenclature are known, as a con- tribution towards the preparation of the European Check-List which we hope may be produced before long. THE AUTUMN 1953 INVASION OF LAPLAND BUNTINGS AND ITS SOURCE By Kenneth Williamson {Fair Isle Bird Observatory) and Peter Davis {Skokholm Bird Observatory) INTRODUCTION There were a number of remarkable features about the autumn mig'ration of 1953, and not the least of these was the phenomenal invasion of Britain by Lapland Bunting's {Calcarius lapponiciis), which occupied at least a month from 3rd September. This species has always been regarded as rare in Britain (though it is easily overlooked) except in certain favoured areas. There are localities in the south-east of England, notably Cley in Nor- folk, where birds are seen in most -winters; and since the founda- tion of Lundy Bird Observatory in 1948 it has been shown that the Lapland Bunting is a fairly regular autumn-migrant there in small numbers. It has long been known as a passage-migrant through certain of the northern isles, Clarke (1912) recording it regularly in autumn on his visits to Fair Isle, the Flannans and St. Kilda. Prior to 1953 the peak numbers recorded by Fair Isle Bird Obser- vatory had fluctuated from a few to 40 or so in exceptional seasons such as 1949. The Handbook gives only four instances of its occurrence in Ireland, but in recent years P. S. Redman’s work and the observations of I. C. T. Nisbet and others in the north- west have shown that here too it is a regular autumn-immigrant (Cibbs et al., 1954; Redman, 1955). Until attempts were made to analyse the Fair Isle movements in the light of the “migrational drift” concept (Williamson, 1952) the fact that these autumn-immigrants to the north and west of Britain could be Creenland birds does not seem to have been real- ized. Salomonsen (1931), whilst noting that some of the cast- coast birds may wander to Iceland and the British Isles as vag- rants, considers that the bulk of east and west Greenland birds winter in North .'\merica ; whilst Bannerman (1953) explains these visitations as due to breeders from the fells of southern Norway. He cautiously admits, liowever, that ‘‘our knowledge of the migra- tions of the Lapland Bunting is far from complete”. The present authors have put forward their view, in a studv of the 1952 movements, that the bulk of the birds entering Britain are of Greenland origin (Williamson, 1953; Davis, 1934). The exceptional strength of the 1933 invasion, together with the fact that daily observations on the migration were maintained through- out the whole period at three widely separated points on the western seaboard, afforded an excellent opportunity for a full study of the status of the Lapland Bunting in this country. Accordingly, a request for information was published in British Birds, and we VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 7 express our g-ratitude to all those who have assisted by furnishing- records. We are especially g-rateful to Mr. Redman for making his observations at Inishtrahull available to us at the outset of this study. Much use has been made in this study of the Daily Weather Report of the Meteorological Office of the Air Ministry, and we are grateful to the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office for permission to include diagrams based on the charts in the Report. AUTUMN AND WINTER RECORDS, I953-54 The following list summarizes the records which have reached us as a result of the appeal for information made in this journal (vol. xlvii, p. 95). Scotland. Fair Isle: One, Sept. 3rd; three, 5th; then seen daily until end of month, with 75 on 9th, 80 on i2th, 55 on i6th, 60 on 19th, 45 on 23rd and 26th, 35 on 29th (K.W.) Sutherland: Scourie — two. Sept. 15th (Sir Charles Connell). East Langwell, Rogart — one, Dec. ist (I. D. Pennie). Midlothian: Gladhouse Res. — six plus, Oct. 25th (D. G. Andrew). East Lothian: Aberlady Bay — two. Sept. 27th; and birds present on most week-ends until Feb. 21st, with 25 on Nov. 22nd and 10 on Dec. 6th the largest numbers reported (F. D. Hamilton, K. S. Macgregor). Belhaven Sands — one, Dec. 13th (M. F. M. Meiklejohn); one, Dec. 27th (D. G. Andrew). West Barnes, Tyninghame — 12, Jan. ist (F.D.H. and K.S.M.). Tiree : One, Sept. 9th (Miss B. Whitaker). Ireland. Inishtrahull: Birds passing on most days. Sept. 3rd to 27th, with 26 on 9th, 23 on nth, 20 on i6th, 10 on 20th; two, Oct. 3rd; three, 5th. “It is estimated that over 60 different birds were involved.’’ (P. S. Redman, I. C. T. Nisbet, A. Gibbs). Co. Donegal: Malin Head — “Odd birds ... on most days Sept. 3rd onwards’’ (to 29th), with 30 on 19th and many passing during 27th-29th. “Several hundreds appear to have been involved.’’ (P.S.R., I.C.T.N., A.G.). Co. Londonderry: McGilligan’s Point — seven. Sept. 30th (I.C.T.N.) Wales. Skokholm: Two, Sept. 15th; one, 24th (P. Conder). England. Northumberland: Monks’ House — one, Nov. 8th (E. A. R. Ennion). Co. Durham: Teesmouth — one. Sept. 13th and 20th; two, Oct. i8th; reported on eight days in November (16 on 14th); five, Dec. 5th, and 18, 6th; one or two on three days in January; one, Feb. 7th, and four, 14th; five, March 8th, and twelve, i3th-i5th (D. R. Seaward et ah). The only previous record for this county was in i860. Yorkshire: Gouthwaite Res., Nidderdale — -one “probable” in flight, Dec. 6th (A. F. G. Walker). Gristhorpe Bay, .Scarborough — one, Jan. 17th; two, 31st (A. J. Wallis). Lincolnshire: North Cotes — present from Oct. nth to Feb. 28th, usually scattered parties; about fifty, Dec. 13th (S. A. Cox, R. May). Mouth of R. Witham — two or more, Nov. ist (M. J. M. Larkin); at least three, Nov. 15th; one, Dec. 26th (I. C. T. Nisbet). Holbeach St. Marks (Welland Estuary) — four or five, Nov. 29th (E. J. Cottier and A. E. Vine). 8 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix Norfolk: Wolferton (N.W. coast) — at least two, Nov. 6th at least one, Dec. 14th; one, 28th (I.C.T.N.). Holme and Thornham — forty or more, Nov. 8th; about sixty, Nov. 15th (E.J.C., A.E.V., P. North); present, Dec. 28th (I.C.T.N.); about 35, Jan. loth (P.N.); one. Mar. 14th (E.J.C.); three, Apr. 19th (T. Smout). Gun Hill (E. of Scolt Head Island) — four, Nov. 29th (G. M. S. Easy, D. Farren); one, Dec. 13th (E.J.C., P.N., A.E.V.). Cley-Blakeney area — one Dec. 29th (I.C.T.N.); two, Feb. 28th; one, March 20th (Cley B.O. per M. Seago). Did not winter this year. Suffolk: Walbersvvick — four or five, Oct. iith; eleven, 19th; smaller numbers to Nov. 22nd (W. M. Daly, A. Gibbs, Lowestoft and Suffolk Reports). Essex: The Naze — one, Oct. 4th (R. V. A. Marshall). Walthamstow Marshes — one, March 19th (Miss J. Jones). [Middlesex: Perry Oaks S.F. — one “ probable ”, Oct. 10th (W’.M.D., .\.G.).] Kent: Hoo Marshes — two. Sept. loth; one, 14th (Kent Bird Report). Neatscourt Marshes — one, Nov. 29th (Kent Bird Report). Yantlet Marshes — ten plus. Dec. 30th; some, Jan. 3rd (J. J. Garr, K. H. Palmer, C. Peale). Birds were also reported from the N. Kent marshes in the first four months of 1954 (Kent Bird Report). Sussex: East Head (West Wittering) — one, Dec. 23rd; and one or two on other dates to Jan. 3rd; one, Jan. 17th; two, 31st (per G. H. Rees and G. des Forges). Wiltshire: Swindon — four or five, Dec. 13th (Q. L. Webber). Lundy: One, Sept. 3rd, and birds almost daily to Oct. i8th, with 17 plus on Sept. 5th, 23 plus on loth, 33 plus on 15th, 11 on 27th; one Nov. 5th and 8th; two, i6th; one, 17th; one, Feb. 2nd, iith and i6th (P.D.). It will be seen that with only three exceptions (Sutherland, Lundy and Swindon) all the November-March records are from coastal districts east of a line Edinburgh-Portsmouth. There is a marked preference for estuarine salt-marshes and similar areas, which are more extensive in lowland Britain than in the west. The concentration is nevertheless an interesting" one, and gives support to the view that the small numbers found wintering in Norfolk in other recent years may in fact be of Greenland origin — as the 1953-54 birds must obviously be if the arguments set out in this paper arc correct. It seems likely from the records received that many of the immi- grants did not remain to winter in Britain. No records from the North Sea and Atlantic coasts of Europe have reached us, but there are many places which may prove attractive. Lapland Bun- tings have wintered on the shores of Denmark and Germany (see Distribution Map in Peterson, Mountfort and Hollom’s Field Guide to the Birds of Europe, 1954); they may do so in less fre- quently watched areas further south. THE METF.OROLOGIC.'VL ENVIRONMENT In examining the meteorological background of the several movements which took place in September 1953 we need consider only the three watchpoints where daily records of passage were maintained. These are Fair Isle in the north of Scotland, Inish- trahull off the northern coast of Ireland (360 miles south-west of Fair Isle), and Lundy ofl' the north Devon coast (320 miles south- south-cast of Inishtrahull). We shall consider two possibilities — VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 9 that the arrivals could have taken place (a) by down-wind drift from Greenland, either direct or via Iceland, or (b) by direct immi- gration on a south-west orientation, or by down-wind drift, from the Norwegian coast. The coincidence that the first Lapland Bunting turned up at all three observatories on 3rd September suggests arrival from the west. It is reasonable to suppose that any movement out of Norway would have been noticed first of all at Fair Isle in the north, or at some east-coast observatory such as the Isle of May, and would not have reached Ireland or Devon until several days later. In point of fact there were 5 birds at Lundy on the 4th (but apparently none at Fair Isle) and an initial peak of 20 was recorded next day, with 3 only at Fair Isle. Inishtrahull too had increased passage. Conditions were much more suitable for the inception of migra- tion in Greenland, which had calm anticyclonic weather from the ist to the 3rd, deteriorating in the south-east on the 4th, than was the case in Norway, which was covered by a vigorous low pres- sure system with its centre in Forties. Had cyclonic drift round this depression taken place from northern Norway, then Lapland Buntings should have first reached Fair Isle and not the more southerly stations, flying on a force 6-7 N.E. wind. As force 6 W. and S.W. winds were then blowing across the North Sea and into the Skagerrak a down-wind drift or a direct approach to Britain from that region of the Continent was physically impossible for any Passerine. Thus, for this initial movement, Greenland is quite clearly indi- cated as the source. Collateral evidence is provided by the pattern of Wheatear {Oenanthe oenanthe) passage at Fair Isle during this period, practically all the birds handled between the 2nd and the 4th belonging to the Greenland race OE oe. leucorrhoa. (For details of these birds, see BuU. Fair Is. B. Obs., vol. 2, pp. 35-37). All came in at very low weights for this race, confirming the theoretical assumption of a long cyclonic journey over the eastern Atlantic. The weather situation during the first few days of the month was very complex. In the Atlantic a col of fine weather with light northerly winds existed between the Greenland and Azores highs and this col, moving eastwards behind the Forties depression, was penetrated on the 3rd by a ridge from the sub-tropical high pres- sure belt which later intensified over Britain. With a north to N.E. airstream in sea-area Fair Isle on the western periphery of the low such migration as had begun through this col on the 2nd, or followed via Iceland on the 3rd, would reach Britain through Rockall Seas and the Western Approaches in the region of light westerlies in this anticyclonic ridge. The first movement of Lap- land Buntings, if they came from Greenland either direct or via the Iceland area, made their landfall where one would expect on the theory of migrational drift, namely in western rather than northern Britain (Figs, i a and b). 10 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Figs, i a and b. Initial immigration of Lapland Buntings as deduced from the mid-day weather- charts for 2nd and 3rd September 1953, through an eastwards-moving col in mid-.\tlantic succeeded by an anticyclonic ridge. With a new and vigorous depression moving eastwards towards our area on the 4th, bringing a contrary windstream between Britain and Greenland, it seems probable that the continuing movement of Lapland Buntings at Lundy and Inishtrahull repre- sents onward passage from Ireland and the Hebrides under the excellent conditions provided by the anticyclonic ridge. There is presumptive evidence that the 3 recorded at Fair Isle on the 5th were on passage, for on this day movement of White Wagtails {Motacilla a. alba) and intermediate Wheatears of the Faeroe- Iceland population (so-called Oe. oe. schieleri) was resumed. The next movement developed between 7th and loth September, when the conditions in south-east Greenland were again anti- cyclonic and favourable for emigration. Wind-strength in Forties and on the coast of Norway on the 7th was force 8, its direction S.W. or W.S.W., so that again Passerine migration into Fair Isle from this quarter must be deemed impossible. Yet the inva- sion at Fair Isle at this period reached staggering proportions: there were 30 birds on the 8th and a flock of over 70, in addition to scattered individuals, on the gth. At Inishtrahull there was a strong passage attaining a peak of 26 birds on the gth. The move- ment through Lundy was poor by comparison, and did not reach a peak until the loth. •\ ridge of the Bermuda high brought west winds to Denmark Strait on the 7th, and during the 8th this high expanded eastwards, whilst another high developed over Britain. North of these two systems it was possible for the westerly wind-stream to bring birds direct from Greenland to Fair Isle and the northern tip of Ireland, but at Lundy, below the centre of high pressure, the winds were contrary (Fig. 2). However, the English high was displaced to the south-west during the gth, so that a veer of wind took place in the eastern .'\tlantic and brought Lundy within the westerly airstream. Thus, on the theory of down-wind drift, the delayed peak at Lundy is satisfactorily explained. VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 11 Fig. 2. — First major peak of Lapland Buntings (70-)-) at P'air Isle, Sth-gth September 1953, deduced from 0600 hrs. weather-chart for 8th. The high over southern Britain moved south-west on 9th to admit Lundy to the westerly airstream, resulting in a delayed peak there on loth. F'ig. 3. — Second major peak of Lap- land Buntings (80) at Fair Isle, 12th September 1953, in the complementary W.N.W. airstream between an Azores high and a depression east of Iceland, deduced from 0600 hrs. weather chart for nth. Inishtrahull and Fair Isle were again better placed in this westerly airflow on the nth and 12th and arrivals continued, with an all-time record of 80 birds at Fair Isle on the 12th after about 45 on the previous day (Fig. 3). At the time of these major inva- sions the westerly airstream extended across Forties and it should be noted that such birds as overshot the northern islands would pass on to the Norwegian coast. Late in the period winds were strong in south-west Norway and a direct immigration of Scan- dinavian birds must be regarded as impossible. A third peak of 35 birds took place at Lundy on the 15th and there appears to have been an increase at Inishtrahull the same day. The Fair Isle figure remained steady at about 35. Winds across the North Sea and on the Norwegian seaboard at this time were S.E. and a classic Continental “drift” was developing at Fair Isle (see Williamson, 1954 a). This airstream flowed between a Scandinavian high and a vast area of low pressure in the eastern Atlantic, beyond which there was a N.W. airstream between Greenland and south-west England (Fig. 4). It is reasonable to suppose that this, Lundy’s third peak, came by a down-wind track from Greenland. Increases at Inishtrahull and Fair Isle next day may have been due to coasting or onward passage from Iceland and Faeroe, through which a fair proportion of these buntings must pass in autumn ; or, in the case of Fair Isle, to drift from southern Norway in the S.E. airstream which was still bringing Continental migrants across the North Sea. Coasting movement of Lapland Buntings, doubtless from the Hebrides, was certainly taking place 12 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Fig. 4. — Lapland Bunting peak at Lundy only, 15111 September 1953, derived by cyclonic drift from south-east Greenland simultaneously with the arrival of Continental migrants by anticyclonic drift at Fair Isle. near Malin Head on the i8th and from the 27th to the 30th (Gibbs et al., 1954), and a rise in number at Inishtrahull on the 20th coincided with a N.W. wind between Greenland and northern Ire- land. .\n increase at Fair Isle during- the i9th-20th may have been due once more to drift from southern Norway, as North Sea winds were still S.E. If Lapland Bunting's were indeed reaching- us in this way (and there seems little doubt that they were) then the question arises as to whether they were birds of North Euro- pean stock, or drift-migrants which had entered Norway from Greenland between the 8th and the 12th. This question is dis- cussed below. Numbers rose again at Fair Isle on 26th September and at Lundy on the 27th: west of Iceland at this time there was a vigor- ous depression, with winds from southern Greenland N.W. back- ing westerly and then S.W. in the approach to the British Isles. Force 5-6 westerly winds in Forties make it appear unlikely that any birds could have crossed from Norway on a S.W. -orientated flight. Similar conditions, suggesting a cyclonic approach from Greenland, obtained on the 29th, when there was an increase at Fair Isle and movement on the coastal moors of north Ireland was heavy. Lundy was too far to the south of this airflow to be affected, but more birds arrived there and probably at Fair Isle VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 13 too on 2nd October, this time with an anticyclonic system to the west. MOVEMENTS IN PREVIOUS YEARS 1949. Lapland Buntings passed through Fair Isle in considerable numbers in 1949, the invasion at its peak being at about half the 1953 scale, but less protracted. This abundance was the more surprising as odd birds only had been noted in the previous year. It was also a great Snow Bunting [Plectrophenax nivalis) season, and the first parties — 40 of each species — were found on loth Sep- tember after weather suggesting a north-western origin. The White Wagtail movement reached its peak on this day and 7 Redpolls [Carduelis flammea) were noted. These were not identi- fied subspecifically, but may well have belonged to the Greenland form rostrata, which is the most regular at Fair Isle. The weather in Greenland was calm, in Norway troubled by frontal distur- bances with heavy rain and westerly winds ; and in mid-Atlantic there was a vast anticyclonic system with a westerly airstream along its northern boundary (Fig. 5). However, the unprecedented influx of Snow Buntings, over 2,000 in number, on the i6th, coincided with a N.W. airflow between two low pressure centres in the eastern Atlantic and a S.E. cyclonic airstream in the North Sea, so their place of origin must remain indeterminate. The second Lapland Bunting peak, again 40 birds, followed next day, with the westerly wind persisting in the Atlantic between the low pressure centres but the chance of drift from the Skagerrak removed (Fig. 6). Totals of 20 and 30 Lapland Buntings on the 2ist and 22nd were almost certainly derived from the Continent in easterly weather, but a further increase, with over 1,000 Snow Buntings, on the 25th took place with westerly winds. Fig. 5. — First Lapland and Snow Bunt- ing peaks (40 of each) at Fair Isle on loth September 1949 in westerly air- stream on northern flank of an Azores high. Fig. 6. — Second Lapland Bunting peak (40) at Fair Isle on i6th September 1949 through a region of light-moderate westerly winds between opposing low pressure centres. 14 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX At Lundy there had been a single bird on 2nd September, and six or seven were present from the 3rd to the 15th. Weather con- ditions suggest a cyclonic approach, to the west and south of a complex depression which was moving across the British Isles on the 2nd. This track would not bring birds to the northern part of Britain. 1950. Passage was very poor at Fair Isle in 1950: after single birds on ist and 3rd September there were half-a-dozen on the nth and 26th, and 4 on the i6th and 24th. On the nth, a White Wagtail peak day. Fair Isle was situated in a light N.W. airstream blow- ing from Iceland between two low pressure centres ; on the i6th, with more wagtail and Meadow Pipit {Anthus pratensis) passage, and the first Snow Buntings, winds were cyclonic westerly with a low centred on the Faeroes. The 4 birds of the 24th, with a dozen Snow Buntings, may have come through a col in the same region. The 26th was the only period with a marked north-east- wards expansion of the Azores high, giving a N.W. airstream from Greenland and Iceland, and bringing in addition to both species of bunting the last White Wagtail and 6 Redpolls. Lundy had only one record in 1950, two birds on 29th Septem- ber. These may have reached Britain in the same conditions as the Fair Isle birds of 26th September. Many more Lapland Buntings than usual arrived in Norfolk in this autumn, with a peak of nearly 40 birds at Cley in mid-October (Richardson and Jackson, 1952), which was a period of pronounced easterly weather in the North Sea. ^95-f- This was a better season at Fair Isle, with 5 birds on 6th Sep- tember increasing to a peak of 18 on the 8th, coinciding with White Wagtail passage and arrival of Greenland Wheatears. There was a further peak of the same number on the 15th, but only scattered records afterwards. The first influx had much in common with the initial peak of 1949, an Azorean high being well established to the west of Britain, giving a westerly airflow between Greenland and the northern isles and across Forties to the Norwegian coast. This high moved over Britain to give a west or N.W. airstream at Fair Isle on the next two days, during which Lapland Buntings increased, and a N.E. airstream across the North Sea which carried exclusively Continental drift-migrants to the Isle of May and other east coast bird observatories (Fig. 7). The later peak of 18 coincided with the first Snow Buntings and the arrival of early Greenland White-fronted Geese {Anser albi- frons jlavirostris) at their Irish wintering-grounds and at Fair Isle (Ruttledgc and Williamson, 1952). The wind was westerly in the south-western quadrant of a depression which was filling between Iceland and Norway (Fig. 8). VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 15 Fig. 7. — First Lapland Bunting influx (18) during 6th-8th September 1951, in light westerly airflow of northern side of an anticyclone covering the British Isles. Simultaneously Con- tinental immigrants were entering along the eastern flank of the high. Fig. 8. — Second Lapland Bunting, peak (18) at Fair Isle on 15th September 1951 by cyclonic immigration round a filling low in Faeroes area. eastern Britain in the N.E. airflow There was a single bird at Lundy on 25th September, in condi- tions which did not indicate a recent crossing. 1952- At Fair Isle 2 birds appeared at the beginning of September, increasing to 7 on the 4th and reaching a peak of 13 on the 6th, during the period of White Wagtail passage; the first Snow Bun- ting and a Greater Redpoll (C. f. rostrata) also arrived. Again the complete weather picture is of a high pressure development in the north-eastern Atlantic, intensifying during the period, and giving N.W. to north winds in the Faeroes and Fair Isle sea-areas, and westerly winds between Greenland and Iceland sometimes extending to the Norwegian coast (Fig. 9). This high became centred on our own area between the 8th and 15th, with a pro- nounced westerly airstream between Iceland and Norway, and as mentioned later in the section dealing with the species in that country Lapland Buntings were commoner there from the middle of the month than in other recent years. Numbers were small at Fair Isle and after the 14th, when there were 6 in anticyclonic weather, there were only scattered records until one on the 29th was succeeded by 5 next day. These seem likely to have originated in east Greenland, where the weather had been good for several days, travelling via Iceland along the eastern side of a ridge reach- ing south to Ireland. There were 3 on 5th October with Greenland Redpolls, and 4 on the 7th. (Scot. Nat., vol. 65, pp. 77-78 and figs.) 16 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Fig 9. — Lapland Bunting peak (13) at Fair Isle on 6lh September 1952 round the north-eastern periphery ot an Azores anticyclone. Two birds flew over Lundy on 17th September, with winds north-west and north around the northern fringes of an anti- cyclone centred south of Iceland, and along the complementary airstream between this high and a depression centred over Norway. Another bird on gth October arrived in very similar conditions. Two other records of single birds at Lundy — on nth and 13th September — were in easterly weather, suggesting Europe or E. Britain as their immediate source. CONCLUSIONS We conclude from this examination that the biggest influxes of Lapland Buntings to the north and west of Britain take place when anticyclonic conditions (usually a north-eastwards extension of the Azores high) become established in the Atlantic Ocean to the west of Ireland, giving a N.W. airflow between south-east Greenland and our own area (for examples, see Eigs. 2, 5 and g). It is probable that a proportion of this immigration takes place VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 17 via Iceland, and that in periods when the eastwards extension of the anticyclonic system is marked, much of it reaches Norway. There is evidence too that movement sometimes takes place through a col, or through the rather calm area between opposing low pressure centres. Smaller influxes, generally of a more localized nature, occur when a cyclonic westerly airstream covers this region in the south-western quadrant of a depression centred on or near the Faeroe Islands (Figs. la, 3 and 8). A low pressure system centred farther south than usual, in Rockall Seas, may divert the stream to south-west England and, conceivably, the Channel coast of France (Fig. 4). There is no evidence that these big irruptions, either in 1953 or any previous season, have their source in northern Europe, although small numbers of drift-migrants do reach Fair Isle and eastern Britain in easterly weather (see below). The Lapland Bunting movements at Fair Isle are usually accompanied by passage-birds of north-western origin, such as Greenland or “ schwleri” Wheatears, Greater Redpolls or White Wagtail peaks. BIRDS IN SOUTHERN NORWAY Those who believe that at least a part of the Lapland Bunting influx into Britain is derived from the fells of Norway and Lap- land can point to the almost regular occurrence of small numbers of this species in southern Norway as supporting their view. The north European breeding-stock has a south-east migration route, but this does not deny the possibility of small groups reaching the south of Norway by east-wind drift, nor does it exclude the possi- bility that a small part of the population (from the Dovrefjeld region, perhaps) might have a south-west “preferred direction”. In recent years, with the encouragement and assistance of Dr. H. Holgersen of Stavanger Museum, a Cambridge University expedition has kept annual watch during the autumn migration period at Lista. No Lapland Buntings are mentioned in the 1950 and 1951 reports, nor did Holgersen himself find any on the island of Utsira in the former year. However, a number appeared at both places in 1952 and 1953, and in fact the species was fairly common in the Lista area in mid-September 1952, a few passing S.E. or N.W. over Eigvaag daily from the loth to the 15th, whilst others were seen at various points along the coast, including 20 together on 20th September (Griffin and Nisbet, 1953). For the 1953 season we have: “A continuous rise in numbers from 2 on 2nd October to over 30 on the 24th, many of them probably on migration”, as well as occasional records elsewhere (Swales, 1954). It appears, therefore, that the Lapland Bunting is somewhat irregular in its appearance and strength in the south-west of Norway. Holgersen observed a few on the island of Utsira in 1952, the year of greatest abundance at Lista, and in discussing the possible origin of these birds he points out that they could well be of north-western stock rather than Norwegian breeders, and 18 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX that In mid-September the winds were favourable for the arrival of migrants from this quarter. In addition to the Lapland and a few Snow Buntings, a number of Greenland Wheatears and a Hornemann’s Redpoll [Carduelis h. hornemanni) appeared at Utsira at or following this period. He argues that as very few of the buntings were present during an inllux of migrants from the east on 30th September, the Norwegian population “can hardly have begun their passage about mid-September, or they ought to have been more numerous throughout the last half of the month and at least from the 30th’’. (Holgersen, 1954). So it is by no means established that the Lapland Buntings which appear as autumn migrants in south-west Norway are Scan- dinavian birds, and in fact there are good reasons for believing that they are more likely to be birds of Greenland origin brought in by westerly winds after over-shooting the island groups north of Britain. There we must leave the question of their origin pend- ing further investigation, which we have no doubt Dr. Holgersen will make on future visits to Utsira. The next question we must consider is the ultimate destination of these birds, since it is clear they are still on migration at this point and do not over-winter in southern Norway. If migrational drift brings such birds to Norway in the first place, then drift could also be responsible for taking them out. So many examples of the autumn pattern of bird-movements between the Continent and Britain have been given in contributions to this and other journals that it seems unnecessary to labour the point that in south-west Norway, with the Skagerrak sea-crossing before them. Passerine migrants are particularly exposed to the dangers of deflection over the North Sea by easterly winds. It is not inconceivable that the Utsira and Lista buntings could sustain a drift which would bring them to the British Isles, anywhere from Fair Isle south to Cley. Birds which managed to proceed on their migration without encountering contrary winds might still enter Britain by the short sea-crossing between Holland and East Anglia, and remain to winter in south-east England. Both Williamson (1953) and Holgerson (1954) have discussed an interesting situation which arose on 25th-26th September 1952 and which brought Snow Buntings and Greenland Wheatears to Fair Isle by cyclonic migration off the west coast of Norway. As mentioned above, Holgersen thinks it improbable that the buntings were Scandinavian birds. No Lapland Buntings were recognized at Fair Isle in this movement, but when a south-east wind-drift developed in the Skagerrak a few days later (29th-3oth) 5 appeared at Fair Isle and the species was recorded at the Isle of May. As already mentioned in the discussion of the 1953 movements, it is possible (indeed, probable) that increases in number at Fair Isle on i6th and 19th September were due to arrivals from the south- east' in company with Continental species. 1952 was a “good” Lapland Bunting autumn at Cley in Norfolk, up to 10 birds being VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 19 present from mid-September (Wild Bird Protection in Norfolk, 1952), and as this was also a year of plenty in south-west Norway there can be no certainty that the Cley birds belonged to the Euro- pean stock. Nevertheless, there can be little doubt that, as sug-gested by Davis (1954), some at any rate of the East Anglian birds have a European or eastern origin. It is difficult to postulate any other origin for the exceptional 1950 invasion, with about 40 birds at Cley in mid-October — a season when very few were noted at Fair Isle and there were no records from southern Norway. Similarly the small invasion of Lapland Buntings which took place in south- east England in the winter of 1892-93 may have had an eastern source. Although some of the specimens collected at this time are of iiideterminate origin (see the section on Taxonomy), at least one has strong eastern affinities. WEIGHTS OF TRAPPED BIRDS Some indication of the source of migrant Lapland Buntings might be obtained from a study of their arrival-weights and sub- sequent recuperation if only there were some way of trapping a sufficiently large sample. If these birds, as seems likely, have to cross a thousand miles or more of the Atlantic to reach Britain, their weight-loss in the course of this journey must be substan- tial. The only data we have for Passerines regularly migrating from Greenland are for the Wheatear [Oenanthe oe. leucorrhoa), which has a normal weight at this season of 30-35 gm. but may fall to as low as 20-23 gm. on migration through Fair Isle (see Bull. Fair Is. B. Obs., vol. 2, pp. 35-37). This is a larger bird than the Lapland Bunting, and although we have no records of “ normal weight ” in this species we should expect it to be a little over 30 gm. The Snow Bunting, a bird of similar habit but rather longer in the wing, has about the same weight-range as the Greenland Wheatear. Table I gives details of Lapland Buntings trapped at Fair Isle and Lundy in 1953 (one in 1949). It will be seen that the weights vary between 25 and 30 gm., with two remarkable exceptions. At one end of the scale we have 17.46 gm. and can regard this as near the absolute minimum, since the bird was found dead, appar- ently from exhaustion. At the other extreme is an unusually big male weighing 40.27 gm. and this must surely be near the upper limit, representing a bird that has been some time recuperating'. This example was caught in a Potter Trap baited with turnip seed, on which it had been feeding for some days in the vicinity of the trap. The early arrival of 5th September 1953 appeared to be a tired bird, or unusually tame, since it allowed itself to be shep- herded into a clap-net. It was heavily infested on the eye-rims and at the gape with nymphs of the Cattle-Tick [Ixodes reduvius), but there is no evidence that such infestation causes loss of weight in other species. 20 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Table I — Details of trapped Lapland Buntings (Calcarius lapponicus) Date Sex Wing Bill Tarsus Tail Weight At Fair Isle 5-ix.i949 d 91 29.9 5-ix-i953 9 89 1 I 2 I 62 26.23 16.1x.1953 9 91 12.5 22 60 25-30 16.ix.1953 d 94 13 22 66 29.85 28.ix.1953 9 93 12. s 21 65 17.46 10. X.1953 d 99 12.5 24 69 40.27 At Lundy (from feathers) 2. X.1953 $ ISt w. 90 10 22 — 25-1 3- x.1953 d ISt \v. 92 10 2 I — 28. I SPRING MIGR.ATION Numbers in spring at Fair Isle are very few. Clarke (1912) knew of only 5 occurrences in as many years, between 25th March (which remains the earliest date) and 2nd May, and before the foundation of the Bird Observatory the only additional records were of sing'le birds on 27th April, 4th-6th May and i8th May (which remains the latest date). There is certainly a tendency for spring- records to be com- moner following a good autumn migration. In the spring of 1950, for example, males were present in April on the 5th, i8th-24th (with 3 on the last day), 26th-29th and on 5th May ; two females were present on i2th-i3th May, one on the 17th and a male and 2 females on the 18th. James A. Stout and James Wilson saw odd birds in April 1954, and there were 4 between 6th and 9th May, whilst C. K. Mylne had one on Foula on the 6th and 5 on the loth. Thus, the numbers are so small and its appearance so irregular in the northern isles in spring that we must conclude that the return migration is by a different route, as has been shown to be the case for the Iceland Merlin {Falco c. subaesalon) (Williamson), 1954 b). Possibly the bulk of the birds still in this country leave from the Outer Hebrides when outbreaks of polar anticyclonic air establish S.E. winds between Britain and their breeding- grounds, but until some research is done on this problem this opinion must be regarded as conjectural. T.AXONOMY OF THE LAPLAND BUNTING An alternative method of investigating the area of origin of Lapland Buntings wintering in the British Isles, or passing through on migration, lies in a taxonomic study of the material in museums. The following observations are based on an examina- tion of over 300 specimens from all parts of the range, mostly in the British Museum (Natural History) and the Royal Scottish Museum. We are grateful to Mr. J. D. Macdonald and Dr. A. C. Stephen, respectively in charge of these collections, for access to this material, and also wish to thank Professor V. C. M'ynnc- Edwards of Aberdeen University and Dr. Finn Salomonscn of Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, for their kind- ness in making other specimens available. The Lapland Bunting has a Holarctic distribution. The type of VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 21 the species came from Lapland — Fringilla lapponica Linnaeus, Syst. Nat., ed. x, i, p. i8o (1758) — so that this must stand as the typical locality of the nominate race. The palest birds, with prominent buffish-brown fringes to the feathers in the upper-parts and with the black feather-centres least conspicuous, are from eastern Siberia, particularly the Yenesei region and (on migration) China. This pale form is C. 1. coloratiis Ridgeway, Auk, 15: 320 (1898), with type-locality Kamchatka. It extends eastwards into Alaska, where it has been given the name C. 1. alascensis Ridgeway — a form which is poorly defined. In western Siberia (Petchora region) the birds are somewhat darker, and in north-west Russia and Lapland they are darker still, the fringes of the feathers of upper-parts being a deeper, richer brown and the black centres more prominent. This of course is the typical race C. 1. lapponicus. The darkest birds of all in series are those from Greenland and the eastern Canadian Arctic populations. This is C. 1. subcaJ- caratus (Brehm). Salomonsen (1951) accepts this race on the grounds that it is darker than the European and has a larger and more robust bill, “with an average difference in bill-length of almost 1.5 mm. and an overlapping of only about 25% of both populations’’. We think the plumage difference is rather slight and inconstant, and the degree of overlap in bill-length too great to warrant the recognition of subcalcaratus as a “good’’ race. This opinion is based on an analysis of bill-measurements which Mr. Alec Butterfield kindly made for us, and which is given in Table II. Table II — Summary of bill-measurements of Lapland Buntings (Calcarius lapponicus) Key: A', Arctic Canada; B, Greenland and Baffin Island; C, Scandinavia east to Petchora; D, Yenesei Valley and China (migrants). Length of bill from skull in mm. Length of bill from nostrils in mm. Length A. B. C. D. Length A. B. c. D. I I 0 0 5 I 7 0 0 2 2 II-5 0 0 3 2 7-5 0 0 2 3 12 4 I 2 8 8 5 I 24 19 12-5 6 2 8 3 8.5 4 4 8 I 13 5 6 16 I I 9 6 6 2 3 13-5 I 6 5 3 9-5 0 0 0 0 14 2 5 7 0 10 0 2 I 0 Average 12.75 13-30 12.76 12.68 Average 8.53 8.85 8.13 8.0 As Mr. Butterfield points out, these figures suggest a two-way dine of decreasing bill-size stemming west and east from Green- land, and with this dine there would appear to be also Increasing paleness in the mantle plumage. We have not seen enough material from Arctic Canada and Alaska to be sure that this is so, but it is certainly true in the Paleearctic region. For the purposes of this discussion we therefore use the names subcalcaratus (wes- tern) and coloratiis (eastern) as representing the terminal popula- tions on this dine. 22 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX It will be readily appreciated that there is ^ separating- Greenland from north European birds, eithei on colon or'^size of bill, individual variation masking: the tendency towards subspecific distinctness. Reasonably certain _ discrimu.ataon s possible only in a minority of cases, on the criterion of an y robust bill, so the taxonomic approach to this question of the g: of migrants has not proved as helpful as we had h(j)ed. . . , Nevertheless, the birds which have been collected m the Brit s Isles show an interesting distribution. Pale birds of undoubted eastern type occur in south-east England ; whilst dark l^rds, many with big bills, occur commonly at Fair Isle and m the Outer - rides. The two groups are not exclusive: dark birds (occasionally with big bills) occur in eastern England, and at least one pale example is known from Fair Isle. Three birds in the British Museum collection match very closely two autumn migrants from the Gobi Desert, and are from the coloratus end of the dine: 9, Cambridge, 15. xii. 1892 ;cf and 9 , Thorpe Mere, 10. x. 1911. Others not quite so pale but still showing a decided affinity with eastern birds are: and 9 , Thorpe Mere, 6. xi. 1915 ; 9 , Aldringham, Suffolk, 9. xi. 1915 I c/ and 2 9 9 , Cley, Norfolk, x. and xi. 1923 ; and 9 , Fair Isle, 23, ix. 1905- 1 • j c The last' of these is very unexpected, as other 1905 birds trom Fair Isle suggest affinity with snbcalcaratus. There are a number of dark but indeterminate speeimens of western origin from Thorpe Mere, Cley, North Cotes in Lincolnshire, Berwick-on-Tweed and Fair Isle. There is a long series of dark, heavy-billed birds in the Royal Scottish Museum from Fair Isle, the Flannans and St. Kilda: these are at or near the suhcalcaratus end of the dine, and they can be matched by similar individuals from Cley, Blakeney, Great Yarmouth, Wellshill, Lowestoft and North Cotes in eastern England, and abroad from Heligoland, Iceland and Jan Mayen. We may summarize by saying that the preponderance of dark, big-billed birds at Fair Isle, Flannans and St. Kilda is consistent with the view founded on our interpretation of the meteorological data that the bulk of the passage into Britain is drawn from Green- land. On the other hand, it is clear that birds originating near the coloratus (eastern) end of the dine appear in autumn and winter in south-east England (and may even reach Fair Isle), whilst in all parts there are frequent records of dark birds of inde- terminate western origin. CAUSE OF THE INVASION OF 1 953 At first sight it appeared likely that the unusual abundance of Lapland Buntings in September 1953 might be due to weather factors deflecting a considerable part of the America-bound migra- tion into the eastern Atlantic. U seemed important, therefore, to extend the scope of this inquiry by seeking information on the winter status of the Lapland Bunting in the United States in 1953- 54. Low wintering numbers would suggest that unusual circum- VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 23 stances, probably meteorolog-lcal, had caused a wholesale shift of the population from its usual winter home to another some 4,000 miles away. On the other hand, a high wintering stock would indicate some biological cause for their abundance, and pose quite a different kind of problem. A request to Dr. Albert Wolfson was kindly passed, through Mr. John Baker, the president of the National Audubon Society, to Dr. Chandler S. Robbins of the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. We are grateful to Dr. Rob- bins for his trouble in compiling a detailed and interesting report, which we think it worth while reproducing in extenso below ; “No significant counts of this species were reported to us until the end of December, when the annual Christmas Bird Count was conducted. . . . Unfortunately, relatively few of our counts come from the area in which the Lapland Longspur winters in the greatest abundance. Furthermore, even within this area, many localities are covered only occasionally ; therefore it is very diffi- cult to get much significance from the changes in counts from year to year. The following figures are presented for what they may be worth. “In 1949 a total of 580 Lapland Longspurs were recorded during the week of the Christmas counts in U.S. and Canada. The locality reporting the g'reatest number was East St. Louis (Illinois) with 250. In 1950 the total was 2,680 of which 950 were noted at Sanborn (Iowa), the highest locality count. In 1951 the grand total was 2,032 and the highest single count 608 at Lawrence (Kansas). In 1952 the total was 1,790 and the highest count 300 at Valentine (Nebraska). “In 1953 the total number of Lapland Longspurs recorded was 8,732, which is quite likely the largest ever recorded in these counts. . . . The highest single count was 3,000 at Camp Chaffee (Arkansas). There has been an annual increase in coverage which must be taken into account in comparing the year to year totals ; in 1953, for instance, there were 18,769 party-hours reported for the entire Continent as compared with 15,600 in the previous year. The two areas that had the highest counts in 1953 — Camp Chaffee with 3,000 and Olathe (Kansas) with 1,500— were unfortunately not covered in the preceding years. However, in glancing over the reports I noticed that several of the areas which report every year had exceptionally high counts in 1953. These include Lonoke (Arkansas) with 1,083, Des Lacs Refuge (North Dakota) with 613. The high counts in these areas and the large number of localities which reported Lapland Longspurs this year suggest that there was an actual increase in abundance of this species in the central United States this winter.” Thus it would appear that the great invasion of the British Isles In 1953 was not due to special weather conditions in the Atlantic, causing a diversion of a part of the Greenland population from its route to America, but to a general Increase in numbers over at least the greater part of the bird’s Nearctic range. It is remark- 24 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX able that this increase, presumably the result of an unusually successful breeding-'Season, should have a parallel in the Old World in a similar marked rise in numbers of other northern birds. The most remarkable manifestation of this, of course, was the “irrup- tion” of Crossbills {Loxia curvirostra) into western Europe from June onwards to September, and in addition the autumn mig'ration of waders. Siskins {Carduelis spinus), Coal Tits {Pams ater), Kestrels {Falco tinnunculus) and Fieldfares {Turdus pilaris) was abnormally strong (Williamson, 1954 a and c). Why several north- ern species of diverse habits should show this increase, whilst others occupying the same region apparently remained stable, is a problem to which there seems to be no simple solution. The greater fecundity must surely be due to a greater food-supply, leading to a higher survival-rate among the young and, perhaps, a greater proportion of double broods. In northern Europe during June and July 1953 the weather was dominated by a polar anticyclone of an intensity and stability which is rare in these latitudes in the summer months. Such con- ditions would promote a higher fertility in plant and insect life, and the autumn abundance of certain birds may be a direct result. The situation in the case of the Crossbill, an early breeder, is more complex, but we believe a connection with the polar anticyclonic weather can be established (Williamson, 1954 c). Late in June this high extended to Greenland, though temperatures were not above the mid-forties, except at some stations late in the month, and there were periods of anticyclonic weather there and in the east Canadian arctic in early July and again in the first part of August. The Nearctic region, however, did not enjoy anything like the same settled conditions and high temperatures as were present in north-eastern Europe, and there seems no obvious reason why Lapland Buntings should have reached an optimum in this part of the world in 1953. SUMMARY 1. An unprecedentedly big invasion of Lapland Buntings [Calcarius lapponicus) into Britain in September 1953 is studied with a view to determining its source. 2. Reports of the species in the British Isles in autumn and winter 1953-54 are summarized. 3. The meteorological environment of the invasion is examined with the help of The Daily Weather Report and the authors con- clude that the several movements, as well as others recorded in the north and west in previous years, were composed almost entirely of Greenland birds. 4. The biggest influxes occur under conditions of anticyclonic development in the north-east Atlantic, with a westerly airstream between south-eastern Greenland and the British Isles. Smaller and usually more localized influxes occur in cyclonic weather, with a low centred on or near Iceland or Faeroe and a backing air- stream, N.W.-S.W., between Greenland and Britain. The move- Plate -i-J O QJ (Ti CD xo j- >0 '-' Qj cr cr> "“.5 c: ^ c: a (D ; > 'on X c: o CAl -5 g ^ « o — ^ ^ o c . M K O c: C/) Oh 5 O) ^ (D C3 ^ '-•e «- *-2 OJ , T3 . 0^ c: un '■B (D > " ^6x tJ (D ui = r_ f1 1 .^H >.‘n u c iD > O ,„ . ^ CD o 2 I’l.ATE 2 Osccir Mohcrg I''km.u.I'; (Ikeat (Ieev ()\v\. (Siri.x nchulosa): Sweden k)55 This owl is much fJrcycr tlian the ICajJle Owl {liubo bubo) and the Ural Owl (S. unilciisi.s), between which it comes in size, .\hove, this colour is hoklly marked with blackish-brown and white. Like the Ural Owl this Ijiial has a long tail, which can be seen here, Plate 3 The under-parts are streakeil witli dark brown on a Irackgrouml of faint barring which can just be seen in this plate. The eyes, unlilce those of the L'ral Owl, are yellow. This pair of owls were breeding in a typical site — the disused nest of one of the larger birds of prey (see page 27). Plate 4 A. McCormick Male (iKEEN WoonrECKEu {I’icu.s viridi.s) SIIOWINt; I'AECAL MATTEIi BETWEEN THE MANDIBI.ES See “ N'cst-sanilation and fledging of the (ireen W'oodpeidver " (page 33). Mdcvc l\iisk I'liMALi'; I i Aia.ixjriN Di ck (I I islrioiiiciis liisiriotiiciis) SiiETi.ANi), Ocroniat k)55 Tlv sliort, ratla'i- delicate bill and the |)alteni of three s|)ots on the head, two in front of the (‘ve and one behind, ;ir(' (de.ai ly shown. Thi' bird was otherwise largely brown .above .and white bidow (si'e page 3(1). VOL. XLix] LAPLAND BUNTINGS IN 1953 25 ments thus provide further support for the theory of down-wind drift. 5. Small numbers reach Fair Isle from the Continent under conditions of S.E. wind in the Skagerrak and North Sea: it is suggested that these, and the birds appearing irregularly in south- ern Norway, are more likely to be Greenland migrants which have previously drifted to Norway than north European breeding-birds. 6. There is evidence that at least some of the birds partially wintering in East Anglia are derived from Palaearctic breeding- stocks. 7. Spring migrants are rare at Fair Isle and Lundy and the return migration must follow a different, at present unknown, route. 8. A taxonomic study suggests the existence of a two-way dine of decreasing bill-size and paler coloration stemming east- wards and probably also westwards from Greenland. British- taken specimens reveal a preponderance of dark, heavy-billed birds (C. 1. subcalcaratus) in the northern isles, and a mixture of pale eastern (C. 1. coloratus) and indeterminate dark birds, with a few of subcalcaratus type, in eastern England, thus supporting the conclusions reached from a synoptic study of the migration. 9. There is evidence that, as the species was unusually abun- dant in the United States in winter 1953-54, the Lapland Bunting population in the Nearctic reached an optimum in autumn 1953. The cause of this abnormal abundance is not known. REFERENCES Bannermann, D. (1953): The Birds of the British Isles. \'ol. i. Edinburgh. Clarke, W. E. (1912): Studies in Bird Migration. Edinburgh. Davis, P. (1954): “Reports on the movements of certain migrants at British Bird Observatories in 1952 — Lapland Bunting.” Brit. Birds, xlvii : 21-23. Gibbs, A., Nisbet, I. C. T., and Redman, P. S. (1954); “ Birds of North Don- egal in autumn 1953.” Brit. Birds, xlvii: 217-228. Griffin, D. M., and Nisbet, I. C. T. (1953): “Ornithological observations from Lista 1952.” Sterna No. 8 (Stavanger Museum). Holgersen, H. (1954); “Ornithological observations from Utsira, 1952.” Sterna No. 12 (Stavanger Museum). Redman, P. S. (1955): “ Migration at Tory Island in autumn 1954.” Bull. Fair, Is. B.Obs., 2: 261-263. Richardson, R., and Jackson, P. (1952): “Exceptional passage of Lapland Buntings in Norfolk, 1950.” Brit. Birds, xlv: 286-287. Ruttledge, R. F., and Williamson, K. (1952); “Early arrival of White- fronted Geese in Ireland.” Irish Nat. ]ourn., 10: 263-264. Salomonsen, F. (1951): Gr0nlands Fugle. Vol. 3. Copenhagen. Swales, M. K. (1954); “Ornithological observations from Lista, 1953.” Sterna No. 14 (.Stavanger Museum). Williamson, K. (1952): “Migrational drift in Britain in autumn 1951.” Scot. Nat., 64: 1-18. (1953): “Migration into Britain from the north-west, autumn 1952.” Scot. Nat., 65: 65-94. (1954 a): “Migrational drift at Fair Isle in late September 1953.” Fair Is. B.O. Bull., ii : 117-126. (1954 b); “The migration of the Iceland Merlin.” Brit. Birds, xlvii: 434-441- (1954 c) : “A .synoptic study of the 1953 Crossbill irruption.” Scot. Nat., 66: 155-169. PHOTOGRAPHIC STUDIES OF SOME LESS FAMILIAR BIRDS LXIX. GREAT GREY OWL Photographed by Oscar Moberg (Plates 1-3) Though the Great Grey, or Lapland, Owl [Strix nehulosa) has never been recorded in Britain, we feel more than justified in publishing these magnificent photographs which we have received through Mr. Moberg’s friend and companion, Kapten Sven Wahl- berg, for they are probably the first to be taken of this species at the nest, at least in Europe. This owl breeds from Arctic Norway, Sweden and Finland right across Siberia to Sakhalin, Yakutsk and the mainland north of the Kamchatka, according to G.P. Dementiev in The Birds of the Soviet Union; also in parts of the North American continent, chiefly in the north-western quarter. In Siberia it is largely con- fined to a strip 500 to 1,000 miles in width, mainly between latitude 50° N. and the Arctic circle. Over much of its range it is resident, though locally it is migratory, and in North America there is a definite movement south in winter. Like some other owls, it is subject to years of “ irruption,” and then in Europe its range extends over much of the rest of Scandinavia and Finland. The Great Grey is a very large owl, larger than the Ural (S. uralensis) and approximating in size to the Eagle Owl {Bubo bubo), though it has none of the bulk of this last species. According to the summary of information given by J. B. Szczepski in Pomocnicze Tabele O rnitolo giczne (pp. 54-57) the two species have roughly the same total length and wing length, but whereas male Eagle Owls weigh between 2,100 and 3,000 gm. and females even up to 3,260 gm., the Great Grey is more comparable to the Ural Owl, males weighing chiefly between 700 and 800 gm. and females up to 1,200 gm. It is much greyer than the Eagle Owl, boldly marked with blackish-brown and white above, and with dark brown streakings below on a background of faint barring, that can just be seen in plates i and 3. These photographs show the bird’s strikingly rounded head, with large facial discs which are different from those of the Ural Owl in being heavily traced with circles. Against these the white curves between the eyes stand out in contrast with the black patch on the chin. The eyes are yellow, unlike the blackish irides of the Ural Owl [cf. vol. xlvi, plates 63- 67), but like those of that species, they are small, far smaller than 26 VOL. XLIX] PHOTOGRAPHIC STUDIES 27 those of the related Tawny Owl (S. aluco) which is the only repre- sentative of the genus in Britain. The figures given by Szczepski show that the diameter of the eye is only 12.5 mm. as against 16-17 mm. in the Tawny. The Great Grey Owl breeds in thick, coniferous forests of the north, in the disused eyries of large birds of prey, there again differing from the related Tawny and Ural Owls which prefer cavities in trees. Kapten Wahlberg informs us that the nest shown in these photographs was found in Sweden 40 miles north of the Arctic Circle at a place near the Finnish border. He goes on to say — “ The nest was situated in a forest with a few big pines left standing amongst a lot of young spruce, birch and aspen trees and because of this the wood was quite dense. In one of the pines there was an old bird of prey’s nest, goshawk or buzzard, which had been taken over by the owl. Immediately we came there we saw her sitting in the nest ; she was still and quiet and watched us, following all our moves by turning her big concave face with its nine circles towards us. She was very calm and left the nest only a few times whilst we were there. We began to work with our hide some hundred yards away and even when we raised our ladder against a tree seven yards from the nesting tree she did not move. Now and then she took care of her only chick just like an old hen and she had a chuckling voice too. All the pictures were then taken from the hide eight yards above the ground in a neighbouring tree. When she flew with slow lissom strokes between the trees, I thought it very curious that she did not collide somewhere. This is a bird as big as a male Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), and it was quite amazing to see her flying low in that rather thick wood. Six times we heard a curious noise in the distance ‘ booooooh, booooooh, booooooh.’ The hen answered from the nest with her chuckling or you may call it ‘ a little dog barking ’ noise. Ten seconds later the male bird came. He was smaller and had to work hard as the food was scarce and they managed to rear only one young. In twenty-four hours he came with prey only six times, five times with a water vole and the sixth with some other rodent.” Szczepski gives the normal clutch as 4-6 eggs, occasionally 7, though in years when food is plentiful as many as 9 eggs have been recorded. As with some other owls, its clutch size, numbers and breeding range are very much affected by the lemming plagues. Apart from these mammals its food, according to O. Uttendorfer [Die Emahrung der Greifvogel iind Enleji, p. 132) consists of voles, squirrels, and small and medium-sized birds. Most of the hunting is done b}^ dav, hence the very much smaller eyes than the largely nocturnal Tawny Owl. A. C. Bent [Life Histories of Some North American Birds of Prey, Part II) gives the chief prey as bush rabbits, young hares, squirrels, rats, lemmings, shrews, mice and small birds. I.J.h.-L. A RAVEN ROOST IN DEVON By H. G. Hurrell At least one large roost of Ravens {Corvus corax) has been reported in Scotland and another in Wales. In W. Cornwall there was one in 1945 and 1946 near an abnormally liberal food supply. In October the number of Ravens using this roost was between 100 and 150. By early February there were less than 50 and by March the maximum counted was 16. From time to time Raven roosts have doubtless occurred in Devon, yet so far as I can trace, none has hitherto been recorded. In the nature of things such roosts must be few and far between and this makes it all the more remark- able that I should be able to observe the establishment of one almost on my doorstep. My house is situated at 650 ft. on the southern fringe of Dartmoor with an extensive view across S. Devon farmland. Between the house and the moor is a 5-acre wood. During the past 5 years a pair of Ravens have visited this wood from time to time, although their nesting tree was about a mile away. For some rea- son they have not reared any young and each year after their failure they frequented our wood for several days. They would repair and then abandon a nest in a Scots pine about 100 yds. from the house. About a month before Christmas 1954 they began roost- ing in our wood, generally selecting for the purpose a deciduous tree near the nest. One winter morning I saw’ eight Ravens fly overhead into the moor. This was a few minutes before our local pair had left the tree in which they had roosted. That evening our wood wtis with- out Ravens, for the local pair had gone elsewhere. Four days later, how'ever, on 17th January 1955, two pairs of Ravens settled amicably in our wood. This was remarkable behaviour, because hitherto the local pair had always driven off intruders with the greatest fury. So I concluded that these four birds were strangers. Later the same day, during a walk on the moor, I came across a large concourse of Ravens attracted by the carcasses of 5 sheep which had died in an exceptionally big snowdrift. They flew off at my approach and blackened a stretch of moorland like rooks when they pitched. I estimated that there were at least 50. Soon several of them engaged in a display on the ground which I watched through my binoculars. Some half-a-dozen birds, which were evidently females scattered here and there in this flock, had in attendance one, two or three birds, which, from their rather larger size and their behaviour, must have been males. These males puffed out their feathers, especially those of the throat and neck, and stretched up to their maximum height beside tlie near- est female. While holding this attitude they would follow the female, if she walked away, by progressing in greatly exaggerated, stiff-legged hops. I believe the Ravens came to this feast for 28 VOL. XLIX] DEVON RAVEN ROOST 29 several days from a distant roost. Then on 21st January I was delighted to find that 8 or 10 Ravens had roosted in the wood close to my house. On the 24th the headlights of the car unfortunately disturbed several which were roosting almost over the house. From now on all lights were switched off when going up the drive after dark. The number had reached at least a score by 25th January and about 50 by the end of the month. The nest in the Scots pine was torn out by the invading Ravens so that not a stick of it remained. The roost continued at its full strength of between 50 and 60 for a couple of months. Only twice before during a lifetime in Devon (on 23rd April 1936 and 26th April 1941) have I seen such a number together. The continued presence of such an exception- ally large number was evidently made possible by two circum- stances which provided an unusual supply of food. Many sheep had died on the moor in the hard weather and myxomatosis was rampant. I examined scores of castings and most of them con- tained sheep wool and/or rabbit fur. Several times I came across Ravens feeding on rabbit carcasses. Another important item in their diet is still rather a puzzle. Flakes of a tough, but pliable, white substance were often present in the castings. Some castings consisted entirely of pieces of this substance. At first I thought it must be cartilage or tendon, though the quantity seemed excessive for this. Microscopic examination of a flake showed black lines branching in all directions. Mr. O. D. Hunt ascertained that It was a vegetable substance, though what kind of plant remains a mystery. I found considerable quantities of the same material, but in slightly smaller flakes, in the castings of Carrion Crows {Corvus corone) under a large crow roost. The availability of food doubtless explains why so many Ravens were able to remain in the district, but it does not explain why they chose to use our wood. Many similar woods are to be found within easy reach, though it would be difficult to find one with so extensive a view. Whether or not this would appeal to Ravens I cannot say. I have a suspicion that our pair may have un- wittingly interested others in the wood where they were in the habit of roosting, but this is only a suspicion. The procedure each evening was for the birds to arrive from various directions in ones, twos or small parties. They would assemble on the high moorland behind the roost. Sometimes they would sit quietly on the ground. Often they would take flight and engage in remarkable aerobatics. They would chase each other closely, often making vicious dives. It appeared to be a recog- nised kind of horseplay. Just occasionally there would be a really angry chase when one Raven appeared to be out for another’s blood. They would make two or three visits to the wood and back to the moorland before they finally settled down in the trees to roost. In our mixed wood there seemed to be a preference for roosting in deciduous trees such as beech, ash, chestnut or oak. 30 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX rather than in Scots pines which were also available. When at roost the Ravens were concentrated in a small portion only of the 5-acre wood. It was noted that two Ravens would often roost near each other. There would be many such couples. A favoured tree might hold between a dozen and a score of Ravens. At times they made a lot of noise. They possess a considerable range of calls, many of which Mr. Tony Soper recorded for the B.B.C. on 5th February. The roost continued at its full strength of between 50 and 60 throughout February and for a part of March. On 19th March a party of seven Ravens circled high at roosting time and made off westwards. There was a rapid diminution in the number using our roost during the following week and it was later established that they had gone to Piles Copse, one of the three ancient oakwoods of Dartmoor. It is a small wood, only a few acres in extent, situated in a deep moorland valley 3 miles west of our wood. The trees are gnarled and twisted oaks only 30 ft. or so in height. The view from the wood itself is somewhat restricted, but wide sweeps are to be seen from the hills above. Piles Copse has its own pair of roosting and nesting Ravens. On nth April (Easter Monday) I obtained the maximum count of 86 using' our roost. Without a doubt these Ravens had been disturbed from Piles Copse by campers who lit ffres there during the Easter week-end. The Ravens went back to Piles Copse after a few nights in our wood and by the end of April, when I visited Piles, I estimated that 80 or more were roosting there. During the months of May and June ihe roost continued at Piles, though numbers diminished considerably. There were Ravens about during August and up to 40 were reported together on the moor, but it seems likely that they were making use of yet another roost. By mid-September I found only the local pair roosting at Piles. There have been no Ravens roosting regularly in our wood since they transferred to Piles. It may be mentioned that our local pair built a new nest about a mile away in 1955, but, as usual, it did not succeed. The most remarkable find beneath our roost was the complete nest of a dormouse. It was lying in the open on the floor of the wood immediately beneath the branches of a tree in which several Ravens were roosting. Circumstantial evidence suggests that it had been dropped 60/70 feet from the tree-top. I was surprised to find inside the nest a dormouse, still hibernating. I have kept the dormouse and it is still alive and well at the time of writing, ten months afterwards. On 5th March, on the floor of our wood immediately below the roost, I found a dead Raven. It had been severely pecked on tlie rump, wings and head. This may well have been the cause of death, especially as a post mortem showed no other likely explana- tion. It was a female in non-breeding condition. There was no enlargement of the ovaries. From the appearance of the throat VOL. XLIX] DEVON RAVEN ROOST 31 feathers I suspect she was a bird of the previous year. Another dead Raven which I picked up on the hillside above the wood on 13th April was also a female in non-breeding- condition. She appeared to have been shot. Yet another Raven was found on 23rd April on the slopes above Piles Copse. This was a male which had been dead for a week or two (cause not ascertained). The two earlier examples sug-g-est that larg-e roosts may be com- posed of non-breeding birds, at any rate during the nesting- season. I have often noted, too, that breeding Ravens roost near their nests in the breeding-season. There were a few birds in the roost which were extremely ragged and seemed to be moulting heavily. Possibly these could be very old birds or ones which were two or more years old and still without the opportunity of breed- ing. It is unlikely that yearlings would be moulting in winter. An interesting result of the establishment of a Raven roost in our wood was the fact that it attracted Jackdaws {Corvus mone- diila) which were on their way to their usual roost a mile or so away. The Jackdaws would pitch in trees near the Ravens. Then they would fly some distance towards their own roost, but turn back to spend a few moments longer with the Ravens. This might be repeated several times. Eventually, for several nights a number of Jackdaws remained in the wood and roosted with the Ravens. To the best of my knowledge they have never on any occasion roosted in the wood except when the Ravens were there although they fly past the wood each evening. An interesting example of one species influencing the roosting locality of another. It is my contention that in Devon the most suitable feeding areas for Ravens, such as the moors, are to a large extent terri- torially divided between a number of pairs. This means that, if non-breeding Ravens fed and roosted singly, especially in the breeding season, they might be vehemently driven from one terri- tory to another. When, however, a whole host of Ravens arrive, as in our case, it is clearly impossible for the local pair to rout them. This seems to point to an advantage for non-breeders in feeding and roosting collectively. SUMMARY The establishment of a Raven roost in Devon in January 1955 is described. It coincided with an exceptional food supply through large snow-drifts trapping a number of sheep and through the incidence of myxomatosis. Two dead Ravens were examined and found to be in non-breeding condition. One of the advantages of collective feeding and roosting is suggested. REFERENCES Cadman, W. a. (1947): “ A Welsh Raven Roost.” Brit. Birds, xl : 209-210. Coombs, C. J. F. (1946): “Roosting of Ravens.” Cornwall Bird Watching & Pres. Soc., i6th Ann. Rep., pp. 49-50. Fergusson, E. J. (1943): “Large Raven roost in Perthshire.” Brit. Birds, xxxvii : 76. NEST-SANITATION AND FLEDGING OF THE GREEN WOODPECKER By H. R. Tutt There is considerable conflict in the accounts of nest-sanitation by the Green Woodpecker (Picus viridis). Owen (1921) writes: “From nests I have opened from time to time after the young have flown, it seems that generally the nest is kept in a very clean con- dition by the old birds, chiefly by the female. The dung must be swallowed in the hole, as we never saw a bird carry any away.” On the other hand, a statement by Loppenthin (1932) mentions a Green Woodpecker’s hole “cut into a rotten beech about 5 m. from the ground. On July 9th, 1928, this nest contained a feathered young bird and a layer of excrement about 10 cm. high’’. Owen’s account was the result of work by a team of schoolboys led by him, and he informs me he has lost his notes, but from memor}'^ says one hole was cut open after a stoat took the young from it; “others were opened at various periods after the young had left, usually by woodmen’’. Loppenthin broke open the nest-hole when he found it. The two statements appear contradictory, but, except in one case, the data concerning Owen’s nests are, in the absence of his notes, too uncertain for comparisons to be made. There is another account, given by Blair and Tucker (1941), quoting the observations of A. H. M. Cox and M. Moon, “Faeces carried after ninth day; parent did not enter hole; may have taken direct. Faeces mixed with wood-dust carried, but more often swallowed inside hole, parent emerging with soiled beak’’. The second and last of these statements are contradictory, unless the second refers to only one visit by one adult, which I think it must do. The first statement also conflicts with the last by Owen. No details are given of the tree, the position of the nest-hole, the dis- tance at which the observations were made, nor details of how wood-dust was recognized on a faecal sac. Of the many nests I have examined there has been wood dust in one only; all the others have had soft wood interiors but no dust. With regard to the “soiled beak’’, I have seen, as Owen did, wet clay on the upper mandible; I have also frequently seen the paste-like food adhering to the adult’s bill immediately this is withdrawn from that of the young. Usually the long tongue is whipped out, and curved back over the bill to retrieve food (see Tutt, 1950). The food paste might be easily mistaken for excreta. I have studied nest-holes in fruit-trees at heights varying from 2 ft. 6 in. to 5 ft. 6 in. above ground level, using a hide^vhose front was 6 feet from the nest-hole. The hide was usually placed so that the bird was seen sideways as it entered or left the hole; at one nest, however, it was placed directly in front, so that the 32 VOL. XLix] NOTES ON GREEN WOODPECKER 33 observer could look through the hole to the interior. The pattern of behaviour has been similar with all the pairs, but much greater detail could be seen from the hide facing the front of the nest. This hole was 3 ft. 6 in. high in a plum tree ; the interior was a natural cavity going far above the entrance hole and with very fine dust at the base. Often the adult emerges like a rocket and it is then not possible to see the bill clearly; at other times, however, there is a distinct pause. When emerging from the hole in the plum tree, both parents were forced to pause owing to the struggle both, but more especially the female, had to push through. This hole had a hori- zontal axis of 5 cm. and vertical 5.2 cm., the smallest of all the holes measured. The female seemed to realize the tightness of the hole, for once, when returning to feed, she chiselled at the side of it for nine minutes, the wood being so tough she had to take each chip and lever and pull till the fibres broke. There are three phases in the fledging period each merging into the succeeding one and varying slightly with the different pairs. The first lasts 12-14 days during which time the adult enters the hole, so that feeding and sanitation are carried out hidden from view, except when the hide is directly in front. The second lasts 4-5 days and in this phase regurgitation takes place outside, after which some or all of the chicks are fed through the hole before the adult enters. The final phase, 3-4 days, commences when the female pushes her way through the young into the hole for the last time; the male continues to enter for another day, or day and a half, and then he also ceases to go inside. During the first phase the parent usually leaves the hole with the beak closed in a normal manner. Only once at 13-14 days have I seen what must have been faeces : the bird emerged with the mandibles slightly apart and a white streak was visible projecting just outside and along their edges. When the light was in the right direction I was able to see the adult inside the hole in the plum tree. I watched it regurgitate, its head being framed in the entrance ; each regurgitation was followed by its lowering its head to feed. The bird was obviously clinging to the sides of the cavity for the bottom was 15-16 inches from the lowest point in the rim of the entrance. Feeding over, the bird’s head disappeared for from one to two minutes before it emerged from the hole. The pause every time an adult left this nest enabled careful observa- tion of the beak ; In the last day or two of this first period the mandibles were occasionally opening and shutting as the bird came from the hole. The bills of the young could be seen inside the hole and their forward toes on the lip of the entrance at 13/ 14 days. During the second phase the adult sometimes emerged opening and shutting the mandibles as it was thrusting the head through the hole and then made a swallowing action ; sometimes the bill was closed normally, but far more often the mandibles were slightly apart. The photograph by A. McCormick (plate 4a), taken in side 34 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX view at another hole, shows the male leaving' in this way; the faecal matter is visible between the mandibles, but not so clearly as I have observed it on many occasions; 1 have seen two and three distinct lumps inside the bill between the mandibles, which may be held more widely apart according to the amount of faecal matter carried. Only once have I seen a complete faecal sac: the male emerged dangling one from the lip of the bill at 17/18 days, the excreta must be dropped, but I have never been able to see this from the hide. I have not seen any indication that direct taking of sacs occurs at the hole: in a normal cavity the young would have to invert for this purpose. I have never seen an adult Green Woodpecker cling- ing upside down and I cannot believe a chick would cling in this manner. There was room to climb the cavity in the plum tree but I never saw a youngster go above the entrance hole. The third phase produces a marked change in the behaviour: sanitation is continued by one bird only for about a day and a half and then ceases altogether. Feeding (see Tutt, 1950) is now erratic. I have seen the female regurgitate from nine to thirteen times successively during this period ; she gives food to one chick three or four times, places her closed bill into its open mandibles and pushes it away to allow another to come to the hole, but not all the chicks get food at a single visit. In the last two days, the male will come and feed a single chick once or twice, jerk his way up the nest tree, or fly to a neighbouring one, calling “wcet, weet, weet . . .”, or uttering a soft but peculiarly sweet yaffle, repeated at intervals. The female calls like the male but far less often. First one chick and then another (each trying to hold the place as long as possible) thrusts out the head to the fullest extent and gives vent to loud squawking interspersed by two or three strident yaffle notes. The chicks arc obviously hungry and though not left without food get less than usual. When an adult arrives the chick whose head is out shows the most intense excitement, and when after feeding it once or twice the adult stops regurgitating the youngster lunges out at the parent’s throat with such force that the latter jumps hastily aside. The frequent and persistent low calling by the adults, as they cling, quite still, to the nest tree or a neighbouring one, seems designed to entice the young to fly out. One morning at 0550 hours after a youngster had yaffled two or three shrill, loud notes intermittently over a period of forty minutes, the male came and fed it once; it stabbed at the adult’s throat; these stabs were avoided and it was fed again. The male withdrew its head and the youngster shot out of the hole, flying about twenty yards into a neighbouring tree. Two of the brood were still in the hole at dusk. It appeared to me that some if not all of the young remained clinging to the walls of the cavity when roosting after sanitation ceased, but this was impossible to ascertain with certainty. Permission was granted to cut open the hole in the plum tree VOL. XLix] NOTES ON GREEN WOODPECKER 35 with the least possible damage and this was done nine days after fledging. A rectangular opening 2|"x6" was made, the hole being deeper than was expected. A level surface of blackish, wet- looking material was visible. Quarter-inch holes were bored one below the other; from the first and succeeding ones came the wet stufi; along the drill, and then a hole from which issued fine, dry, powdery wood dust. Thus the depth of the wet mass and the interior measurements of the hole were obtained : the distance from the lower edge of the entrance to the bottom of the hole measured some 40 cm., of which 5 cm. was taken up by the mass of wet material. Most of the 5 cm. of wet material was spooned out. There was a slight stench from it ; under a magnifying glass it appeared as tiny pieces of elytra coverings, such as could be expected from a diet of ants ; there was one complete leg, but no other large pieces. In the mass were six larvae and two pupae of some Diptera species, evidently feeding there. Only very occasionally before the final phase does the female leave without entering the hole after feeding ; if she omits to do so on one visit she enters on the succeeding ones, and these omis- sions are almost always in the two days before she stops entering. The male is regular in entering the hole after feeding till the last day on which he does so, and then like the female his omission is a single occasion and he enters on his next visit to feed. Once either female or male is observed not to enter on successive visits, all entry by that bird is at an end: this is the general pattern of behaviour as observed with all the pairs, and fledging takes place normally two days after that on whieh the male ceases to enter the hole. Occasionally the young may remain in the hole 6/7 days without entry by either bird. In 1953 there was a hole 12 ft. high in the bough of an apple tree growing on the crest of a slope, the hole facing directly south-west. There was no entry by either bird during observation on 4th July, nor during the periods when obser- vations were made on each successive day till fledging occurred (observations between 4th and gth July inclusive totalled 13 hours 12 minutes and covered about 21 visits by the parents to the tree). The young were expected to fly on the 6th. But that day a strong, blustering south-west wind played directly on the hole ; when a head was put out to yaffle shrilly, it was withdrawn immediately. The gale continued till the gth and at least two young were still in the hole late that evening. They were gone on the loth. Once the adults cease to enter, a biological stage is complete and they seem incapable of resuming their former behaviour : they can only prolong the stage in which they are already acting' if unusual cir- cumstances occur. The 5 cm. of material in the hole in the plum tree may have been deeper when the young flew, in the normal time, for decomposition had been proceeding for some days when the hole was opened. In 36 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX the 1953 hole, where the young" were confined more than twice the normal time the depth of excrement may have been as great as that found by Loppenthin. Where did the young woodpeckers roost after fledging? In the twilight we searched a great many large apple trees, twenty feet high, and eventually disturbed seven birds; they were in two adjacent trees on the top branches where these levelled out before drooping. We had observed instances of the male bird squatting along the branch of an apple tree like a Nightjar (Caprimidgus eiiropaeiis), when men working in the orchard disturbed their feed- ing. This is probably the way the family roosts on trees during the summer period. I am indebted to Mr. J. H. Owen for his letter, to the late Mr. C. J. Tillisch of Copenhagen for the translation of Loppen- thin’s note, and to Mr. I. J. Ferguson-Lees for his advice. SUMMARY During the first 12/14 days after young Green Woodpeckers hatch most of their faeces are swallowed by the adults inside the nest cavity. During the next 4/5 days, the faeces may occasionally be swal- lowed in the hole; sometimes swallowed as the parent leaves the hole; and often carried out between the mandibles. During the last 3/4 days there is no sanitation by the female and none by the male after the female has ceased for one to one and a half days. There is an accumulation of excreta by the time the young leave the hole. Green Woodpeckers probably roost on trees in the open in summer and squat along the branches. REFERENCES Blair, R. H. (with Tucker, B. W.) (1941): “Nest-sanitation.” Brit. Birds, xxxiv; 251. I.0PPF.NTIIIN, B. (1032): In Dansk Orn. For. Tidsskr., 26: 153. Owen, J. II. (1921): “On some breeding-habits of woodpeckers.” Brit. Birds, XV : 61-62. Tutt, H. R. (1951): “Data on the excavation of the nest hole and feeding of the young Green Woodpecker (Pious viridis).” Proc. Xth hit. Orn. Congr., 1950: 555-562. NOTES Harlequin Duck in Shetland. — While watching waders at half tide at the Pool of Virkie, south Shetland, on the afternoon of i6th October 1955, we noticed a small dark duck which we believed was a female or first-winter Harlequin Duck (Histrionictis hisirioiiicus) swimming and diving on the far side of the channel. Even at a considerable distance, when little detail was distinguish- able, the whitish patches at the sides of the head were clearly seen. It flew on to a sandbank, momentarily stood erect, and M.R. approached to photograph it. It then attempted to rise into a strong north-west wind, but experienced considerable difliculty VOL. XLIXJ NOTES 37 and was easily caught. It was taken to Spiggie for more detailed examination. We were struck by the bird’s apparently good condition. In the hand the small size was obvious. The wing measured 197 mm., bill from feathers 25 mm. and tarsus 30 mm. All these measurements are approximate as suitable instruments were not available. The general coloration of the head was mid-brown, with two whitish patches in front of the eye and a third behind it. The margins of these patches were less clearly defined than the bird’s appearance in the field suggested. The mantle, back, rump and upper tail-coverts were an even dark brown ; the scapulars were mid-brown, almost the same shade as the head ; the wings were a uniform dark brown like the mantle, and there was no suggestion of a speculum. The upper part of the breast was light brown without the uniform appearance of the other areas, and was clearly demarcated from the white belly and under tail-coverts. The sides of the rump showed a greyish hue. The bill was noticeably short and was very dark brown in colour. The legs and feet were greyish-white and the webs dark brown. The eye appeared dark but the colour of the iris was not noted. The bird was examined in the hand by L.S.V. and U.M. Venables and Tom Henderson, who concurred with our identification. The bird was photographed (see plate 4, lower) and immediately afterwards was released on the fresh-water Loch Spiggie, Again, the most obvious field-characters as it swam buoyantly into the wind were the small size and the three whitish patches on the head. It was noticed that the duck often cocked its tail after a rapid preen. It was seen again next day (the i7th) swimming vigorously and jerking its head, and still seemed to be in good condition'. M.veve Rusk and Isabel M. N. Ryan [Mr. Peter Scott informs us that Harlequin Ducks are not kept in captivity at all. — Eds.] Twirling of Kestrels . — On 13th June 1955 David Wadge and I were walking along the River Meon in Titchfield Haven, Hamp- shire, when we saw a male Kestrel [Falco tinnunciilus) fly across to the opposite side of the river and settle on a bough about half- way up a tall tree. Very soon thereafter a female Kestrel appeared from higher up the tree, and both birds flew across the river to our side and rose to a height of about 100 ft., where they gripped talons, spread their wings and held them motionless, and twirled down almost to grass level before letting go. All the time they were dropping, the female was on the underside, and they twisted round and round. Immediately afterwards both flew ofl; hunting together. According to the supplementary notes at the end of the fifth volume of The Handbook, D. K. Wolfe-Murray reported that a pair of Ravens (Corvus corax) “sometimes grip ‘hands’ and fall 38 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX for 200 ft. or so before separating" and righting themselves”, and a pair of Buzzards (Buteo buteo) were ‘‘gripping claws and falling together like Raven”. J. A. Nelder {antea, vol. xliii, p. 226) and G. W. H. Moule {antea, vol. xliv, p. loi) confirmed the habit for the Buzzard. Cold water was poured {antea, vol. xliv, p. 41 1) on the suggestion that it was a form of display, and Capt. H. A. Gilbert {ibid.), who suggested that it was a struggle between a nesting bird and an intruder, reported a similar performance by two Golden Eagles {Aquila chrysactos). From mv many observations on the Black Kite {Milvus migrans) in India, and from the present instance, I am convinced that this twirling is neither display nor aggression but play. I often saw the Kite do this trick and could see the talons locking bird with bird, and on each occasion it looked to me like a game, the pair spinning gently round as they slowly fell until, when about to collide with a roof or the ground, they let go and went about their business without any appearance of enmity. C. Suffern Crane in Orkney. — A single Crane {Gms grus) stayed in the vicinity of Ingsay Farm, Birsay, Orkney, for some ten days in the spring of 1955, from about 17th to 27th May. I saw the bird on the 24th, when it was feeding on a field of oats at a range of a little over 100 yards from me. The general colour of most of the body and lower part of the neck was of a lightish grey, much the same shade as is the Heron {Ardea cinerea). The upper part of the neck was blackish with a white stripe running down each side from the eye. The head was also dark, as was the stout, medium length bill. No red patch on the head could be distinguished. The bird’s most outstanding character was the long, drooping blue- black plumes hanging over the tail. Its movements were grace- ful and deliberate, and when walking each foot was daintily lifted, and poised before being set down. The body was almost horizon- tal, and the neck was gracefully curved. I did not put the bird up, but the farmer said that it would not stand too close an approach. He had seen it fly strongly with slow wing beats from field to meadow several times. F. Baefour {R.S.P.B. U'nrden) Crane in Suffolk. — On 25th May 1955, having been informed that a strange bird had been seen on Westleton Heath, Suffolk, I made my way there and was rewarded at once by seeing it fly past me at a height of about 150 ft. The bird alighted some 200 yards away and gradually made its way in my direction until it was within 150 yards. In all I watched it for some 2^ hours, and had no hesitation in identifying it as a Crane {Gnis gnis). In flight it appeared to be larger than a Heron {Ardea cinerea); its head and neck were fully extended, and its legs projected beyond its tail. The general impression was of a black and grey bird. When it was on the ground I noticed the following points:’ bill, lightish VOL. XLIX] NOTES 39 and perhaps smaller than a Heron’s; crown, dark; body, grey; wings, grey with black tips; tail, black and drooping; legs, dark- ish. There appeared to be a white stripe from behind the eye, and there was a black area from the chin to a point halfway down the front of the long neck. It was very alert all the time I was watch- ing it, and in between intervals of feeding it used to stop and stand still, looking around it. Later in the day it flew on to the Royal Society for Protection of Birds Reserve at Minsmere, where it was also seen by Col. and Mrs. Boyle, Mrs. E. M. Bale and G. R. Edwards. R. Wolfendale [R.S.P.B . Warden) [Mrs. E. M. Bale tells us that with Miss M. S. van Oostveen she also saw the Crane between 8 and 9 a.m. on 26th May at Walk Barn Farm near Westleton Heath, about one mile inland from Minsmere ; the men working on the farm reported that they had noted it during the two previous days. Mr. F. K. Cobb informs us that what was presumably the same bird was seen at Walbers- wick, Suffolk, on 25th May by Messrs. R. B. Barstow and G. S. Ralston. — Eds.] Aggressive display of young Curlew. — In May 1942 I had under observation the nest of a Curlew [Nnmenin s arquata) with 4 eggs, near Glenapp, Ballantrae, Ayrshire. On 29th May one Curlew’s egg was cracked. On 31st May all the eggs were chipping. On ist June, 24 hours later, three young Curlews were hatched. Two lay flat in the nest as I bent to look at them, but one stood up and faced me aggressively, making itself as tall as possible, cheeping and flapping its tiny wings. Its age must have been a few hours only, and no parent birds were near it at the time. M. D. Crosby [A previous note on this subject appeared in our June 1955 issue (antea, vol. xlviii, p. 280). — Eds.] Song-flight of Wood Sandpiper on passage. — The two records on this subject published recently [antea, pp. 415-6) prompt me to mention that a Wood Sandpiper [Tringa glareola) was watched display-flighting at Gladhouse Reservoir, Midlothian, over a long period on the evening of 6th June 1955. Two other birds of the same species were present at the same time, and the way in which they kept together and tended to avoid the company of the singing bird rather suggested that they were paired. Possibly it was their presence that stimulated the unmated bird to display. D. G. Andrew White-rumped Sandpiper in Midlothian. — On 21st August 1955 we found a White-rumped Sandpiper [Calidris fuscicollts) at Glad- house Reservoir, Midlothian, feeding among Dunlin (C. alpina) and Ringed Plover [Charadrins hiaticula) on the large areas of mud that had been exposed as a result of the dry summer. R. W. 40 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX J. Smith and Charles Walker joined us in watching" the bird and it was again seen the following day by A. G. S. Bryson and George Waterston and also on the 24th by G. W. and Miss E. V. Baxter. It had apparently left by the 25th. The date of its arrival is not so accurately known, but there was a big influx of Dunlin and Ringed Plover between the i6th and 20th and it seems likely that the Sandpiper came in with them. The following notes have been read and approved by all those who saw the bird. Watched at ranges down to 30 yards (and once, briefly, at 15 yards), the greyer upper-parts enabled the White-rumped Sand- piper to be picked out easily among the accompanying Dunlin, almost all of which were birds of the year. The poor light made it impossible to obtain any accurate notes on the colour of the mantle, but the feathers appeared to be a mixture of ashy-grey and dark brown, in colour very much resembling the winter plumage of a Dunlin but presenting a coarsely scaled appearance quite different from the neater pattern of that species. A well-marked whitish stripe ran over the eye and enabled the bird to be picked out from its companions at considerable range even when only the heads were visible above a large stone. The upper breast was profusely streaked with grey and this extended on to the flanks. There was no appreciable difference in size between the Sandpiper and the smaller of the accompanying Dunlin, but in build it was more reminiscent of a Little Stint (C. minuta) with its short bill, neck and legs and rather rotund body. The bill was appreciably shorter, finer and straighter than those of the Dunlin, though it was still slightly longer than that of a stint, very slightly decurved and terminating in a square-cut tip. In flight the white upper tail-coverts stood out conspicuously above the blackish tail. The call-note, which was quite unlike anything we had ever heard before, was a shrill, high-pitched “tweek”, sometimes repeated several times. It had little volume and did not carry very far. The leg colour appeared to be black but this feature could not be seen with certainty. Some observers noted the appearance of an up- turned tail, an impression probably caused by the wing-tips extend- ing beyond and obscuring the tail-feathers (see antea, vol. xlvi, p. 260). A.G.S.B. and G.W. noted that the Sandpiper differed from the Dunlin in its feeding methods. The latter were probing the mud fairly deeply whereas the Sandpiper pecked around on the surface of the mud. Although these features leave no doubt that the bird was a White-rumped Sandpiper, it seems worth drawing attention to two points on which our observations differ from some previous pub- lished descriptions. The Handbook mentions “a pale shade on wing, but nothing comparable to white wing-stripe of Dunlin” and this is supported by the descriptions in some recent British records {antea, vol. xxxix, p. 186; vol. xlii, p. 331 ; vol. xlvi, p. 262). .Ml those who saw the Gladhouse bird agreed that there was a distinct wing-bar which seemed to be very similar in extent to that of the VOL. XLIX] NOTES 41 Dunlin. However, Peterson (A Field Guide to the Birds, 1947, p. 99) shows this species as having; a more distinct wing-bar than the Handbook passage would lead one to expect. Evidently this fea- ture is rather variable. Secondly, in the case of some recent records, mention has been made of the bird’s slim appearance (e.g. antea, vol. xxxix, p. 186; vol. xlvi, pp. 260 and 261). Our impression of the Gladhouse bird was that it looked noticeably short-bodied and dumpy — an effect which was probably produced by the relatively short neck and legs. John Hoy, A. J. Smith and D. G. Andrew [.As a result of this record D. L M. Wallace has submitted to us a sketch of a bird seen by himself and other members of the Loretto School Ornithological Society at Musselburgh, Midlothian, on 9th October 1948. This bird was identified at the time as a Little Stint (C. niinuta), but the sketch shows clearly the diagnostic fea- tures of the White-rumped Sandpiper — white rump, poorly defined wing-bar, short, slender bill, and conspicuous eye-stripe — and we consider that the bird was probably of that species. There are, however, no supporting field descriptions, and the rest of the evi- dence depends largely upon the memories of the people concerned. It seems to us, therefore, that this 1948 record cannot be regarded as certain. The 1955 occurrence is the first fully authenticated one for Scotland. — Eds.] White- winged Lark in Hertfordshire. — At 19.30 hours on 12th .August 1955, following a period of north-easterly winds, a bird which was subsequently identified as an adult female White- winged Lark {Melanocorypha leucoptera), was seen by B.L.S. at the new Hilfield Park Reservoir, Hertfordshire. On the 13th and 14th it was watched by both of us and the following account is based on our joint field-notes. The bird remained in the area until the 17th during which period it was seen by various other observers including F. H. Jones and H. P. Medhurst. As the field-characters given in The Handbook (vol. I, p. 163) are rather scanty we give below full details of appearance and behaviour. In flight it appeared at first sight much like a Skylark (Alauda arvensis) with a lot of white on the wings. It was generally flushed by itself, but on one occasion when it was put up in com- pany with six Skylarks comparison showed it to be about the same size, though much heavier-looking; the wing length of the two species appeared about the same, but the tail of the rarer bird was shorter and square cut, though not as short as that of the Woodlark {Lulhda arborea). The flight was identical with that of the Skylark, and on several occasions it glided down in a similar manner with the wings held rigid and slightly turned down at the tips, and the tail cocked just above the level of the back. On the wing the large white patch on the secondaries, the white outer web of the second primary (i.e. the leading edge of 42 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX the wing") and the white outer rectrlces were all very prominent. Viewed from below, or when banking over, the white under wing- coverts were also noticeable. During five hours’ observation B.L.S. was able to obtain two good views of the bird on the ground, on each occasion at a range of about 25 yards. The upper-parts were dark brown, much darker than those of a Skylark, though the pale edges to all the body-feathers gave a distinctly mottled appearance. On the closed wings, which were ’held slightly drooping, the white area on the secondaries and the white outer web of the second primary were both very prominent ; the tips of the primaries were darker brown and there was a slight chestnut tinge on the lesser wing-coverts. Under-parts were greyish-white, throat pure white; breast streaked with dark brown fairly densely at the sides and more sparsely towards the centre; flanks streaked dark sandy brown. Cheeks and superciliary stripe whitish-yellow, lores and ear-coverts brownish with a dark streak running from the ear-coverts below the eye. Bill dark brownish-yellow, short and stout like a finch. Legs not seen clearly. No sign of a crest. The call note which was heard once or twice was very similar to, but distinguishable from, that of the Skylark. This bird showed a preference for a fairly restricted area of bare soil with short, sparse vegetation, but it often went to ground in very thick grass where it would stay until almost trodden on. Generally speaking it was a very shy bird intolerant of observa- tion on the ground, and showed a strong dislike of being away from cover. On the few occasions when it landed on bare soil it would 'stand very upright for a moment and then run very rapidly, like a wader, for the nearest tuft of grass where it would crouch down until flushed again. R. Meinertzhagen (“Review of the Alaudidae’’, Proc. Zool. Soc. Loud., vol. 121, p. 86) mentions this habit of squatting in cover. This is the first authentic record of this species in Hertfordshire and the 13th for the British Isles. Major W. Murray Marsdcn {The Field, vol. 174, p. 897) reported a supposed White-winged Lark at Great Gaddesden, Hertfordshire, on 20th April 1940, but the record was rejected. Bryan L. S.age and A. R. Jenkins Greenish Warbler at Fair Isle. — A Greenish Warbler [Phyllosco- piis trochiloides viridanus) was caught in the Gully Trap at Fair Isle on the morning of 15th July 1955 and was present during the next nine days, being recaptured on the 17th and 23rd, after which it was seen no more. The upper-parts were a greyish olive-green, greyest on head, nape and rump, with the green most marked on the edges of the flight-feathers in the closed wing. The under- parts were whitish with some streaky yellow markings on the breast (not visible in the field), the under tail-coverts and bend of the wing pale yellow, and the axillarics and under wing-coverts yellowish-white. There was a greyish sufl'usion on the flanks. The VOL. XLIX] NOTES 43 tail-feathers were brownish-olive, except for the smoky-white outer pair, and the central pair showed dark “fault-barring-” perhaps indicative of recent moult of these feathers. The wing- feathers showed more wear than the tail, abrasion being most marked in the right wing. The yellowish-white tips to the inner webs of the greater coverts and the long and almost straight super- ciliary stripe, extending nearly to the nape, were very prominent features in the hand and in the field. The bill, broad at the base, was dark brown on the upper and yellowish on the lower mandible ; the tarsi were purplish-brown and the irides dark brown. The measurements were: chord of wing 58 mm., tail 43 mm., bill from skull 12 mm., tarsus 19 mm. Its weight when trapped at 0640 hours on 15th was 7.75 gm. and when recaptured at 0940 hours on 17th, 7.68 gm. — exactly i gm. heavier than the example trapped here on 2nd June 1949. On 23rd July it weighed 7.39 gm. In the wing-formula the 3rd to 6th primaries showed emargina- tion and the ist primary was 7 mm. longer than the primary coverts ; the 4th and 5th were equal and longest, and the 2nd primary fell just short of the 8th. On the basis of C. B. Tice- hurst’s study of this group (A Systematic Review of the Genus Phylloscopus, London 1935) there can be little doubt that the bird was an adult female of the western form viridanus. The wing- formula of 2nd primai*y = 8th/9th is unusual in viridanus and prac- tically confined to females, which in the PhyUoscopi generally exhibit a more rounded wing than males {op. cit., pp. 20-21). The typical race has a longer bill and much longer ist primary, and since there is a complete prenuptial moult in this species plumbei- tarsiis would almost certainly show some evidence of a second wing-bar .on median coverts in July. The intergrade forms hidlowi and obscuratus are also precluded on bill-length and wing-formula. In the field the head, nape and rump were the greyest part of the plumage, the folded primaries only showing green. The under- parts showed no yellow. The creamy eye-stripe extended well to the rear of the eye in an almost straight line. The bird indulged in a continuous restless flicking of the tail and loosely-closed wings when seeking insects among the heather or the saplings in a small sycamore plantation, and a good deal of its time was spent in fly- catching. On one occasion it was seen to take a moth. Its flight was slow and fairly direct. When alarmed, it gave a musical disyl- labic call-note “chee-wee”. This is the third occurrence at Fair Isle, birds having been recorded on 2nd-3rd June 1949 {Scot. Nat., vol. 62, p. 20) and 19th September 1950 {antea, vol. xliv, p. 120); and it marks the eighth appearance of the species in the British Isles in the past ten years. Kenneth Williamson and Valerie M. Thom Greenish Warbler on the Isle of May. — On 27th August, 1955 a Greenish Warbler {Phylloscopus trochiloides) was trapped on the Isle of May by Miss F. E. Crackles and Lt. Col. H. G. Brownlow,' and examined by the three of us. It was not seen before it was 44 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX caught but was watched in the field on various dates thereafter by several observers up to 3rd September. It was retrapped on two of these dates and its weight was recorded as follows: 27th August, 6.8 gm. ; ist September, 7.6 gm. ; 3rd September, 8.2 gm. This increase is probably the replacement of weight lost on passage presumably over the North Sea. In the hand the bird was like a Chiffchaflt {Ph. collyhifa) but it had a well defined wing-bar and its under wing-coverts were silky white instead of yellow. Its lower mandible \vas yellowish orange. The emargination of the 6th primary was only slight. This emargination was distinct on one wing but less distinct on the other. In the field the wing-bar was hard to see but the general colour relative to the Willow Warblers [Ph. trochilus) was greyer. The wing-bar and the relative length of the 2nd primary ( — 8tli and =7th/8th) indicate that the bird was of the race Ph.t. viridanus. This is the first recorded occurrence of the species on the island. A. G. S. Bryson [Mr. Bryson has also sent us the full description taken when the bird was first trapped and this fully confirms the identification. — Eds.] Richard’s Pipit in Co. Donegal. — At about 4 p.m. on 19th August 1955, after some three days of strong southerly winds, I was looking for birds among the high sand-dunes above Tramorc Strand, Horn Head, Co. Donegal, when I flushed near a trickle of water in dense herbage a large, lark-like, skulking pipit which after a brief, direct, almost dunnock-like flight dropped again into thick cover. As it flew away it looked very dark sooty brown, with little or no trace of rufous, olive or huffish tinge, and the even darker tail was rather broadly margined with clear white outer webs. After being twice flushed it alighted on a more open sandy place where I was able to write its description as it sat eyeing me tensely for at least a quarter of an hour. The long, straight bill was deep and strong, and like the legs looked out of proportion to the bird’s size and build. The upper mandible was tipped dark horn, paler at the base; the lower was yellowish-flesh, and when at intervals it put out its tongue the inside showed orange-flesh and the gape blood-red. The head-pattern was distinctive. Under a plentifully flecked, dark brown crown, with possibly a suspicion of a creamy streak, ran a broad, creamy superciliary doubling round under the large, blackish eyes to form a faint and narrow eye-ring. A darker tract separated this from a crescentically curved creamy stripe below the eye, broadening into a moustachial streak to join tlie unspotted creamy chin and throat towards which converged a bold thrush-like pattern of large, heavy, blackish-brown striations or small patches, contrasting with the unspotted creamy belly. The very long, stout tarsus was flexed right back, and like the large toes was a distinctive coral or orange flesh-colour. VOL. XLIX] NOTES 45 On first alig-fiting- here it momentarily wagged its long tail up and down like a wagtail ; otherwise it was throughout tense, ner- vous and silent, although two or three times when it was out of view in cover I heard a weak, low, slightly finch-like chirp which may have come from it as I could find no other bird anywhere near. 1 flushed it without much trouble over a dozen times after flights of roughly twenty or thirty yards, and except on the one occasion it always slipped quickly into cover, even among herbage 1-2 ft. high. Once it alighted on dense marram grass and dived under towards the ground. The persistence of this unpipltlike behaviour and the strong preference for cover were the more marked as there was plenty of open sand and sward round about. The spot was about J mile from the shore, and over 100 ft. above sea-level. Compared with Rock Pipits [Anthus spinoletta) watched a few minutes earlier and subsequently, it appeared fully as large or larger, definitely longer-legged and deeper-billed, less grey, more contrasty and far more silent and less active. It was a much larger and heavier bird than Meadow Pipits (d.. pratensis) seen in numbers earlier the same day. It was like no bird I had ever seen except a Richard’s Pipit (d. richardi) put up from the flower-bed of a bungalow garden in Baluchistan on 2nd September 1952 — “which I at first took to be a bunting’’ (quoting from field-notes made at the time) “but after being flushed again it alighted on the edge of the lawn and proved to be a very large pipit with longish bill and stout, long, flexed, pinkish legs and long toes . . . the breast was in the centre quite heavily striated dark brown and the outer tail-feathers were white; the back striated dark and paler brown; it walked pipit-like but was a coarser, more stolid bird”. Reference to skins in the British Museum showed a good likeness to a female shot by Caton Haigh in Lincolnshire on i6th November 1912 ; there is appre- ciable individual variation but I am satisfied that there can be no doubt over the identification. E. M. Nicholson Unusual Yellow Wagtail in Shetland. — An unusual Yellow Wag- tail {Motacilla flava) was observed on marshy ground near Grut- ness pier, Shetland mainland, on 25th May 1955, by a party about to embark on M.V. “The Good Shepherd” for the journey to Fair Isle. The party Included Harry A. Craw and Donald M. Walker, who discussed the bird with me on their arrival at the Bird Observatory, and it was also seen by William Crawford, an outgoing visitor who wrote a description in the “Log” kept at Tom Henderson’s Hotel at Spiggie. The verbal accounts I received agree exactly with Mr. Crawford’s note, which reads : “.^11 of the party saw the bird two or three times for a minute or two as it moved about up to the pool. Apart from the fact that it was a flava wagtail — upper-parts olive and under-parts yellow — I noted that the forehead, crown and cheeks were uniformly dark, blackish. The nape was rather lighter and greyish in colour. 46 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX There was no eye-stripe, nor was any white noticed between the dark cheek and the yellow of the neck. The bird was seen at about 30 yards distance in good light”. It was thought at the time that the bird might be a Black-headed Wagtail (M. /. feldegg), but feldegg has a completely jet-black head and nape, and it seems much more probable that this was an example of the rather scarce variety of the Grey-headed Wagtail {M. f. thunbergi) which has an extension of blackish feathering beyond the lores and ear- coverts to the sides of head and crown. Although a name has been given to such birds, M. /. aJakidensis, by Grant and Mack- worth-Praed {Bidl. Brit. Orn. Club, vol. 69, p. 13 1 (1949) ), on the basis of a single specimen from Lake Alakul in Turkestan, it appears to be merely an individual variant which crops up from time to time over the range of thunbergi. When examining the flava collection in the British Museum (Natural History) recently I had occasion to write in my notes on thunbergi: ‘‘black of ear- coverts sometimes extends to surrounding feathers, above eye and even on to crown”; and there is a specimen in the Dresser collec- tion in the Manchester Museum which would meet Mr. Crawford’s description, and which was taken at Christiania (Oslo) in Norway in May 1870. Kenneth Williamson Scarlet Grosbeak in Yorkshire. — bird caught at the Spurn Bird Observatory, Yorkshire, on i6th September 1955 was seen before being handled to have a very stout bill and conspicuous whitish wing-bars. After detailed examination, in' which Miss A. E. Leach and M. M. B. Philpot took part, the bird was diagnosed as a female Scarlet Grosbeak [Carpodacus erythrinus). Subse- quently the bird was shown to Messrs. R. S. Pollard, E. W. Ellis, E. Andressy, A. Frudd and Mrs. Frudd. Mr. Ralph Chislett con- firms that this is the first record for Yorkshire. The crown, mantle and scapulars were fawn streaked with brown, the rump was unstreaked, slightly lighter in shade and tinged with olive ; ear-coverts and sides of neck were of a uniform dark fawn ; throat and breast light buff, streaked brown ; chin light buff, and belly pale cream, with under tail-coverts very slightly darker. The flanks were paler toned than the breast, with streaks less pronounced. The tail was forked, with rectrices and primary remiges dark brown, edged with greenish-buff'. The con- spicuous wing-bars were formed by whitish-buff tips to the greater and median coverts. The lesser wing-coverts were brown narrowly edged with cream. The upper mandible was leaden in colour, and the lower slightly lighter with a bluish tinge. From the nostril the bill measured 8 mm., and its depth at the nostril 9.5 mm. Legs and feet were grey-brown, and iris dark brown. The wing mea- surements taken supported the identification. While being trapped and also while being examined, the bird gave a solt, sweet-toned double call which might be rendered as ‘‘too-weet”. J. K. Fenton and H. G. Brownlow REVIEWS THE BIRDS OF THE BRITISH ISLES. ‘ By D. A. Banner- man and G. E. Lodge. [Oliver and Boyd, Edinburg-h, 1955). Vol. IV. 259 pages; 29 plates. 45s. The present volume is a worthy successor to the preceding- ones, but again whets the appetite for those which are to come. It covers the swifts, nightjars, bee-eaters, Hoopoe, Roller, wood- peckers, cuckoos and owls, and contains essays on 31 species, all but one of which are illustrated in colour by Mr. Lodge’s fine plates. The text is on the same generous lines as before and includes a 12-page account, with illustration, of the Black Wood- pecker. This species is retained in square brackets, but the pre- diction is made that the bird will soon gain a full place on the British List, arriving from Holland. The remarkable statement is made that Swans utilise the abandoned nest holes of the Black Woodpecker ! Dr. Bannerman continues his excellent policy of obtaining first- class help from observers who have worked outside this country on species little known here, among the most notable being Dr. Y. Hagen’s observations on Eagle Owl, Snowy Owl, Tengmalm’s Owl and Hawk Owl in Norway, details of which are not elsewhere available in English. The debt owed to Dr. H. M. S. Blair is very considerable, while some valuable notes on the Cuckoo and other species by Col. R. F. Meiklejohn have been included. Dr. Wetmore has written a large part of the accounts of American Nighthawk, Yellow-billed and Black-billed Cuckoos, but there is little information on N. American autumn distribution, migration habits or dates, or other points which could have a bearing on trans- .Atlantic passage. Under Blue-cheeked Bee-eater there appears the following state- ment : “ The announcement by the Editor of British Birds (xlv, 1952, p. 227) that an example of Merops superciliosus had been identified in the Scilly Isles is apt to give the impression that the bird was an example of the typical race of the Blue-cheeked Bee-eater which is a native of Madagascar and whose range is south of the Equator. There is little doubt (if any) that the bird was an example of the Persian race. It would have been well if when the announcement occurred some qualifying note had been added to that effect.” Most readers of The Birds of the British Isles will doubtless accept this as a fair comment without referring to the original account which appeared in British Birds. In that account, how- ever, which Dr. Bannerman must surely have read, the ranges of the various races of the Blue-cheeked Bee-eater were given, and it was stated “ It seems probable that the bird which she saw belonged to the Middle Eastern race.” It is difficult to understand why Dr. Bannerman chose to make his comment in such terms. P.A.D.H. 47 48 Ri*:\’ii>:\vs I M>l.. \l,l\ l-lKl'V V1':ARS ok B1RI)\\ AI'('11I.\(:. \W a. M. C. Nu noi.i.. {Joint Murniy, London, '-7 -8 platos. us. (ul. i Mu. Nu'iioi.i, has hroiit^ht loj^ollu'r a luimbcr of ploasanlly wrillcn but qiiilo slii^bl essays about birds, mainly in tlio wi'Sl country. 1 bey are illustrated by bis own photographs. He empbasi/i's the value ol biiles lor intimate observation, but miqbt ba\i- dc-seribed in rather more detail what be saw from such close (juartiMS. 1 le has sonu'lbinj^' interesting' to say about the notes of ('ueUoo and C'bailincb and anions^' several j^'ood pbotot;ra|dis is one of a Mi'adow Pipit belpinq' to feetl ;i ('uckoo in a W’bitetbroat 's lU'st. lie i dt'seribes an exciting;' ailventure on a clilf. In one chapter be qives e\ idence of the s^rt'at amount of destruction done by \ermin to the ej^'j^s and broods of joo nests that were Uej)t under special observation, claiming' that this far exceeds that done by human bird-nesters. I'bis is, of courst', true, but be must rcadize that these Joo nests, bv reason of their ba\in}^ been searched for ami discovered by man, were far more \ ulnerable than those that were untouched or m)t I'ven aiiproaclu'd. 'This must also apply to some work of the pbotoi^raiilu'r, who, in order to pbotoj;'rapb a bird satisfactorily at tin* nest, must at tinu's mo\e i twitfs or herbage and si> ex|iose it more readilv to Maqpie, erow or stoat that mi^bt otherwise ba\(' o\'erlook('d it. It was Lord (irey who sus^'^'esti'd that birds mi^bt wi'll sav ; “ 1 U>wi‘ver benevolent your intention, do not look for our m\sts.” .And cer- tainly the keen and increasing' body of bird watchers must Uxirn Ij to do their nestiiii^' with cart' and discretion. .A.W'.B. I rORO-C'ORO— Till-: world ok THIC Sr.ARLlCT IBIS. By Paul A. Zaiil. {I I mtiniotul , Hnninioml X- Co., Lt»ndon, 1055). 214 pa^'cs ; 41 Illustrations. iSs. 'riioSK who have read I'lattiiiiyo 1 1 mil, in which Dr. Zahl described l| bis search for the breeding;' i^rounds of the fast-disa|ipear- inq' Roseate b'lamin}.;'o, will welcome bis new book. The author is a biologist who writes with ('onsiderable charm. Ills latest obser\ations, on tiu' teeming' wild life of A'ene/iu'la, make ('xei'Ih'nt readinj4'. .Aidi'd by the National ( It'o^ raphie .Socii'tv, Dr. Zahl undertt)ok an arduous one-man ex|)edition, at the height of the rainy season, into the un-mapped llanos swamps ainon^' the upper tributtiries of the Oronoco. llert', after many abortivt' journeys, (irsl by duf^-oul canoe and eventually by lif^ht aero|)lane, he iinally loctited a breedinj^' colony of 10,000 pairs of Scarlet Ibis {(Inara rubra). Later, he succeeded in filming' them at close (juarters; the sj^ecies h;id never previously bt'en photof4'ra|)hed I at the nest. In the course ol tlu' ('xpedition, he also photof^raphed I other int('restins4 tropical species such as the lloal/in, the Maquari | Stork ;ind the Bo;it-billed Ni^'ht Heron. The author’s desc'iiption 1 of the return journey, in the eourse of which he and his native ) f^uide became lost in tIu' maz(' of water-ways, is \'ery vividly written. 'This well illustralc'd book combines ornitholof^ieal interest with :i line adventure story. 'I he scientific observations ari' written with intej^rity and the story with becoming' modi'sty. (LR.M. NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS Contributors are asked to observe the following points, attention to which saves the waste of much editorial time on trivial alterations: 1. Papers should be typewritten with double spacing, and on one side of the sheet only. Shorter contributions, if not typed, must be clearly written and with similar spacing. Failure to help in this way may result in delays to publication. 2. Notes should be worded as concisely as possible, and drawn up in the form in which they will be printed, with signature in block capitals and the writer’s address clearly written on the same sheet. If more than one Note is submitted, each should be on a separate sheet, with signature and address repeated. In the case of rarity records, any supporting description which is too detailed for publication should be attached separately. 3. Certain conventions of style and lay-out are essential to preserve the uni- formity of any publication. Authors of Papers in particular, especially of those containing Systematic Lists, Reference Lists, Tables, etc. should consult the ones in this issue as a guide to general presentation. English names of species should have capital initials for each word, except after a hyphen (e.g. Siberian Thrush, Yellow-headed Wagtail), but group terms should not (e.g. thrushes, wagtails). English names are those used in The Handbook of British Birds, with the exception of the changes listed in British Birds in 1953 (vol. xlvi, pp. 2-3). The scientific name of each species should be given (in brackets and underlined) immediately after the first mention of the English name. Sub- specific names should not be used except where they are relevant to the discuss- ion. It is sometimes more convenient to list scientific names in an appendix. Dates should take the form “ist January 1955” and no other, except in Tables where they may be abbreviated to “ist Jan.”, “Jan. ist”, or even “Jan. i”, whichever most suits the lay-out of the Table concerned. It is particularly requested that authors should pay attention to Reference Lists, which otherwise cause much unnecessary work. These should take the following form: TucKiiK, B. W. (1949); “ Species and subspecies: a review for general ornitho- logists.” Brit. Birds, xlii : 129-134. WiTiiERBV H. P'. (1894): Forest Birds: Their Haunts and Habits. London, j). 34. British Birds publishes material dealing with original observations on the birds of Britain and Western Europe, or where appropriate, on birds of this area as observed in other parts of their range. Except for records of rarities. Papers and Notes are normally accepted only on condition that the material is not being offered to any other journal. Photographs (glossy prints showing good contrast) and sketches are welcomed. Proofs of all contributions accepted are sent to authors before publication. After publication 20 separates of Papers are sent free to authors; additional copies, for wdiich a charge is made, can be provided if ordered when the proofs are returned. Various other conventions concerning references, including their use in the text, should be noted by consulting previous examples. 4 Tables should be numbered with Roman numerals, and the title typed above in the style used in this issue. The title and any headings within the Table should not be underlined, because this sometimes makes it difficult for the Editor to indicate the type to be used. It is most important that the lay- out of each Table should be carefully planned with an eye to its final appearance; above all, it should be borne in mind that Tables must either fit into the width of a page, or be designed to fit a whole page lengthways. All Tables should be self-explanatory. 5. Figures should be numbered with Arabic numerals, and the captions typed on a separate sheet. All line-drawings should be in Indian ink on good quality drawing paper (not of an absorbent nature) or, where necessary, on graph paper, but this must be light blue or very pale grey. It is best if maps, graphs, etc., are drawn twice the size of the final reproduction (ideally, therefore, for the normal 4" width the original should be 8" wide); sketches of birds, however, should be only slightly larger than the size at which it is intended they should appear. It is always most important to consider how each drawing will fit into the page. Unless the author has had considerable e.xperience as a draughtsman, all lettering, figures, arrows, etc. should either be inserted lightly in pencil or else marked in position on a covering sheet of tracing paper. In maps it is often desirable to have a tinted (stippled etc.) area, and this should be indicated by a light-blue colour and left to the engravers. WARNING to Bird Lovers. Now on the market are certain Nestboxes which are quite useless, both size and construction being completely unsuitable. Make sure YOUR Nestbox bears this label: — Tit or Robin 12s. 9d. Large Rustic Tit “ Observation ” {glass panel): solid bark slabs, 18s. lid. Rustic Robin 17s. 6d. Nuthatch 17s. 6d. Tit Bell 9s. lid. Peanut Feeder 11s. 9d. Rustic Food House 15s. 6d. Large Glass Seed Hopper 19s. 9d. smaller 12s. 6d. “ Bird Sanctuary ” Catalogue DEPT. 11, GREEN RIGG WOODFORD GREEN, ESSEX Binoculars and Telescopes New and Reconditioned, a good range at reasonable prices. Approval allowed, also part exchanges. Send for list and particulars. ALSO Binoculars and Telescopes repaired, cleaned and adjusted, send your instrument for estimate by return. Hatton OpticalCo.Ltd. Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. Telephone 3071. Established 1930 SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS WARDEN WANTED.— BARDSEY Bird and Field Observatory requires a Warden for Spring to Autumn service. Main duties are hostel-management and the organisation of bird-trapping, ring- ing and recording. Free accommoda- tion, fuel, part of keep and an honorarium of ;^ioo are offered. -Vpply to: W. M. Condry, Eglwysfach, Machynlleth, Mont. HEBRIDEAN CRUISES.— 12 and 14-day Cruises by Soft. Motor Yacht to VVestern Isles and Lochs. Fully in- clusive Fare (from (ilasgow) from 35 and 40 gns. Also 8-day Cruises (April/ May only) from 19 gns. Write Blue Water Cruises Ltd., Dept. BB, in, Union Street, Glasgow, C.i. FOR SALE. — Handbook, complete, mint condition, £6 6s. od. Bottomley, The Brow, .Skelwith Bridge, Ambleside. BIRD BOOKS BIRDS OF THE SUDAN F. O. Cave and J. D. Macdonald •A guide to the identification and distribution of all birds known to occur in the .Sudan. In addition to the twelve coloured plates there are over 300 line drawings by D. M. Reid Henry. 480 Pages. 12 Colour Plates. 45s. BIRDS OF BURMA B. E. Sinythies Provides, in non-technical lan- guage, a concise and accurate account of the birds of Burma with details gained at first-hand of appearance, voice, behaviour, habitat, food, breeding, status and distribution. 712 Pages. 31 Colour Plates. 84s. BIRDS OF ARABIA Colonel R. Meinertzhagcn, D.S.O. .\n account of the ornilhology of the whole .Arabian prMiinsula ,and the desert regions of .Sinai, Pales- tine, .Syria, Transjordan, and Iraq. The book contains ma])s of distribution, le.\t figures, a full bibliograph\- and a “Who’s Who" of Arabian ornithologists. 610 Piiges. 19 Colour Plates. 84s. Recently Published — Birds of the British Isles VOLUME IV D. A. Banncrinan and G. E. Lodge 280 Pages. 29 Colour Plates. 45s. OLIVER & BOYD Tweeddale Court, Edinburgh 39a Wcibeck Street, London, W.l Printed in Gt. Britain by Witmerby & Co., Ltd., Watford, Herts. Published by H. F. & G. WITHERBV LTD., 5, Warwick Court, W.C.i. BRITISH BIRDS m m V. "■ ,pyriU£«\'S'.-tt. BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MONTHLY MAGAZINE Edited by E. M. Nicholson W. 13. Alexander A. W. Boyd L J. Ferguson-Lees P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst Editorial Address: Fordlands, Crowharst,. Sussex. Photographic Editor: G. K. Veates Monthly 3s. Yearly 30s. Contents of X’ollme XLIX, Xomheu 2, Feuruakv 1956 Pace 'Plate I: Black Duck and King-neckeil Duck. Specially painted by Peter Scott ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Frontispiece Records of Wood Sandpii^ers in Britain in tlie autumn of 1952. B\' I. C. T. Nisbet ... ... ... 49 The migrations of British chats (Oenanlhe, SaxicoUt, Phoenicurus) as shown by the results of ringing. By .Sir .\. Landsborough Thomson, C.B., D.Sc. bj Delayed emigration of certain birds in autumn 1954. By J. .\. (i. Barnes. Part 1 — Summer-visitors ... ... ... ... ... ... 74 Birds of a transatlantic voyage in late spring 1954. By Mrs. .\gnes M. Thom ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 80 Notes : — Displacement coition in the Mallard (W. G. Hale) ... ... ... S4 Behaviour of Common Tern after eggs had been stolen (J. Grierson) 85 .\quatic Warbler iii Dorset (Dr. John .\sh) ... ... 85 Subalpine Warbler in Norfolk (G. II. .\cklam, John .Shepperd and R. A. L. Sutton) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 8b Starlings attacking field mouse (R. G. Finnis) ... 80 Review : — The Golden Eagle : King of Birds. By .Seton Gordon, C.B.F. ... ... 87 Letter: — Census of breeding Great Black-backeil Gulls (T. A. W. Davi.s) ... 88 t'over photograph by Eric Husking: Merlin (Ealco cohinibariiis) Plate I PS. <955 Upper: Black Duck (Anas nihripes), male and female ( 9' Co. Kilkenny, February 1954, see vol. xlviii, p. 341) Lower: Ring-necked Duck (Ayfliya eollaris), female and male ( Gloucestershire, I2th-I4th March 1955, sec vol. .xlviii, p. 377 (In each case the right hand bird is the one which occurred in Britain) Speeial/y painted for "British Birds" hy Peter Scott VoL. XLIX No. 2 FEBRUARY 1956 BRITISH BIRDS RECORDS OF WOOD SANDPIPERS IN BRITAIN IN THE AUTUMN OF 1952 By I. C. T. Nisbet INTRODUCTION During the autumn of 1952, as noted previously {antea, vol. xlv, p. 432), a considerable passage of Wood Sandpipers (Tringa glareola) was observed in many parts of Great Britain, particularly in the south-east. There is some evidence that the numbers of this species occurring on passage in Great Britain have been increas- ing, at least on an average, during the years 1950-54, but the numbers visiting the country in autumn 1952 seem to have been quite abnormal. For a variety of reasons the publication of this summary has been greatly delayed, but it is hoped that the conclu- sions drawn here will be of a general interest, apart from any value they may have in the study of migration. The records from which this account has been compiled have been taken from several sources : some were sent in response to the appeal' by the editors {antea, vol. xlv, p. 432), others have been sent directly to the author, and a number have been drawn from the reports of local ornithological societies, etc. ; a full list of records and observers is given in the appendix to this paper. Since the records used in a study of this kind are contributed voluntarily by a large number of ornithologists, many of whose observations are necessarily casual, a preliminary investigation was made of the records used here in order to assess the random- ness of the sample, and consequently the extent to which a detailed analysis was justified. This investigation cannot be discussed in detail here, but it was found possible to construct a series of arrivals of which the dates are known to within quite definite limits (often 24 hours or less), which is then quite adequate for detailed analysis. In particular, no detectable bias was found towards observations at week-ends, at least until the end of August, when the main passage ceased. Most of the records of large arrivals refer to week-days, and even the casual records are 49 50 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX more or less evenly spread among^st the days of the week. In view of this conclusion the casual records referring' to week-end dates have not been discarded, though they have been treated with considerable caution. Before the migration is analysed in detail an examination of the pattern of movement through the country leads to general con- clusions without which the detailed records cannot be interpreted satisfactorily. THE PATTERN OF MIGR.ATION THROUGH BRITAIN Geographical. The distribution of the records through the country follows the pattern which appears to be normal for the species, with much the largest numbers of birds noted south and east of a line from the Wash to the Solent; smaller numbers along' the east coast north to the Shetlands ; and occasional birds over most parts of England, and the west coast of England and Wales, especially in Cheshire, Anglesey and Cornwall. This distribution indicates clearly that the vast majority of the birds concerned reached Great Britain from the Continent by crossing the southern part of the North Sea or the English Channel, i.e. from north France, Bel- gium, Holland, and perhaps in some cases from Denmark. The possibility of approach from Norway is not ruled out, especially in the case of some of the northern birds, but the discussion below indicates that in all probability these birds also arrived from the more southern part of the North Sea. In view of the restricted breeding-range of the species, it may be assumed that all the British records refer to Scandinavian breeding birds, whieh have presumably reaehed Britain by mig'rating along the North Sea eoast. It may be noted that as the “normal” direc- tion taken by Wood Sandpipers leaving Scandinavia is due south (Svardson, 1953), the movement along the Dutch coast is essen- tially an oLitwash on the flank of the main passage of the species across Europe. It is therefore important to emphasize that this study is concerned only with the diversion of birds into Britain, and not with the main migration of the species. In all. Wood Sandpipers were reported from just o\er 100 localities in Great Britain in 1952, though at most of these only a few individuals were noted. The concentration of birds at particu- larly favourable sites is quite remarkable: at only 14 localities were more than six birds recorded on any one occasion, but at 7 of these the numbers reached 15 or more, and there are four records of concentrations larger than 25. In view of the known habits of the species it seems unlikely that such large concentrations can be explained as due to the arrival of a single large Hock ; more prob- ably the birds are prepared to fly some distance in search of a really favourable feeding-ground, even at the end of a long flight. The records may be summarized briefly as showing a sudden immigration into parts of southern England in early July, followed VOL. XLIX] WOOD SANDPIPERS IN 1952 51 by a period of scattered arrivals of small numbers before the main migration in larg'e numbers in Aug'ust. This may broadly be divided into several phases : a few larg'e arrivals in East Anglia in early Aug'ust, with scattered arrivals elsewhere, particularly in the north, from ist to 13th August; a large immigration experienced in much of E. and S.E. England from i6th to i8th August, and another, rather smaller movement, affecting a larger area, especially in the west and south-west, from 19th to 26th August. After this numbers fell rapidly, and no significant immigration was noted during September. Dynamic. With the limitations of the method of investigation, discussed above, taken fully into consideration, the movements of the species may be analysed in terms of two more or less contradictory assumptions which appear to be implicit in most of the previous work of this type on bird migration through Great Britain. The first theory, in terms of which the “Migrations” sections of The Handbook were written, and which was in vogue until quite recent years, assumes that birds crossing the North Sea into Britain arrive on the north and east coasts, and work steadily south and west down the various coastal “routes” and inland; the theory that waders follow well-marked and fixed routes across the country along river-valleys, etc., is a natural extension of this idea. The second theory, developed mainly in recent years, assumes that, on account of changes in meteorological conditions, birds are stimulated to migrate more or less simultaneously over a wide area, and in consequence arrivals in Britain take place on a wide front and over a short period ; in the case of waders it is often tacitly assumed that these “waves” reach the coast and pass straight inland, leading to arrivals over a wide area inland in a short space of time. For an example of this kind of hypothesis (applied to wader migration in spring) see Flinde (1951). This theory, with its emphasis on meteorological conditions as the primary factors controlling migration, has been closely associated with the development of the theory of migrational drift, discussed below. The first theory finds remarkably little support in the 1952 records of Wood Sandpipers. It is true that most of the records for the north of the country are for the period ist-ioth August, and that the largest arrivals on the East Anglian coast were in the first week of August, while the largest numbers inland and in the south-west were in the period i6th-28th August; but the numbers in this latter movement were so much greater than those recorded earlier that it is clear that they resulted from a separate influx into the country. Examination of the records from the south-west shows a close agreement between the arrivals there and the main movements in eastern England ; in the case of the Scilly Islands birds of 4th-5th July the correlation is exact, but the eor- 52 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX rcsponclence also extends to the main movements, between 17th and 26th August in the west and south-west, and between i6th and 28th August in the east. One particular case is even more illuminating. In the movement of 4th-5th July (discussed below) some twenty birds were seen in the Thames Valley, and others in Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Nottinghamshire; these dispersed slowly, some remaining until 15th July or later. The only arrivals reported in the country in the period 6th-i4th July, however, were the following: — Kent: — Grove Ferry, two on 6th July. Norfolk: — Cley area, three on 7th July. Devon: — -Exe Estuary, one on 8th July. Northamptonshire: — Ecton sewage farm, two on 9th July. Cambridgeshire: — Cambridge sewage farm, three on 9th July; one on 13th July. Cornwall: — Ryan’s Field, two on loth July. Leicestershire: — Loughborough sewage farm, two on 12th July. Middlesex: — Poyle gravel pits, two on 13th July. These records hardly suggest a southerly or westerly movement through the country by the birds leaving the Thames V^alley. This evidence suggests that many, if not most, birds leaving localities in southern England left the country altogether without halting again, and that many, if not most, of the birds recorded in the west and south-west reached these areas by direct westward or north-westward flight from the Continent, and not by overland “routes” after leaving localities in the east or north. The records available are not suOicicntly complete to disprove the “route” hypothesis completely, even for the one species in one autumn, but it is clear that the speculation which has already been made on the location of routes across the country would have been more profit- able if some attempt had first been made to prove the existence of the supposed routes. The evidence for the applicability of the “wave theory” to the migration of Wood Sandpipers is more equivocal. There is one good example of a wave in 1952 — on 4th and 5th July, when birds arrived at points as widely separated as the Scilly Islands, Middle- sex and Nottinghamshire. At other times arrivals extended over a considerable area in the course of a few days: e.g. between i6th and 19th August, when birds arrived in some numbers in the south-east (especially inland) and smaller numbers occurred west to Cornwall, Somerset, Warwickshire and Anglesey, and north to 5'orkshire and even Fair Isle. But on individual days in this period (and on 4th and 5th July also) the geographical incidence of the arrivals was extremely erratic, with large numbers occurring at a few widely spaced localities on one day, and at different places in the same area on other days. It should also be stressed that there is evidence of arrival of Wood Sandpipers at some localities on every day during the main period of passage, and that at some times — for example the period ist-8th August — the arrivals were so erratic as to provide clear evidence against the wave hypothesis. VOL. XLIX] WOOD SANDPIPERS IN 1952 53 Some other features of the movements also require extension of the wave concept. On 4th August (a bank holiday when records are full from many localities) some numbers of birds arrived at several marshes on the Suffolk coast. There are a few records elsewhere in the country suggesting arrival on that day, but the numbers are very small, and are probably not significant, so that the Suffolk records seem to represent a typical wave, but arriving on a front probably less than thirty miles wide. There is also evi- dence that at times such as the period ibth-iqth August, when arrivals took place over several days, the immigration was dis- continuous, with birds arriving once each day. It seems clear that if even a proportion of the records of Wood Sandpipers in 1952 can be interpreted in terms of waves, it is necessary to postulate waves discontinuous in space and in time, and at times extending over very narrow fronts ; in these circum- stances the concept of a wave loses much of its meaning. The very random and erratic nature of the migration, however, at least at certain periods in the autumn, suggests that meteorological factors acting over a large area, such as temperature, wind, cloud, etc., did not have a primary effect in controlling the migration of the birds into the country. On the other hand, certain features of the migration pattern — the continuous series of arrivals ; the res- tricted incidence of some of the influxes ; the geographical distri- bution of the records throughout the country; the suggestion of discontinuous, once-daily arrivals — suggest that many of the records may be better interpreted as being due to a continuation or diversion of a migration, locally concentrated in space and time, along the Dutch and French coasts, with the direction and dis- tance of flight after leaving the Continent varying from day to day and even from bird to bird. On this hypothesis the immigration into Britain would be con- trolled more directly by the local state of migration on the Conti- nent than by large-scale weather conditions, and it cannot therefore be expected that even a detailed analysis of the rather unprecise records available will give a precise estimate of the extent to which this generalization is true. Certain periods of the autumn do, however, give valuable information about the factors con- trolling the migration into Britain, and these are analysed in detail below. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF MOVEMENTS The theory of drift. The concept of “migrational drift” has attracted a considerable amount of attention in recent years, particularly as applied to the occurrence of migrants outside or on the edge of their normal range, and it is therefore natural to consider its relevance to the present case. Westward crossings of the North Sea form the classic examples for the theory, and in this case it postulates that migrants which are disorientated (e.g. by fog or overcast weather) 54 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX on or near the Continental coasts at night turn downwind and are passively drifted until they make a landfall. (See Williamson, 1952a and 1956, and references ibid.) Apart from the influx of 4th-5th July, for which the evidence is somewhat equivocal, only one of the large influxes of Wood Sand- pipers into southern England — that occurring between i6th and 20th August — carries any suggestion of having been caused by passive drift of this kind. However, the arrivals continued through- out this period, although drift was very improbable on the 17th, and the immigration progressed steadily after the 20th, when drift was quite impossible. In general the large influxes occurred with all types of wind conditions (though generally with unsettled, low pressure weather), and drift cannot be considered to have been an important factor governing the migration, although it may have aft'ected some of the movements. The small number of records for the north of Great Britain, how- ever, form an exception to this, and most of those which give exact dates of arrival occurred under conditions quite typical of drift. The Scottish records of Sth-ioth August are a good example of this — see Williamson (1952b). It may be concluded that only a very small proportion of the birds on the Continental coasts in 1952 were subjected to drift: their conspicuousness in the north merely reflects the greater efficacy of the drift process in diverting birds well out of their normal range. The “wave” of ^th-^ih July. The records of 4th-5th July have already been mentioned several times, and form perhaps the most interesting series of the whole autumn. The “wave” (which followed only two June records in the whole country) was foreshadowed by the arrival of a single bird in Norfolk on 3rd July, and reached its peak in the Thames Valley (Middlesex and Berkshire) on the 4th, with others arriving on the same day in Nottinghamshire, Cambridgeshire (4) and the Scilly Islands (5). Four more reached the Scillies on the 5th, when there may have been an increase in Middlesex, but the subsequent records (listed above) show no evidence of significant migration. This movement must be regarded as quite exceptional, and in view of the abnormally early date it is natural to assume that the birds concerned had left their breeding-grounds only a short time previously. Dr. G. Danielsson has very kindly sent me a list of the diurnal migration of Wood Sandpipers observed on each day throughout the autumn at Ottenby Bird Station in S. Sweden, which provides some kind of index of the migration of the species out of Scandinavia (see S\ardson, 1953). The only record from Ottenby in 1952 which can be linked with the English observations is one of fourteen birds on ist July; this figure is much larger than any other at the same period, but is if anything below the normal for a peak at this time of year. If this correlation is accepted VOL. XLix] WOOD SANDPIPERS IN 1952 55 the birds which reached the Scilly Islands on 4th July would have left Scandinavia about three days earlier, corresponding to an average speed of roughly 200-300 miles a day, and suggesting that they spent only a proportion of each day (perhaps four to twelve hours) actually in travelling. The relation between this movement and the meteorological changes immediately preceding cannot be established exactly, but may be summarized as follows. The migration appears to have started on 29th/30th June (probably in north-central Scandinavia, as the birds did not reach Ottenby until ist July) after a notable fall in night temperatures following the passage of a cold front — conditions similar to those described by Svardson (1953) as typical of those leading to the so-called “avalanches” of southward migra- tion at Ottenby. It seems then to have been further stimulated by good migrating conditions and a further temperature drop in S. Scandinavia on ist/2nd July, to have turned west along the Dutch coast on 2nd and 3rd July, either as the wind turned westerly before the passage of a cold front, or in the overcast conditions following it, and to have continued westwards into Britain on the 4th and 5th in overcast conditions with generally strong N.E. winds. (The latter conditions are suggestive of drift, but the winds as recorded in the Daily Weather Report were consistently between N. and N.E. (bearings 350-050) and the “drift” can therefore hardly have been strictly downwind, unless it originated from well to the north of the Dutch coast ; the places of arrival in Britain are also difficult to reconcile with the hypothesis of S.S.W. flight.) As the movement into Britain was exceptionally large, after a more or less normal exodus from Scandinavia, all these correla- tions carry some suggestion of causation, though this must be treated wifh reserve. In particular it must be stressed that these considerations apply only to the birds which reached Britain, and their relation to the other birds which left Scandinavia must be left open. It may be noted that the interpretation of this movement as having taken place in a series of five or six daily flights, averag- ing several hundred miles each, is in good agreement with the deduction already made that the records as a whole indicate long flights into and out of southern England. The influxes of 4th and 6th August. It is difficult to establish any connection between the abnormally large immigrations into Britain in August and the state of migra- tion on the Continent immediately before them. The records from Ottenby show well-marked peaks around ist-znd August (254 birds), yth-pth August (879 birds) and I5th-i9th August (159 birds) and it is tempting to relate these to the large movements in Britain in the periods 4th-6th, i6th-22nd and 23rd-26th August respect- ively. But although the total numbers passing Ottenby in 1952 were almost twice as large as those in either 1951 or 1953 (the 56 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XUX 733 birds counted on 8th August 1952 almost equalling' the totals for the whole of the autumns of the other two years) informa- tion very kindly sent by Mr, J. E. Sluiters indicates that they were not paralleled by any unusual numbers in Holland, so that in the absence of any detailed records for the latter country this correlation must be treated with considerable reserve. The dis- cussion of the later movements must therefore be confined to a consideration of the sea-crossings into Britain. Two large but localized arrivals which took place in early August are of special interest. The first was on 4th August, and affected the Suffolk coast between Breydon and Havergate only, about 40 birds being noted ; the second was observed only at Cley, Norfolk, where 40 or 50 birds arrived on the 6th. Except perhaps for a few birds on 4th August the other records in Britain at this period show no connection with these influxes. Both immigrations followed a long period of cyclonic westerly or south-westerly winds on the southern North Sea coasts, which lasted from ist August (the day of the peak at Ottenby) until midnight on 5th August. The 6th was mainly cloudy, with light rain in places, and was generally calm or with very light winds, which tended to south on the Dutch coast and to east in eastern England, but were much too light to have affected the birds’ course in any way. The arrival at Cley may be linked w'ith this change and fall in wind. On the other hand, no sig- nificant change in conditions preceding the arrival on the 4th can be detected from the large-scale meteorological charts, and this forms the only major immigration in the whole autumn which occurred in westerly wind conditions. The Suffolk records of 2nd and 3rd August suggest that some migration was taking place in Holland at that time, and the large arrival on the 4th may therefore have been due to a sudden increase in this migration — possibly connected with the movement indicated by the rush at Ottenby 2-3 days earlier. The arrivals between i6th and 28th August. The largest immigration of the autumn started on i6th August, and lasted more or less continuously until 28th August, the numbers which arrived each day decreasing steadily after the initial large peak on the i6th and 17th. The analysis of this movement is rather difficult, as many of the records indicate arrival dates which arc uncertain to within a day or two. The records fall geographically into three main groups, con- sisting of the arrivals between i6th and i8th August, those between 19th and 22nd August, and those from 23rd .August onwards. The first group is plotted on Map I ; the records in the second period arc grouped significantly farther south and west. The records for 23rd-24th August, a weekend, are mostly rather uncertain, and the subsequent records arc of too small VOL. XLixJ WOOD SANDPIPERS IN 1952 57 numbers to allow a detailed analysis, thoug-h the earlier ones at least seem to have been mainly in the south. The meteorological situation at this period was complex, with changeable low pressure weather affecting the North Sea area after another period of W. to S.W. winds in Holland. The possibility that the arrivals in the first group were caused by drift from the Dutch coast has already been discussed briefly ; it Map I — .-\ppRoxiMATE positions of reported arrivals of Wood Sandpipers {Tringa glareola) in Britain between i6th and iStii August 1953 may be added that an attempt to make a detailed correlation does not support this A'iew, although the winds at this time were predominantly N.E. Between igth and 22nd August the grouping of the records in S. England suggests that the birds left the Continent south of Holland : the weather here was over- cast at first, with variable or north-westerly winds, but was generally calm on the 21st and 22nd, with little cloud. The conditions prevailing from 23rd to 28th August are extremely interesting. A high pressure system was stabilized over S. England and N. France, with low pressure develop- ments to the N. and N.E. 'Fhroughout this period a westerly type of weather prevailed in Holland, with fairly strong' W. to 5vW. winds and variable, but mainly cloudy, weather; over N. France it remained calm and clear throughout. At this time the records are, though in smaller numbers, again grouped mainly in the south of England. The restriction to the period i6th-i8th August of the large 58 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX migration (with N.E. winds) from Holland into eastern Eng'- land, despite the continuance of similar weather until the 21st, sug'g'ests that the main mass of birds had passed throug'h Hol- land by the 19th — probably the sug'gested immigration from further S.W. from the 19th to 22nd refers to the same move- ment on the Continent. From 23rd to 28th August, however, birds continued to arrive in Britain, and it therefore seems likely that a further movement was taking place through Holland at this time. If this deduction is correct, it provides a further example of the correlation, noted several times before, of migra- tion through Holland with westerly wind conditions. The inland occurrences. An interesting feature of the autumn’s records is that the incidence of the arrivals inland varied from time to time. The first influx on 4th-5th July, and the large immigration in the second half of August, were both observed much more heavily Inland than on the south and east coasts, over which the birds may be presumed to have passed, but the arrivals on the East Anglian coast on 4th and 6th August were paralleled by scarcely any inland records. A very tentative suggestion may be made that this may be connected with the time taken to cross from the Continent to the British coasts. None of the large inland arrivals occurred with strong westerly or north-westerly winds, but the coastal fall on 4th August followed a sea crossing made against a force four westerly wind, and the crossing to Norfolk on 6th August was probably longer than those taken by the birds occurring at other times. It seems possible that birds which have flown for a short time only usually cross a coastline and continue inland, while those which have flown for a long time usually halt on reaching the coast. CONCLUSIONS It is difficult to make generalizations about the migration of Wood Sandpipers in 1952. Broadly, the migration into Britain seems to be a continuation of a westward migration along the Dutch, Belgian and French coasts, this being essentially a diversion from the main southward movement of the birds leav- ing Scandinavia. The factors inducing the birds to make a sea- crossing into Britain, and determining the strength and location of the arrivals, seem to be mainly local in character, and it is not easy to associate them with large-scale meteorological con- ditions ; nevertheless, certain tendencies do emerge from a study of the movements as a whole. In general, the movements are associated with unsettled, low pressure weather; there is a marked tendency for periods of migration through Holland to be associated with west and south-west winds, and with one exception the actual sea-crossings appear to have started at about the time and place that the winds ceased to blow from the VOL. XLIX] WOOD SANDPIPERS IN 1952 59 west. These correlations, being based on one season’s records only, are naturally tentative, but they may serve as a basis for future investigation. If this interpretation of the migration is correct, the cause of the large numbers in 1952 may have been the repeated occurrence of this type of weather in the southern North Sea area throughout the main period of passage of the species, but this question, and its relation to the suggested long- term increase in numbers, must remain open. Perhaps the most important conclusion of this paper is its interpretation of the migration as having taken place in long flights into and out of Britain, with the birds flying long dis- tances to find suitable resting-sites, and consequently the arrivals being distributed extremely haphazardly. In face of this conclusion the idea of fixed “routes” across the country and similar concepts based on the significance' of the place of arrival lose most of their meaning. In addition it is clear that migra- tion, at least of birds of this type, cannot be investigated ade- quately by observations at a few isolated points : only a wide- spread investigation of this kind can give an adequate picture of the migration as a whole. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Particular thanks must be offered to all the individual observers and editors of local reports who have contributed records, and whose names appear in the appendix to this paper. I am also greatly indebted to the editors of this magazine, and in particular to Mr. I. J. Ferguson-Lees, for every assistance in the collection of records, and to Mr. J. E. Sluiters and Dr. G. Daniels- son who have supplied most valuable information from Holland and Sweden respectively. Dr. W. R. P. Bourne and Mr. D. Jenkins have also given valuable advice in the compilation of this paper. SUMMARY (1) In the autumn of 1952 an abnormally heavy passage of Wood Sandpipers {Tringa glareola) was noted in Great Britain. (2) A detailed analysis is made of all records available, an assessment being given of the precision and value of this technique for studying bird migration. (3) 'Various assumptions commonly made concerning the autumn migration of birds through Great Britain are shown to be inapplicable to the case under discussion. In particular, directly- acting meteorological conditions such as wind had only a secondary influence on the main movements. (4) It is shown that the majority of the birds recorded during the autumn arrived by direct flight from the Dutch or French coasts, and that few birds halted at more than one locality before leaving the countr}^ altogether. (5) Apart from a “freak” influx on 4th and 5th July, attributed to a particular combination of meteorological changes in N.W. 60 BRITISH BIRDS I VOL. XLIX Europe, the majority of the birds recorded arrived in Britain between ist and 28th Auyfust. Tliis movement is broadly divisible into two phases: the lirst, between ist and 6th August, was noted mainly in East Anglia; the second, starting on i6th August, alTected most of southern England. (6) 'I'hc main movements are interpreted as a continuation of a westward passage along the Dutch and French coasts. The weather conditions under which this passage, and its continuation, occurred in 1952 are described and discussed briefly. KEI'KRLXCICS HiNDE, R. A. (1951): “Further report on tlie inland migration of waders and terns." Brit. Birds, xliv: 329-349. .SvARDSON, G. (1953): “ \'isible migration within Fenno-Scandia. ” Ibis, 95; 181-2 1 1. Williamson, K. (1952 a); “Migrational drift in Britain in autumn 1951.” Scot. Nat., 64: 1-18. (1952b): Bull. Fair Isle Bird Obs., No. 8. (1956): “ Migrational drift.” Pro. Xllh Iiil. Oni. Confer. 1054. WiTiiERBV, H. F., et al. (1938): The Handbook of British Birds. London. APPENDIX The following is a list of all Wood Sandpipers reported in 1952, from mid-June onwards, set out by counties. In some cases, where details are incomplete, or are published elsewhere, the records have been summarized. The abbreviations G.P. and S.F. tire used for gravel pit and sewtige farm respectively. SciLLV Isles. — Priglis Fool, St. .Agnes, 5 arrived from S.W. on 4th Jul>-, 9 from 5th-7th July, last 2 towered and ilew S. on 12th July; 2 on 19th Aug., incre.'ising to 4 by 25th -Aug., 2 present to loth .Sept. (Cornwall B.-W. and I’res. Soc. per A. G. Parsons). CoRNWAi.L. — Ryan’s Field, 2 on loth July; present for the whole of Aug.; 4 on 30th Aug., 2 from ist-5th Se])t. Penrose, i on loth Aug., 6 on 17th Aug. Croft Piiscoe Pool, Lizard, b on 19th Aug. Walmsley Sanctuary, 3 on 23rd .Aug. llayle estuary, i on 9th Sept. Lelant estuary, 2 from 27th Aug. -5th Sept. Dozmary Pool, 4 on 24th .Aug., i on 30th -Aug. (Cornwall B.-\\A tmd Pres. Soc. per A. G. Parsons; B. King). Devon. — Exe Estuary, i from 8lh-20th July. Teign Estuary, i on 2nd Oct. Lundy Bird Obs., i on 22nd .Aug. (Rep. Devon B.-W. and Pres. Soc., ig^2; P. Davis, R. F. Moore). •So.MEUSET. — Durleigh Reservoir, 3 on 27th July, 4 on 17th .Aug. and up to 3 until 2 ist Aug. Porlock Marsh, i from ioth-i3th .\ug. Minehead Marsh, i on ic)th Aug., 4 on ist .Sept. Blagdon Reservoir, i on 31st .Aug. (Rep. Devon B.-ir. and Pres. Soc., 1952; Proc. Bristol Nats. Soc., 1952; Rep. Som. /\rch. and N.H.S.; 2nd Rep. Mid-Som. Nats. Soc.; B. King). Isle of Wight. — A'armouth Marsh, i on 20th .Aug. Medina estuary, 2 on loth Sept. (Hants. Field Club per E. Cohen; M. C. .Adams, J. StalTordj. I Iampshire. — Farlington Marshes, i on 25th and 30th Aug., 4th, 5th, and loth .Sept. Dibden Bay, i on 19th and 21st .Aug. (Hants, h'ield Club per E. Cohen; D. F. Billett, C. J. Henty, G. H. Rees). Sussex. — Pett Level, 6 on 3rd .Aug. R. Rotlier 6 on 7th .Aug. Rye Harbour G.P., 2 on 26th July, i on 31st July and 4th .Aug., 2 on 15th .Aug. and up to 3 until first week in Sept., i on 27th .Sept. Thorncy, 2 on 8th, 14th and 16th .Aug., 4-5 on 24th, 28th and 30111-3 ist .Aug., 2-3 from ist-7th .Sejit., i on 13th- 14th and 2ist Sept. Chichester G.P., 2 on loth .Aug. Lower {'lukmere A’alley, 3 on 15th Aug. Midrips, 2 on 2nd Sept., 3 on 41I1 Sejit. Ri'cords from Wicks include 3 on i6th .\ug., (j on 17th .\ug., 11 on 21st .Aug., 18 on 22nd .\ug.. VOL. XLix] WOOD SANDPIPERS IN 1952 61 12 on 23rd Aug., II on 24th .\ug. 9 on 29th -Vug., 5 on 30th Aug. (Sussex Bird Report per G. des Forges; D. F. Billett, K. Brown, J. F. Burton, R. W. Crowe, I. J. Ferguson-Lees, C. J. Henty, B. W. Renyard). Kent. — Stone Marshes, i on 23rd Aug. Grove Ferry, 2 on 6th July. Cliffe, I on 20th July. Elsewhere, “between 13th Aug. and 14th Sept., numbers generally were much higher than usual, and birds were reported from 9 (mainly coastal) localities on 17 dates. On ii different dates 4 birds or more were seen, the maxima being 12 at Stoke on 24th Aug., 18 at the Wicks on 22nd Aug., and 5 at Backsand Point, Stour, on 13th Aug.’’ See also under .Sussex. (Kent Bird Report, and E. H. Gillham; London N.H..S. per G. E. Manser; Sussex Bird Report per G. des Forges; M. Barry, J. F. Burton, I. J. Ferguson-Lees, P. Gordon, W. G. Teagle). Surrey. — Esher S.F., i on loth Aug. Guildford S.F., 2 from i3th-2ist Aug., 8 on 27th Aug. Bellfields, 2 from i3th-27th Aug. Beddington S.F., i on i6th Aug., 2 on i7th-i8th Aug., i on 21st and 25th Aug. and 3rd Sept. (London N.H..S. per G. E. Manser; Guildford N.H. and Lit. Soc. per G. A. Hebditch; M. Barry, H. Bentham). Essex. — Abberton Reservoir, one bird summered, present (3 seen together, 5 ringed) from 5th-2ist .Vug., i on 21st Sept. (Rep. Essex B.-W. and Pres. Soc., 1952)- Hertfordshire. — Old Parkbury, i on 4th .Aug. and 20th Sept. Elstree, i on 29th .‘Vug. (London N.H.S. per G. E. Manser). Middlesex. — Perry Oaks S.F., at least 4 on 4th July, 10 on 5th July, decreas- ing steadily to i on 15th July; i on loth Aug., i from i2th-i4th Aug., 2 on i6th .Vug., 6 on 17th Aug., 17 on i8th .Aug., decreasing to 8 on 28th -Aug., i from 29th-3ist .Aug., 2 from i3th-27th .Sept., i on 28th Sept, and 4th Oct., 2 on 5th Oct., I on i2th Oct. Southall, i on i6th July. Poyle G.P., 2 on 13th July. Ponders End .S.F., i on 2nd and 20th Aug. King George \'I Reservoir, i on 24th .Vug. (Records collected by I. C. T. Xi.sbet and London N.H..S. per G. E. Manser; J. B. Lee Potter, J. Lord, M. F". M. Meiklejohn, C. -A. White, J. D. Woodley). Berkshire. — Ham Fields S.F., i on 29th June, '8-9 on 4th-5th July, 5 on loth July, I on 27th and 30th July, 2 or 3 on 8th, iith and 13th -Aug., 5 on i6th .Vug., i on 17th .Aug. and 4th Sept. Burghfield G.P., i on 4th and 24th July. .Alder- maston G.P., i on i6th Aug. Abingdon S.F., i on 20th -Aug., 2 on 24th Aug. (Rep. Oxford Orn. Soc., 7952; M. F. M. Meiklejohn, I. M. Walker). Oxfordshire. — Sandford S.F., i on 4 dates from i2th-2ist .Vug., 2 on 20th Aug. (Rep. Oxford Orn. Soc., 7952). Suffolk. — Walberswick, i on 20th July, 3 on 2nd -Vug., 2 on 3rd .Vug., 7 on 4th Aug., 2 on 6th Aug., i on 15th .Vug., up to 5 from i9th-2ist .Vug., 3 on 4th Sept., I from 5th-8th Sept. Minsmere, i on 28th July, 3rd-4th and 12th Aug., 3 on 14th Aug., 2 on 30th iVug. Reydon, i on 29th July, 4 on 3rd Aug., at least 26 on 4th Aug., 12 on 7th Aug., 5 on 9th-ioth .Aug., at least 14 on 14th Aug., 10 on 15th Aug., 5 on 19th -Aug., 2 on 28th -Aug., 4 on ist .Sept., i on 15th and i8th .Sept. Havergate, i on 4th-5th -Aug., 2 on 6th Aug., i on 15th Aug., 8 on 1 6th -Aug., 5 on 17th Aug., i on i8th -Vug., 2 on 19th -Aug., i on 20th-22nd Aug., i on 26th-27th and 29th Aug., 3 on 30th Aug., i on ist and 8th Sept, and i7th-20th Oct. Breydon, i on 4th Aug. Felixstowe Haven, i on 8th Sept. Redgrave Lake, i on 6th Aug. West .Stow .S.F., i on 23rd and 30th Aug. (Suffolk Bird Report per P.R. Westall, R.S.P.B. per J. H. R. Boswall; H. Bentham, R.S.R. F'itter, I.C.T. Nisbet). Norfolk. — Cley area, first arrival on July 3rd, increasing to 4 on July 7th and to 18 by i8th July; a gradual decrease thence to 4 on 2nd Aug.; a sudden increase to 40-50 on 6th Aug.; between 7th and 13th Aug. numbers estimated as at least 60; about three-quarters left on the night of i3th-i4th -Aug.; 20-25 on 15th and i8th -Aug.; about 15 daily to 5th .Sept., when another sudden decrease; subsequently only isolated records until 6th Oct., and the last bird noted on 14th Nov. Breydon, i on 4th .Vug. Norwich S.F., i on loth and 13th Aug. (W. F. Bishop, .A. H. Daukes, R. .S. R. Fitter, .V. H. Hunt, M. J. Seago, C. -A. VWiite). Cambridgeshire. — Cambridge S.F., up to 5 from 4th-i3th July, i on i8th and 62 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX 20th July, 2 on 29th July, i from 4th-6th Aug., 10 on 7th Aug., 15 on Sth-gth Aug., 4-7 from ioth-i8th Aug., up to 12 from T9th-25th Aug., 6-10 from 26th- 28th Aug., 2 on 29th Aug., I from 31st Aug. to 6th Sept, and on 8th Sept. Peterborough S.F., at least 31 on 17th Aug., 4 on 19th Aug., 7 on 22nd Aug., 2 on 29th Aug. and 5th Sept. (Cambridge Bird Club per I. C. T. Nisbet; A. R. Jenkins). Bedfordshire. — Willington G.P., 4 on 4th Aug. Dunstable S.F., 4 on 17th .\ug. (Bedfordshire Naturalist). North.amptonsiiire. — Ecton S.F., 2 on 9th, 12th and 13th July, i on 3rd and 9th .‘\ug., 3-6 on loth Aug., I on 14th Aug., about 30 on i6th Aug., 5-9 from i7th-2ist Aug., 14 on 23rd-24th Aug., 4 on 26th Aug., 6 on 27th .^\ug., 2 on 3oth-3ist Aug., 3 on 2nd .Sept., i on 6th-7th Sept. (.\. J. B. Thompson, M. F". M. Meiklejohn). Wiltshire. — Lacock G.P., i on 22nd Aug. (Rep. Wilts. Arch, and N.H.S., 1952). Warwickshire. — .Alvecote Pools, i from i7th-26th .'\ug. Rotton Park Reser- voir, I on 3rd-4th Sept. (G. A. Arnold, M. J. M. Larkin). .Anglesey. — Malltraeth Pools, i on 19th .Aug., 3 on 2ist-22nd Aug., 4 on 26th- 28th Aug., 2 on 30th .Aug. (J. Baldridge, A. \V. Boyd). Lincolnshire. — Gibraltar Point Bird Obs., 2 on 14th Aug., i on 15th and 17th Aug., 3 on 27th-28th Aug., i on 14th Sept. Brigg Ponds, i on ist and 28th Aug. Brocklesby Lakes, i on 17th Aug. Bishopthorpe, i on 15th Sept. (R. K. Cornwallis, S. A. Cox). Leicestershire and Rutland. — Eye Brook Reservoir, 2-3 on 12th Aug., i on 30th Aug. and 6th Sept. Leicester S.F., i on 9th Aug., 2 on nth .Aug., i on i6th and 19th Aug. Loughborough S.F., i on 12th July, i on 19th Aug., 2 on 23rd Aug., I on 24th Sept. Cropston Reservoir, 5 on loth-iith -Aug. (Leics. and Rutland Orn. Soc. per R. A. O. Hickling). Nottinghamshire. — Dunkirk, i from 4th-6th July. Nottingham S.F., single birds to a total of three in second week Aug., 7 on i6th Aug., i on 24th Aug. (Trent Valley Bird-Watchers per J. Staton; per S. Allison). Cheshire. — Altrincham S.F., i on 4th, loth and 13th Aug. Frodsham Sludge Pools, 3 from ist-9th Aug., 7 or more on loth Aug., 4 on 13th Aug., 2 on 17th .Aug., 5-6 on 2ist, 24th and 26th Aug., 2-4 until 6th Sept., i on 14th Sept. (Merseyside Nats. Assoc. Bird Rep., 1952-3; R. H. .Allen, D. M. Behrend, T. H. Bell). Lancashire. — Freckleton S.F., i on I3th-i4lh and 26th-28th Aug. .Astley Flash, I on 3rd-4th Sept. (T. Edmondson, N. Harwood). Yorkshire. — Cherry Cob Sands, 2 on loth .Aug., i on 23rd Aug. Rise, i on i6th Aug. Kilnsea, i on 17th and 23rd Aug. Swillington Ing, 2 on 30th Aug., I on 31st Aug. and 7th Sept. Ringstone Reservoir, i on iith-i2th Aug. Gouth- waite Reservoir, i on 3rd and 4th Aug., 2-3 on 5th Aug. (Yorks. Nats. Union Orn. Rep., 1952; I. G. Brown, H. O. Bunce, A. F. G. Walker). Durham. — Primrose Ponds, Jarrovv, 1 on 5th, 6th, 8th and nth Aug., 3 on 12th and 14th Aug., i on i6th Aug. Boldon Flats, i on 28th July and 2nd .Aug., 2 on 4th Aug., 3 on loth and 12th Aug., 2 from I3th-i5th Aug., i on 17th Aug. Teesmouth Mar.shes, 2 on 13th Aug., i on 14th, 17th and 24th Aug. (Per G. W. Temperley; F. G. Grey, E. Keys, I^. McGowan). Northumberland. — Monks House Bird Obs., 6 on 8th Aug., only 2 remained on i8th Aug., none by 21st Aug. Seahouses, 4 on 24th Aug. (per G. W. Tem- perley; J. Izzard). East Lothian. — Aberlady Bay, 3 on loth Aug., i on 17th Aug. (per Dougal Andrew). Midlothian. — Gladhouse Reservoir, i from ioth-3ist Aug. (Dougal Andrew). West Fife. — Shiresmill Pond, 2 on 12th Aug., i on 13th .Aug. (per Dougal .Andrew). Shetland. — Fair Isle, i from ist-8th .Aug., 2 from ioth-i2lh .Aug., i from i8th-2oth Aug., 3 on 21st Aug., i on 22nd .Aug. (Bull. Fair Isle Bird Obs., No. 10, 1953). THE MIGRATIONS OF BRITISH CHATS (Oenanthe, Saxicola, Phoenicurus) AS SHOWN BY THE RESULTS OF RINGING'' By Sir A. Landsborough Thomson, C.B., D.Sc. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the recovery records of birds of species of “chats” ringed in the British Isles under the scheme now managed by the Bird-Ringing Committee of the British Trust for Ornithology arid earlier by the late H. F. Witherby, Editor of British Birds. The group is for this purpose taken as comprising the genera Oenanthe, Saxicola and Phoenicurus . The number of records is small, but it seems convenient now to bring together the information that has hitherto been published only in a scattered way in periodical lists over many years. (There were no recoveries for any of these species under the former Aberdeen University scheme — A. Landsborough Thomson, Ibis, 1921, pp. 466-527.) The number of birds ringed and recovered, of those species of “chats” that have yielded records under the scheme, are as follows : — Ringed to Recovered Percentage 31.12.53 to 3I-3-55 recovered Wheatear 6,110 (124)114 1.9 Stonechat i)S03 (^5)i4 0.9 Whinchat 2,918 17 0.6 Redstart 5,553 45 0.8 Black Redstart 246 (6)3 1.2 (The recovery figures shown in brackets are those counted before excluding certain records as non-viable, for reasons given later under the species concerned; the reduced totals are used in calculating the percentages. Where birds are trapped for ringing, the chances of retrapping affect the recovery rate in the usual way.) The following is the age distribution of recoveries of birds ringed as nestlings, by years of life reckoned from April to March: — ist 2nd jrd 4th ^th 6th Wheatear 18 14(4-1) 5 Stonechat 9 i — i Whinchat 13 i Redstart 14 6(-|-i) 2 — i Black Redstart i — — — — i (The figure in brackets represents a bird recovered again in a later year. Although some other birds were definitely described by the ringers as birds of the year, the category is not sufficiently distinct to be analysed for age purposes, as some birds not so described may also have been immature, e.g. “migrant”.) The recovery records are summarized below species by species ; conclusions are then drawn under general heads. In the sum- * A publication of the British Trust for Ornithology, the Bird-Ringing Com- mittee of which is indebted to the British Museum (Natural History) for accom- modation and to the Nature Conservancy for financial assistance. 63 64 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix marics, the particulars of ringing- are given on the left and par- ticulars of recovery on the right. Wheatear [Oenauihe oenanlhe) Recovered in British Isles in year of ringing: Of those ringed as nestlings, or as “young” in the breeding- season, lo are excluded from the total of recoveries because they were found dead before they were able to fly; 9 others were recovered at the respective ringing localities later in the same summer. Of those ringed otherwise than as nestlings, mostly as young birds trapped, 33 were recovered at the ringing localities later in the same year. Recovered hi British Isles in subsequent years: Of those ringed as nestlings, 12 were recovered in the next year at or near the ringing localities — in one case 6 miles away. Early dates were i8th April at Skokholm (Pembrokeshire) and 27th April at Fair Isle. In three cases the birds were reported as nest- ing at distances of li and 2 miles from the places of ringing. Four were males, four were females, and in four cases the sex was not reported on recovery. A further 3 ringed as nestlings were found nesting in their third summer at distances of lOO yards, ^ mile and ^ mile from the places of ringing. Of those described by the ringers as young birds, mostly trapped, 14 were recovered in the next year, 2 in the third year, 2 both in the second and third years, i female both in the third and fourth years and i male in the second, third and fourth years, at the places of ringing. One of these birds (cT), returning to Skokholm, was recovered on 25th March in its third year and on 26th March in its fourth. Of those ringed as adults, caught on the nest or trapped, 5 were recovered in the next year, 3 in the third year, and 2 in both the second and third years, at the places of ringing. (Of the birds recovered in the third year, two were ringed as adult females on the nest and were nesting again at distances of J and i mile.) There are also the following records of return to places othci than the ringing locality : — 001376 3I-5-48 Skokholm, Pem- 10.4.49 Coventry, (pull.*) brokeshire, Wales (9) Warwickshire K 2122 3-6-50 Nr. Sedbergh, 12.4-51 Weybourne, (pull.) Yorkshire (d) Norfolk XH 653 2S-7-39 •Skokholm 1.4.40 Nr. .Stokenham (ad. 9) •S. Devon M 2294 23-8.51 Fair Isle 27-4-52 Nesting (sic), (juv.-ist winter) (nesting) Slietlaini (6o°i7'N. i‘’7'\V.) In the first three cases the distances apart are rcspcctivelv 170 miles N.N.E., 180 S.E., and 118 S.E. ; in none had spring migra- * “Pull.” is the term now internationally agreed for a nestling or chick not yet fully able to fly, and “juv.” that for an immature bird beyond that stage. VOL. XLix] MIGRATIONS OF BRITISH CHATS 65 tion necessarily been completed by the date of recovery, but the first bird may possibly have been oft' the line for an exact return. In the fourth case, the bird may have already moved from its native locality by the date of ringing : the distance from ringing locality to recovery locality is 55 miles N.N.E. Recovered abroad: LX 147 B 1083 6.6.52 (pull.) 28.6.48 (pull.) The Cheviot, Northumberland Nr. Padiham, Lancashire 24.8.52 Capbreton, Landes, France 30.8.48 Cap Ferret, Gironde, France 66 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX C 1821 27.6.24 (pull.) Nr. Tliornton, Brad- ford, ^’orkshire 2.9.24 Saint Palai.s- sur-mer, Charcnte Inf^rieurc, France K 842 19.5. 12 (pull.) The Fvlde, Lancashire 8.9. 12 Cazaux, Gir- onde, France ML 367 21.6.52 (pull.) Fair Isle •5-9-52 Capbreton, Landes, France CV 96 16.7.48 (pull.) Fair Isle 20.9.48 Bragan(,'a, N. I’ortugal LH 018 2.6.52 (pull.) Skokholm, Pem- brokeshire, Wales 26.9.52 I’uerto de Santa Maria, Cadiz, Spain MX 357 25-6.34 (pull.) Northmavine, Shetland 29.10.34 Khouribga, Morocco (70 miles S.F. of Casablanca) B 6839 8.6.26 (pull.) Port of Menteith, Perthshire —.1.27 Chavet, Traz- os-Montes, N. Portugal 10264 1.7.49 (pull.) Skokholm 21.8.51 Mimizan, Landes, France 14.4-50 25.6.50 (breeding) 6.5.51 (do.) J 8898 13.6.50 (pull.) Nr. Ulpha, Cumberland 24.8.52 Contis-lcs- Bains, Landes, France SL 518 18.6.46 (juv.) Skomer, Pembrokeshire 18.8.46 San Sebastian, Guipuzcoa, Spain 10480 16.8.49 — 13.00 hours Skokholm 18.8.49 — 08.00 hrs. Capbreton, Landes, France XH 281 7.8.38 (ad.) Skokholm 6.9-38 Dar bel Hamri (Rharb), Morocco (40 miles F. of Rabat) XH 315 30.8.38 (ad.) .Skokholm 11.9.38 Lacanau-OcCan, Gironde, France XH 291 < 00 00 Skokholm 12.9.38 Teste-de-Buch, .Vr. .^reaction, Gironde, France LI I 951 7-8-53 (juv.) .Skokholm •3-9-53 Gaillan, Nr. Lesparre, Gironde, France J 4309 28.8.50 (juv. — ist winter) .Skokholm 12.10.50 Jerez de la Frontera, Cadiz. Spain M 2361 3 1-8.5 1 (juv. — I St winter) Fair Isle ca. 10. 1 1. 5 1 Maubeuge, Nord, France X 9558 30.8.50 (migrant) Isle of May, Firth of Forth, Scotland 0-5-5 • Fdsbyn, Nr. .Soderhamn, F. Sweden (ca. 61 ° 2o'N. •5°4o'F.) CX 209 28.4.46 (ad.) Skokholm 23-5-48 R. OelfusA, S. W. Iceland VOL. XLIX] MIGRATIONS OF BRITISH CHATS 67 F 0011 21.7.49 (juv.) Fair Isle 1. 9.51 Cafiete de las Torres, Cordoba, Spain M 2103 18.7.51 Fair Isle (juv.) Ringed abroad, recovered in British Isles : 9.10.52 Azibo, Nr. Macedo de Calveiros, N. Portugal Copenhagen 6.7.48 872 203 (pull.) Nr. Jakobshaven, K’ek’ertak, W. Greenland (ca. 69°58'N. 5i°i5'W— nec 62°58'N.) 25-S-49 Letchworth, Hertfordshire (Brit. Birds, 1950, vol. xliii, p. 285; Dan. Orn. For. Tidds., vol. 44, p.169.) The recoveries abroad may be summarized as follows ; — Recovery area Number of records Range of dates N.E. France S.W. France N. Spain N. Portugal S. Spain Morocco I 1 1 1 3 3 2 lO.Xl iS.viii — i5-ix iS.viii 20. ix, 9.x, -.i i.ix, 12. X 6.ix, 2Q.X Sweden i g.v Iceland i 23. v The earliest dates for recoveries, in the first year, of birds ringed as nestlings are: — France 24.viii, N. Portugal 20. ix, S. Spain 26. ix, Morocco 29.x. The bird recovered in Morocco on 6.ix had been marked as an adult (on migration?) at Skokholm just a month previously. Stonechat {Saxicola torquata) Recovered in the British Isles : Of those ringed as nestlings, 6 were recovered at the respective ringing localities later in the same summer (not counting one that had never left the nest): 3 during their first winter 8 miles N., 30 miles N., and 45 miles W. of the ringing localities; i in its second winter 23 miles N. ; and i in its fourth winter 74 miles W.S.W. (Largo, Fife, to Georgetown, near Johnstone, Renfrew- shire). As it happens, all the winter recoveries relate to birds ringed in the southern half of Scotland. Of birds trapped, 2 ringed in October were recovered at the ringing localities in the following January and April respectively. Recovered abroad: B 43114 30-9-53 Portland Bill, 20.11.53 Santander, (trapped) Dorset Spain This bird was presumably a migrant at the date of ringing, and there is nothing to indicate what its native locality, or indeed country, may have been. 68 BRITISH BIRDS VOL. XLIX Whinchat [Saxicola rubetra) Recovered in British Isles in same year: Of those ring’ed as nestlings, 4 were recovered at the respective ringing localities later in the same year. Recovered in British Isles in subsequent years: Of birds ringed as nestlings, i was found in the following summer as a female sitting on egg's within 200 yards of the place of ringing (near Blackpool, Lancashire). Recovered abroad : Ten ringed as nestlings were recovered in their first autumn as follows : — LK 769 10.6.52 (pull.) Nr. Killin, Perth- shire, Scotland 4.9-52 Chantonnay, Vendee, France K 967 25.6.12 (pull.) Kinnelhead, Dumfriesshire, -Scotland 15. 9.12 Nr. Galgon, Gironde, France LR 868 21.6.35 (pull.) Nr. Kirby Lonsdale, Westmorland 19-9.35 Aubie et Espessas, Gironde, France L 6742 —.6.31 (pull.) Ingleton, W. Yorkshire 21.9.31 Paderne, Algarve, Portugal 11 7408 — .6.29 (pull.) Ingleton, W. Yorkshire late 9.29 Sesimbra, Portugal LB 699 '5-6.3S (pull.) Nr. Penrith, Cumberland —•9-35 Cenac, Gironde, France LD 7 13.6.38 (pull.) I^nugharne, Carmarthenshire, Wales —.9.38 Faro, .Algarve, Portugal LN 969 20.6.53 (pull.) Nr. .Ashopton, Derbyshire —.9.53 Alfandanga, Nr. Olhao, Algarve, Portugal MW 20 20,7.2c (pull.) Dalston, Cumberland 7.10.25 Cunha Baixa, Mangualde, Beira, Portugal Y 239 15.6.14 (pull.) Ingleton, W. Yorkshire 4, 10. 14 Nr. Lould .Algarve. Portugal Of birds abroad, as trapped for follows ; — ringing, the only- 2 recovered were both L 0402 8-5-5I isle of May, Firth of Forth, Scotland 20.9.51 Nr. Coimbra, Portugal R 29852 27.8.53 Seahouses, ca. 20.11.54 Northumberland Nr. Louie, -Algarve, Portugal The recoveries abroad may be summarized as follows; — - Recovery area Number of records Rauffe of dates \V. France 7 4.ix S.W. France 3 i.vi^', iQ.ix, -.ix Portugal 8 -.ix, 20. ix — ca. 20. xi .Ml the birds were ringed as nestlings in the year of recovery, cxcejjt two ftrapped) of those recovered in Portugal — including the one with the late date. VOL. XLIX] MIGRATIONS OF BRITISH CHATS 69 Redstart [Phoenicurus phoenicunis) Recovered in British Isles in same year: Of those ring^ed as nestlings, 6 were recovered later in the same summer at or near the ringing' localities. Of those ringed as migrants in autumn or spring (at the Isle of May and Spurn Head Bird Observatories, with two exceptions), i6 were retrapped after the following intervals: — next (2nd) day, 7; 3rd day, 5 (2 of them also on 2nd); 4th day, 2 (i also on 2nd); 5th day, i; 6th day, i. So far as can be seen by an examination of the records themselves, with the aid of a perpetual calendar, there does not appear to be any notable excess of trapping on particular days of the week such as might introduce a bias in favour of short periods ; the intervals thus give some indication of the length of stay. There is also the following case: — B 26967 25-4-S4 Sandwich, 10.6.54 Nr. Loch (ad.d) Kent Ailort, Inverness-shire, Scotland Recovered in British Isles in subsequent years : Of birds ringed as nestlings, 5 were recovered in the next year. I in the third year. I both in the next and the third year, and i ( 9 ) in the fifth year, , all at or near the ringing localities. Of birds ringed as breeding females, i was recovered in the next year. I in the third year, and i both in the next and the third year. at or near the places of ringing. Recovered abroad: NC 491 8.6.52 Kielder Forest, ca. 16.9.52 Nr. Viseu, (pull.) Northumberland Portugal K 4206 9.6.50 Forest of Dean, 25-9-50 Bragan^a, (pull.) Gloucestershire N. Portugal EM 179 14.6.38 Ullswater, 26.9.38 Amiera, (pull.) Westmorland Portalegre, Alentejo, Portugal KK 956 9-6.53 Forest of Dean 30-9-53 Pradilla de (pull.) Ebro, Zaragoza, Spain (41 °52'N. I ° i6'W.) AK 81 16.6.15 Leek, 1. 10.15 Nr. Niza, (pull.) Westmorland Alentejo, Portugal B 22452 6.6.53 Nr. Kendal, 1-10.53 Vitoria, .-Vlava, (pull.) Westmorland .Spain NW 34 9.7. 20 Nr. Cheadle, 2. II. 20 Osses, Basses- (pull.) Staffordshire Pyren6es, France B 11632 12.6.53 Everingham, 16.9.54 .-Mcobendas, (pull.) Yorkshire Madrid, Spain (40°34'N. 3°38'W.) JD 22 r 12.9.52 Gibraltar Point, 5-10.52 Mazan, \'au- (juv. 9) Lincolnshire cluse, France 70 BRITISH BIRDS 1 VOL. XLIX JD 366 1. 10.52 (?) Gibraltar Point 9.10.53 Nr. Cabra, Cordoba, Spain HP 35^ 29.4.38 Skokholm, — -10.39 Xiza, Alentejo, (?) Pembrokeshire Portugal '^iUs Fig. 2 — Recoveries of Redstarts ringed in the British Isles + Redstart {Phoenicurus phocnicurus). Ringed abroad, recovered in British Isles : Helgoland 18.5.50 Wangerooge, 1 1. 5. 51 Holy Isle, 9 372 823 (?) E. Frisian Is., Northumber- Germany land (Brit. Birds, 1952, vol. xlv, p. 459). Radolfzell 2-9-53 Ottenby, Oland, '5-9-S3 Sandwich, K 26 637 (9) .Sweden Kent (fide Iv. P. Leach) VOL. XLix] MIGRATIONS OF BRITISH CHATS 71 The recoveries abroad may be summarized as follows; — Recovery area Number of records Range of dates S.W. France S.E. France N. Spain Portugal S. Spain I I 0 5 1 2.xi 5-x i6.ix to i.x ca. i6.ix to -.X 9.x The earliest dates for the recovery, in the first year, of birds ringed as nestlings are: — France 2.xi, Spain 30. ix, Portugal ca. 16. ix. The easterly loca- tion of two of the recoveries in N. Spain is notable. Bl.\ck Redstart (Phoenicurus ochruros) Recovered in British Isles in same year: Three records are excluded — 2 nestlings found dead at nest and one migrant caught at sea and found dead at place of release on land within two days. There is i record of a nestling recovered later in the summer at the same place. Recovered in British Isles in a subsequent year: B 4570 3-7-47 Pett Level, 21.6.52 Dover, (pull.) Sussex (breeding d) Kent The distance is 31 miles N.E. ; the bird was in its sixth year when recovered. Recovered abroad : LV 208 12.4.53 Isle of May, ca. 27.6.53 (migrant?) Firth of Forth Ringed abroad, recovered in British Isles : Helgolatid I5-7-5I Halle a/d Saale, 27.10.51 8 705 248 (pull.) Saxon Anhalt, Germany (5i°28'N. ii°58'E.) [Brit. Birds, 1952, vol. xlv, p. 459.) GENERAL CONCLUSIONS Recovery statistics. The proportion of ringed birds recovered (excluding non-viable cases) ranges from 0.6 per cent, for the Whinchat to 1.9 per cent, for the Wheatear. The figures are fortuitously affected by retrap- ping at some ringing localities, and no useful deduction can be drawn. Tabulation of recoveries by years of life (for birds ringed as nestlings) shows the usual picture of predominant mortality in the first year. Local movements . It seems remarkable that there are no recoveries at all during Elbingerode, Harz, Germany (5i°47'N. io°47'E.) Spurn Head, Yorkshire ^ 72 BRITISH BIRDS [ VOL. XLIX the autumn from the British Isles, such as would indicate the pre- emigratory movements of the summer visitant species. In the case of the resident Stonechat there are a few winter records showing local movement up to 74 miles W.S.\\\ (and up to 30 miles N.). Return in subsequent years. For two of the summer visitant species, Wheatear and Redstart, there are numerous records showing" exact return to the native or former breeding" localities, both in the year following" ring"ing and in later years. In the case of the Wheatear this applies, in a small proportion of instances, to both sexes ; in the Redstart, so far as the records show, only to the female. For the Whinchat there is a single record — a female breeding" at its native locality. In the case of the Black Redstart (not necessarily emig"ratory) there is a record of a male breeding in its sixth }’ear 31 miles from its native locality. There is not sufficient evidence to show the j deg"ree of constancy to native locality in the case of the Stonechat. For none of the species is there any evidence of even occasional return to other than the original area, althoug"h one or two spring" records for the Wheatear may be equivocal as regards the deg"ree of accuracy of return. Southward in Igra lion. In the case of the Wheatear, one record from N.E. France in November is exceptional both as regards place and date. Other- wise the records for southward migration arc all from S.W. France (ii), W. Spain and Portugal (7), and Morocco (2). All of these, except one from Portugal in January, fall in the period from mid-August to October. The records for the Whinchat are from W. France (i), S.W. France (3), and Portugal (8), in the period from September to November. The only record showing emigration on the part of the largely resident Stonechat is from N. Spain in November. The records for the Redstart are from S.W. France (i), S.E. France (i), and Spain and Portugal (9). Two of the records from N. Spain are from localities notably far towards the east side. All the records fall in the period from mid-September to very early November. There is thus an indication of a more easterly trend on the part of the Redstart, as compared with the Wheatear and Whinchat : the distribution of the records may be described as continental rather than coastal. There is only one record for the Redstart from S.W. France, the area which yields most records for the Wheat- ear; two of the .Spanish records are far distant from the .Atlantic seaboard; and the record from S.E. France suggests a possible further progress through Italy. More records for this species are required. All but one of the records arc for the autumn and none for the spring ; the predominance of autumn records has been noted in VOL. XLix] MIGRATIONS OF BRITISH CHATS 73 various other species, and the fact that the return movement in springs is unrecorded must be attributed to factors which lessen the chances of recoveries. The total absence of records from tropical Africa (Wheatear, Whinchat, Redstart) is explicable in the same way and is correlated with the almost complete absence of winter records ; similarly, only tbe Wheatear has yielded recoveries from N. Africa, through which the Whinchat and Redstart must also pass. Other movements . Summer records of the Wheatear from Sweden, Iceland and Greenland, and of the Redstart from N.W. Germany and Sweden, indicate the breeding area of birds coming through the British Isles on passage. The Wheatear from Greenland can be ascribed to the race Oe. oe. leucorrhoa. The two overseas records for the Black Redstart are of special interest. The bird native to N. Germany and recovered on the Yorkshire coast in its first autumn shows a movement in a W.N.W. direction. The female on spring migration in the Firth of Forth and recovered in N. Germany before the end of June in the same year shows a movement to the S.E. It is a matter of speculation whether it was a German native bird off its course on the first occasion but eventually finding' its proper area, or a bird originally on its proper course and subsequently displaced to an abnormal summer area. In either event there are the facts that the capture for ringing coincided with a period of S. or S.W. winds and was shortly followed by wintry weather and winds in the direction from Scotland to N. Germany. (Note on meteoro- logical position by Professor H. Seilkopf of Hamburg', communi- cated by' the Vogelwarte Radolfzell). Miscellaneous. Not often does a recovery record give an indication of the dis- tance covered by a migrant within one or two days. Of interest, therefore, is the case of a Wheatear recovered in France, at a distance of about 585 English miles, 43 hours after it was ringed in Wales. Retrapping of Redstarts ringed on migration, mainly at bird observatories on the east coast of Great Britain, has shown that some are still present after one or two days, and a smaller number after from three to five days. DELAYED EMIGRATION OF CERTAIN BIRDS IN AUTUMN 1954 By J. A. G. Barnes PART I SUMMER-VISITORS Several notes received by the Editors of British Birds in the winter of 1954-55 confirmed the impression of some individual observers that the departure of migratory birds, both summer- visitors and passag’e-mig'rants, had been unusually delayed in the autumn of 1954. Appeals for information on this subject in British Birds, The Field and Country Life brought only a moderate response, but a number of County Recorders kindly sent details of late occurrences in advance of publication and further data have been obtained from County and other local reports. The writer is greatly indebted to Mr. I. J. Ferguson- Lees for his help and advice in the preparation of this paper. A study of the collected notes shows that the delay in departure did not affect all species, but for several there was an exceptional number of late records. Birds which do not breed in southern liritain will be treated separately in the second part of this report, but of the breeding species the Yellow Wagtail provided the most striking example of delayed emigration : there were not less than thirty occurrences, some of considerable numbers, within the range of late dates given in The Handbook of British Birds (H. F. Witherby et al. 1938-41), though it should be added that there have been rather more October records of this species in several recent years than there were before 1940. Six or more “ late dates ” were added to those given in The Handbook for Sand Martin, Sedge Warbler and Reed Warbler, and there were several also for Common or Arctic Tern, Whinchat, Chiffehaff and Pied Flycatcher, while Swifts, Swallows and House Martins were seen later than usual in many districts. An analysis of the late dates given for summer-resident species in The Handbook for the years 1900 to 1937, inclusive, shows that a total of 13 was recorded in 1911, 12 in 1912, 1 1 in 1910, 10 in 1935, and from o to 9 in the other years. Even when allowance is made for the better cover of the country by bird-watchers and local reports in recent years it is clear that the number of delayed departures in 1954 was exceptional, and indeed probably unique in this century. A short account of the weather conditions in the last four months of 1954, taken from the Monthly Reports of the Meteorological Office, will be given at the end of the second part of this paper. In brief, after a cool, wet, unsettled summer, the autumn of 1954 was generally mild, wet and stormy, with 74 VOL. XLix] DELAYED EMIGRATION : 1954 75 no prolonged period of anticyclonic conditions. It may be suggested that two factors were concerned in the large number of late occurrences of certain species : a hold-up of departures owing to the lack of favourable weather for migration, and a high rate of survival of lingering birds because of the absence of early frosts and consequent abundance, for the time of year, of insect food. In the following summary of the more significant records for each species the normal time of departure is quoted from The Handbook, and details are given of any occurrences falling within the range of late dates given in that work. Common Sandpiper {Tringa hypoleucos). — “ Single birds fairly often recorded in winter in various parts of England, Wales and Ireland. Emigration ... to end September with stragglers to second week October.” Late migrants or wintering birds were recorded as follows : One at Mucking, Essex, 7th November; one at Teesmouth, Durham, 24th and 31st October, 14th November; two on River Medina, Isle of Wight, 5th Decem- ber; one at Egypt Bay and one at King’s Ferry, Kent, in Decem- ber; one at Chew Valley Reservoir, Somerset, 28th December; one on Taf Estuary, Carmarthenshire, ist January 1955; singles wintered on Rivers Exe, Clyst, Tamar and Torridge in Devon- shire. Common Tern {Sterna hirundo) and Arctic Tern {Sterna macrura). Owing to the difficulty of identification of these species, especially in autumn, they are taken together. When the species has been stated this is given in brackets, but the writer of this paper has not seen evidence of identification in any case. It should be noted that a late date for a Common Tern (“ passage south ... to mid-October”) is not necessarily one for an Arctic (‘‘passage south ... to second week October, with frequent stragglers to end of month ”). Terns recorded as Common were seen in Lancashire on i6th October and in the Isle of Wight on the 17th. 23rd October: One on The Wash, Lincolnshire. 24th October: One on Cheddar Reservoir, Somerset. 27th October: One at Spurn Head, Yorkshire. 31st October: One (Arctic) at Hilbre Island, Cheshire. 7th November: One (Common) on River Yealm, Devon. 13th November: An immature off Joppa, near Edinburgh. 2ist November: One at Blithfield Reservoir, Staffordshire. 5th December: One near Bridlington, Yorkshire. 19th to 2ist December: One over Ramsgate Harbour, Kent. Little Tern {Sterna albifrons). — ” Passage south ... to end September with stragglers to first week October.” 30th October: 3 seen at close range at Belvide, Staffordshire. 76 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Southward passage Sandwich Tern {Sterna sandvicensis). — “ . . . to second week October.” 23rd October: One or two in Welland Estuar}’, Lincolnshire. Turtle Dove {Streptopelia turtiir). — ‘‘ Summer residents . . . leave early August to first week October.” 2ist October: One at Layer Breton, Essex. 5th November: 6 at New Mill End, Hertford-Bedfordshire border. Cuckoo {Cuculus canorus). — ” Adults ... up to last week August. Juveniles leave during August and first half September.” 2nd October: One at Kirby-le-Soken, Essex. Nightjar (Caprtmidgiis europaeus). — ‘‘ Emigration . . . lasts to third or fourth week September.” Single birds were recorded in Norfolk and Sussex on 26th and 28th September respectively, and one was identified ” with little doubt ” on Lundy on 22nd October. Swift {A pus apus). — ‘‘ Movement continues to end August, with frequent stragglers first half September and occasional ones to first week October.” There were 8 records for the last week of September, including one in Northumberland on the 26th, and 5 for the first week of October. i6th October: One at Leicester. 19th October: One at Spurn Head, Yorkshire. Swallow {Hirundo riistica). — “ Passage and emigration con- tinue to nearly end October. Stragglers frequent in November up to end third week. Very numerous isolated records after third week November, may relate to wintering birds.” There were November occurrences in many parts of England and Wales, and the following single birds were recorded in December: On ist and 3rd at Redcar, Yorkshire; on 4th at Skirlaugh, Yorkshire; on 5th at East Tilbury, Essex; on 8th at Lytham, Lancashire; on 31st near Berwick-on-Tweed. House Martin {Delichon urbica). — ‘‘ Emigration . . . lasts to third week October, stragglers frequent to mid-November and occasional to first week December.” There were 19 November records, mostly single birds in the South and Midlands, but in- cluding one near Edinburgh on the 7th and 5 at Tenby, Pembroke- shire, on the 13th. Two were seen at Langley Point, Sussex, on 4th December, and two near Bridlington, Yorkshire, on the 5th. [i6th January 1955: Two almost certainly indentified oil' Sand- banks, Dorset.] Sand Martin {Riparia riparia). — ‘‘Emigration ... to end third week September. Stragglers frequent to mid-October.” There VOL. XLix] DELAYED EMIGRATION: 1954 77 were 6 records for the first half of October, including- one in North Westmorland on the 13th. i6th October: 700 at King-sdown, Kent, and 9 at Spurn Head, Yorkshire. 19th October: Last seen on Lundy, Devon. 20th October: One at Little Eaton, Derbyshire. 22nd October: 7 over Hove, Sussex. 26th October : One at Leewick, Essex. 30th October: 5 flying W.S.W. over Dungeness, Kent. 25th November: Two over Mansfield Camp, Uckfield, Sussex. Ring Ouzel [Turdiis torquatus). — “ Departure movements . . . continue to first week November. Records between mid-Novem- ber and mid-February may relate to wintering birds.” Single birds were seen in Sussex and Essex on 6th and 14th November respectively. One at Sevenoaks, Kent, on 6th December and one at Clift'e, Kent, on the 7th. An adult cock was seen on Staines Moor and near George VI Reservoir, Middlesex, from January to April 1955. Wheatear [Oenanthe oenanthe). — “ Movement . . up to third week October. Stragglers continue to pass in most years up to mid-November.” There were four records for the first week of November. 19th November: One at Titchfield Haven, Hampshire. Whinchat {SaxicoJa rubetra). — ‘‘ Emigration ... to fourth week September. Stragglers in most years to second week October.” i6tlr October : One at Seaford, Sussex. 20th November: A female at St. Leonards, Sussex. 2ist November: One at Bulverhithe, Sussex. Grasshopper Warbler [Locustella naevia). — ‘‘ Departure . . . lasts to end of September.” 2nd October: One near Walmer Castle, Kent. Reed Warbler {Acrocephalus scirpaceus). — ‘‘ Departure . . . lasts to end September.” A juvenile was still being fed by parents at Cley, Norfolk, in ” early October.” 2nd October: One on Cambridge Sewage Farm. 9th October: One on Lundy, Devon. iith October: One on the Crumbles, Sussex. 13th October: One roosting in hedge at St. Osyth, Essex. Sedge Warbler [Acrocephalus schoenobaenus). — ” Departure to end September.” 2nd October: One on Farlington Marshes, Hampshire; one 78 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix at Chart Sutton, Kent; one at Chesterton Fen, Cambridgeshire. 6th October: Two on Pett Level, Sussex. gth October: One at Rodbourne Sewage Farm, near Swindon, Wiltshire. There were up to three on the Crumbles, Sussex, during the first week of October, two on the nth and 12th, one on the 14th. Garden Warbler (Sylvia borin). — “ Southward movement . . . to first few days October. Occasional later stragglers October gth — 26th.” 6th November: One caught at Spurn Head, Yorkshire. Whitethroat (Sylvia communis). — “ Southward movement . . lasts till mid-October. Stragglers recorded several times in November up to the loth.” gth November: One at Hadleigh, Essex. Lesser Whitethroat (Sylvia curruca). — “ Southward move- ment ... to first week October., stragglers frequent to mid- October.” i2th — igth November: One seen on five of these days on Lundy, Devon. 24th November — loth December: One at North Fambridge, Essex. The Handbook gives only one later date. Willow Warbler (Phylloscopiis trochilus). — ” Very occasionally recorded in winter in England and Wales. Stragglers fairly frequent up to October 22nd.” 25th October: One at Kirby-le-Soken, Essex. 15th December: One seen and heard at Scotton, near Knares- borough, Yorkshire. Chiffchaff (Phylloscopiis collybita). — ” Most years a few winter. Departure .... to mid-October.” The following November records may be taken as late migrants rather than wintering birds: singles at Spurn, Yorkshire, on ist, 7th and 13th, and at High Royd Sewage Farm, Yorkshire, on the 7th ; odd birds in coastal areas of Sussex until the 14th ; one at Horton, Buck- inghamshire, on the 13th; one or two on Lundy, Devon, from the loth to the 17th. On nth December one wtis trapped at Dun- geness, Kent, and one seen at Titchfield Haven, Hampshire. On 15th December one at South Norwood, Surrey; on the 26th one at Littlebourne, Kent. On 2nd January one at West Hyde, Hertford- shire, and one at Haverfield, Middlesex. One at Beddington, Surrey, 25th January to 12th February, and one at Lonsdale Road Reservoir, Surrey, from the end of January to mid-February. Spotted Flycatcher (Muscicapa striahi). — ” Departure of VOL. XLix] DELAYED EMIGRATION: 1954 79 summer-residents .... lasts to about mid-September. Passag'e migration to first few days October.” There were six records in the first week of October : One at Shanklin, Isle of Wight, on the 2nd; one at Margaretting, Essex, on the 3rd; one at Rugeley, Staffordshire, on the 4th ; one each at Lowestoft, Suffolk, and Blakeney, Norfolk, on the 5th, and two on Lundy, Devon, on the 7th. Pied Flycatcher [Muscicapa hypoleuca). — ‘‘ Departure of summer-residents to end August. Passage-migration ... to end September.” 3rd October: One at the Naze, Essex; 3 to 7 at Blakeney Point, Norfolk; 4 at Gibraltar Point, Lincolnshire. Up to 8th October: ” Seen frequently ” on Lundy, Devon. 9th October: One at St. Catherine’s Point, Isle of Wight. Yellow Wagtail (MotaciUa flava). — ‘‘ Departs mid-August to end of September.” There were numerous records for October and one for November, as follows: 2nd October: One at Slough, Buckinghamshire; one at Checkley, Warwickshire. 3rd October: One at Osborne, Isle of Wight; one at Eye Brook Reservoir, Leicestershire. 4th October: One at Hockley Heath, Warwickshire; one each at Abberton Reservoir and Bishops Stortford Sewage Farm, Essex; one at Cley, Norfolk. 6th October: One at Wallingford Sewage Farm, Berkshire. 8th October : One at Abberton Reservoir, Essex. 9th October: 55 on Cowbit Marshes, Lincolnshire. loth October: One on Walland Marsh, Kent; one at Sonning Eye, Oxfordshire. i2th October: One near Cambridge. 13th October: One at Snitterfield, Warwickshire. 15th October: One at Hove, Sussex; two at Ardleigh, near Colchester, Essex; one at St. Neots, Huntingdonshire. 17th October: 15 at Bere Ferrers, Devon; one at Newhaven and one on Seven Sisters, Sussex. i8th October: One at Reading, Berkshire. 2ist October: Two near Rye, Sussex. 23rd October: One at Barrow Gurney Reservoirs, Somerset. 24th October: 3 at Fosdyke, Lincolnshire. 26th October: One at Perry Oaks Sewage Farm, Middlesex. 29th October: One at Coventry, Warwickshire. 30th October: One on Lundy, Devon; one at 'Litchfield Haven, Hampshire; one at Minworth, Warwickshire; one at Romford Sewage Farm, Essex. 4th November: Two at Guarlford Sewage Farm, Malvern. Worcestershire. (To he conduded) BIRDS OF A TRANS ATLANTIC VOYAGE IN LATE SPRING 1954 By Agnes M. Thom [Fair Isle Bird Observatory) Although there are many papers concerning' the birds observed during transects of the North Atlantic there is still room for advancement of our knowledge of seasonal distribution over this \ast expanse of ocean. The present paper is offered as a contri- bution towards that end. The material is presented as a record, and no attempt has been made to analyse or discuss the results in the light of the conclusions reached by authorities such as Wynne- Edwards (1935) and Rankin and Duffey (1948). 'I'he journey was made in S.S. Lismoria (8,000 tons approx.) between the evening of 27th May 1954, leaving the Clyde, and 4th June, arriving at Montreal. The observations accorded closely with the normal pattern for an east-to-west voyage at this season, the only important departure being the remarkable migration of Little .Auks, which appears to have been unusually late. This may be connected with the fact that 1954 was a late ice year: we had near-arctic weather conditions during the later part of the voyage and bergs were reported to be in the vicinity of the ship. WEATHER The ship’s mid-day positions and movements with regard to the ten-degree squares named by Nicholson (1951), together with brief notes on the weather conditions, are given below : May 28th: 55°32'.\., ri°3o'\\’. Rockall .Seas. .Sunny, 3/8 cloud and fresh wind. May 29th: 5o°49'NU 22°29'W. Outer Bailey. Good vis., cloud 1/8, wind freshening during the day. May 30th: 53°I9'.M. 3i°59'tV. Reykjanes Tongue. At 0800 hrs. sunny, cloud 3/8, fresh .S.W. wind. By mid-day heavy rain with gale-force winds made observations impossible. Improvement by 1720 hrs. May 31st: 5i°09'N. 40°2o'\V. Cape Farewell Seas. Wind strong westerly at 1400 hrs., cloud 8/8. Heavy rain from 1500 hrs. June ist: 48°3i'N. 48°3o'W. Outer Bank. Overcast with mist and fresh wind, 0840 hrs. .\t 1100 hrs. wind strong N.W. and conditions arctic, tem- perature 41 °F. Icebergs in proximity. M'ind still strong N.W. at 1500 hrs., cloud 8/8 and perishingly cold. Observations ceased at 1730 hrs. June 2nd: 46°22'N. 5&°44'W. Newfoundland Bank. Calm, sunny morning, 3/8 cloud; coast of Newfoundland in distance. June 3rd: 49°2o'N. 65°i3'W. St. Lawrence. Low cloud 8/8 and rain in morning, improving. On the first evening- \isibility in the Clyde was poor and no worthwhile observations were made. 28th May wtis passed in a comparatively calm col with high pressure to the south :md over the Scandinavian Peninsula tind a depression well away to west- ward, south of Cape Farewell, ^^’e were in the outer perimeter of this low by mid-day on the 29th :md a day later were fast moving into a deepening secondarv which had developed over the 80 VOL. XLix] ATLANTIC BIRDS IN MAY-JUNE 81 St. Lawrence 24 hours before. We passed through the rain-belt of its occluded front on the 30th and during the 31st sailed on the southern side of this system into westerly winds, with another low advancing towards us from arctic Canada. On ist June we were in the southern quarter of this new system, with the wind veering north-west after the passing of a cold front, and tempera- tures 38-41 °F. in the area. This depression had moved far to eastward by the 2nd and conditions showed much improvement with a moderate following wind and temperatures in the mid- forties. DIRECTION OF FLIGHT It was very noticeable that during the period of strong westerly winds which characterized the second half of the voyage all the birds observed in flight were moving parallel with the ship, i.e. westwards into the wind. This was so even with those species which one might reasonably have expected to see moving in some other direction — eastwards, for example, in the case of the Great Shearwater, or northwards in the case of the migrating Little .'\uks. This behaviour serves to emphasize that whereas move- ment down-wind best serves survival in the case of land-birds blown over this ocean (Williamson, 1954), exactly the opposite holds for sea-birds in rough weather, their most important need being to maintain sea-room and avoid being drifted on to a lee shore (Murphy, 1936). SYSTEMATIC LIST Leach’s Petrel [Oceanodroma leucorrhoa). I saw only one type of small petrel during the crossing : the flight was the same in all cases, and sometimes I had clear views of rump and forked tail and generally brownish appearance. By no means all, or even most, were positively identifiable as belonging to this species, but all records of small petrels are included here. They were never following in the wake, and were generally picked up when I was looking at something else, as the waves were so rough that it was difficult to find them with the naked eye. They flew roughly parallel with the ship’s course, in a generally westerly direction. The first was seen at a distance, flitting over the waves, at noon on 31st May. Next day at 0840 hours 5 small petrels flew along- side the ship — one was well identified as Leach’s — and at 0900 hours 15 were seen. Between 10 and ii o’clock 7 were seen, fol- lowed by 2, and at mo hours 4 more, followed a little later by 2, again 2 at mid-day, and 3 shortly afterwards. A small petrel was seen shortly after 1400 hours followed by 2 a little later, and at 1450 hours by a definite Leach’s. There were single birds about 1700 and 1730 hours. Next day, 2nd June, a flock of ca. 30 petrels was seen just before mid-day; they rose from the water and circled round high up before coming down close to the surface again. At 1400 hours another flock of about 50 was seen behaving similarly, and a 82 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX further flight was noticed at 1715 hours. At 1800 hours a lot of tiny black birds were seen at a distance, but they did not rise. [Manx Shearw.vter [Pyocellaria puffinns). A single shearwater was noticed in a gathering of Fulmars which rose some way astern at 1720 hours on the 30th, at about 52°3o'N. and just short of 35°^V^ It did not have a capped appearance, and was blackish above and white below and may have belonged to this species.] Great Shearwater [Procellaria gravis). This was first noticed at 0830 hours on the 31st at about 38-39°\V., a party of 14 passing alongside the ship : the capped head and the white mark on the rump were clearly visible. At 1145 hours, in Cape Farewell Seas, a flock of about 30 was seen, flying in a westerly direction. Several were showing signs of wing-moult (see Rankin and Dutfey, 1948). Shortly afterwards a flock of 10 flew parallel to the ship, and another group of 10 was noted at 1215 hours. Just after 1400 there were first 3 Great Shearwaters, and then two flocks of about 30 and 50 flew alongside. The last observations of the day were made at 1435 hours and 1445 hours when one and 3 birds were seen. On ist June, in Outer Bank at 0840 hours, a single bird was seen; and as we entered Newfoundland Bank in the evening 2 birds appeared at 1600 and 5 at 1710 hours. On the return voyage, 13 Great Shearwaters were counted in a short period before noon on loth August at about 53°o6'N. 53°2o'W. Fulmar {Fulmarus gjacialis). Fulmars following the ship on the first day numbered 5 or 6 at noon and fewer at 1530 hours. There were more next day, about 30 being counted around or following the vessel at 8 o’clock : they were the only birds seen on the 29th and their number varied only slightly. They were still at this strength on the morning of the 30th and had increased to about 50 in the late afternoon. There were a dozen only at 0830 hours on the 31-st, but fewer later in the morning, and again a dozen or so at 1800 hours. On ist June at 0840 hours the number was reduced by half, and one “blue” bird was seen. After lunch there were very few indeed. At 1445 hours a second “blue” put in an appearance and there was one at 1500 — perhaps the same, although 2 were seen together at 1520 hours. The next morning, the 2nd, with the coast of Newfoundland visible in the distance. Fulmars were absent, and in fact none was seen that day. Gannet {Sida bassana). A Gannet was observed flying to the north-east at 0730 hours on 28th May, and at 0840 hours a Gannet was seen astern. There were 2 at 10 o’clock, one at 1145, and 2 immatures in partially white plumage at 1245. No more were seen until 2 appeared, flying low over the waves, as we approached the St. Lawrence on the evening of 2nd June. Great Skua {Stercorarius skua). One was flying a short dis- tance astern at 1130 hours on the 28th, the white wing-patch clearly visible. At 1010 hours on the 31st (south-west part of VOL. XLix] ATLANTIC BIRDS IN MAY-JUNE 83 Cape Farewell Seas) two dark birds with white wing-patches and slow continuous flapping flight were seen at a distance, and I believe these were Bonxies. Two similar birds, again not positively identified, were seen some distance from the ship after iioo hours on ist June. Lesser Black-backed Gull {Laras fuscus). One was follow- ing the ship with the Fulmars on the evening of 28th May in West Rockall Seas. Herring Gull {Laras argentatiis). There were gulls of this species with the ship on the morning of 28th May but we lost them about 9 o’clock and no more were seen until the American side was reached. Six were following the vessel early in the morning of 2nd June off Newfoundland, and later 5 more appeared. In the afternoon 3 birds were present. Kittiwake {Rissa tridactyla). Kittiwakes, about 20 in all, were following the ship on the first morning out. At mid-day, however, in Rockall Seas, only 8 were present, and by 1530 even they had disappeared. No more were seen until 3 immature birds appeared shortly after 10 o’clock on ist June; at mo there were 4, and they were still with us at noon. An adult was next seen, and at 1400 hours 6 “tarrocks” were flying near the ship, and a little later 8 more appeared, plus another adult. At 1715 we had 2 adults and 3 tarrocks present. Six tarrocks flew by, a flock of 15 fol- lowing shortly afterwards, when we were in sight of the New- foundland coast early on 2nd June. In the St. Lawrence on the afternoon of the 3rd one adult and 2 immature birds were seen. Little Auk {Plautus alle). On coming on deck after breakfast un ist June, at about 0940 hours, I saw two flocks of Little Auks close to the ship, about 30 birds in one and 50 in the other. From then until 1300 hours I must have seen several thousand Little Auks; the sea was alive with them, and at times they circled quite high in the air, reminding me of flocks of small waders. It was quite impossible to count them, as whenever one tried to look at anything clouds of Little Auks passed in quick succession. Com- paratively few were on the water — they were practically all flying in the same westerly direction as the ship was moving. Probably some 3,000-4,000 were seen during the morning — a remarkable sight! After lunch these vast numbers had vanished. One flock of ca. 30 was seen at 1400 hours soon followed by a small one of 7. The last were two flocks of about 30 and 20 just after 1430 hours. At 1645 hours on 2nd June 2 birds thought to be this species dived on the approach of the ship. Unidentified larger auks, possibly Briinnich’s Guillemot {Uria lomvia). The first auk (other than Little) was seen at 0840 hours on ist June. In mid-morning 3 others were seen and just before mid-day 2 more flew past, with 4 others at noon. The next were 2 at 1515 hours and at about 1600 hours a flock of about 30 flew parallel with the ship, followed shortly by parties of 4 and 3, then 84 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX a party of 3 which were definitely a species of guillemot as the bills were clearly seen. A single bird passed later, and at 1700 hours a flock of 16. Shortly afterwards there were 2 birds and another was seen at 1730 hours. On 4th June 4 auks were on the water at 1040 hours and rose when the ship approached. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The observations were carried out at the suggestion of Mr. Kenneth Williamson, and I am grateful to him for assistance in preparing the material for publication. REFERENCES Murphy, R. C. (1936): Oceanic Birds of South America. New York. Rankin, M. N. and Duffey, E. .V. G. (1948): “A study of the bird-life of the North .Atlantic”, Brit. Birds, supplement to vol xli. Nicholson, E. M. (1951): “Birds of the North Atlantic”, Proc. Xth Intern. Orn. Congress, 600-602. Williamson, K. (1954): “American birds in Scotland in autumn and winter 1953-54”. Scot. Nat., 65: 13-29. Wynne-Edwards, V. C. (1935): “On the habits and distribution of birds on the North .Atlantic”, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., 40; 283-346. NOTES Displacement coition in the Mallard. — On loth May, 1951, at Clayton-le-dale, near Blackburn, Lancashire, I was engaged in watching the behaviour of a pair of Mallard {Atias pJatyrhynchos) tending fifteen young, which were newly hatched. The young fed for the most part within a radius of three yards of the female Mallard, but occasionally one strayed further afield. Immediately this happened, the male bird swam towards the young, seized it by the hind neck, and thrust it under the water, shaking it violently. The female, “ quacking ” loudly, then half-swam, half- fluttered across the water towards the male Mallard, who released the chick, and proceeded to chase the female, with outstretched neck, both birds “ quacking ” loudly. Eventually, the male Mallard caught the female, and holding her by the hind neck, mounted her on the water, thrusting her beneath the surface. Coition lasted approximately 60 seconds, the heads of both male and female birds remaining submerged throughout the period. Releasing the female, the male swam round her in an arc of some 120°, with neck outstretched and slightly elevated. This behaviour was observed on several subsequent occasions, and whenever a young bird strayed too far from the female Mallard. W. G. H.\le [Mr. Hale has kindly sent us a photograph showing the male with its head below the surface and the female completely sub- merged, but unfortunately this is not clear enough for reproduc- tion.— Eds.] VOL. XLIX] NOTES 85 Behaviour of Common Tern after eggs had been stolen. — The note on the behaviour of a Lapwing; [V anellus vanellus) after its eggs had been crushed [antea, vol. xlvii, p. 414) prompts me to record somewhat similar behaviour that took place when the eggs of a Common Tern [Sterna hirundo) had been eaten by a Black- headed Gull [Larus ridibundus). On i6th June 1951, from my canvas hide on a sand-pit on the Eden Estuary in Fife, I saw a Black-headed Gull land at a Common Tern’s nest containing 3 eggs, the owners of which were absent at the time. The gull commenced to eat the eggs and was allowed to do so by other terns nesting nearby. Eventually it was chased off by the owner who then came back and landed by its nest, but almost immediately flew off again uttering a loud, screaming “ kee- arr.” About 30 seconds later it returned, landing some three or four yards from the nest. It walked quickly towards this, but when it reached it, the bird turned immediately and walked away again in a somewhat agitated manner. It did this several times and then flew off. About a minute later it returned, went straight to the nest, picked up a piece of egg-shell and flew off. In about a half-minute it came back with empty bill, picked up another piece of shell and again took it away. Having disposed of this the bird returned, stood by the nest for half-a-minute or so and then flew off once more. It did not return during the next ten minutes after which I left the hide to examine the nest. This was found to contain the broken remains of two eggs. The follow- ing morning these pieces of shell had gone, but the nest was not used again. J. Grierson Aquatic WarWler in Dorset. — An Aquatic Warbler [Acrocephalus paludicola) was discovered at Portland Bill, Dorset, at midday on nth October 1955. At first sight, as the bird flew off out of thick cover, the tail-pattern suggested that it was not a Sedge Warbler [A. schoenobaenus). This was later seen to be due to the streaked rump, which gave rise to a contrast in shade between the tail and upper-parts, instead of between the tail and rump with the rest of the upper-parts as in the latter species. The pale median crown-streak was clearly seen when the bird settled. In flight it appeared altogether yellower, and more streaked on the upper- parts than a Sedge Warbler. The bird was trapped on the following day by my wife with J. A. Wigzell and Alan Till, and a full transcription of the information noted then in the Observatory records has been sent to the Editors of British Birds. Its weight was 19.6 gm. It was judged to be a first-winter bird on account of the prominent dark speckles on its breast. This is only the second record of this species from Dorset. John Ash 86 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Subalpiiie Warbler in Norfolk. — At about 11.30 a.m. on 29th September 1955 at The Hood, Blakeney Point, Norfolk, we had excellent views of a Subalpine Warbler (Sylvia cantillans). Al- though skulking, the bird was tame and allowed us to approach quite closely. After one unsuccessful attempt it was trapped and its plumage compared with the description noted while we were watching it. After examination it was released. Later it was trapped again by R. A. Richardson who ringed it and made detailed notes of its plumage. We understand that the bird was still present on 30th September, but that it could not be found on the following day. The following is a description of the bird. Smaller than a Whitethroat (Sylvia comminiis) and resembling a Hartford Warbler (Sylvia timiafa) in general shape and In flight although it had a noticeably shorter tail than the latter species. The tail was frequently cocked slightly and appeared rounded when spread. W'hole of the upper-parts blue-grey, brighter on the head, the mantle and rump being- tinged brownish. The blue-grey colour extended below the eye. In direct sunlight the colour of the upper-parts reminded us of the back of a Nuthatch (Siita curopaca). Tail dark greyish-black with noticeably white outer feathers. Wing- feathers grey-brown, with paler edges. Chin pinkish-bulf ; throat, upper breast and flanks orange-buft'. There was a inarked whitish moListachial stripe. Belly and under tail-coverts greyish- white. Bill grey. Legs light brown. At times the eye appeared a brilliant red. At close range, however, it seemed more brownish and it showed as this colour in the hand. A ring round the eye appeared bulT-white but on the captured bird it was pinkish. The bird was silent except that once while in the hand it uttered a quiet “ tec-tec.” G. H. Acki.am, John Shi-:pi>i;kd and R. A. L. Sutton Mr. R. A. Richardson has kindly sent us a summary of his notes on this bird which was also seen by Mrs. M. Meiklejohn, .Miss D. Steinthal and Messrs. P. R. Clarke, P. D. Kirby and P. F. Le Brocq, among others. The detailed plumage description, taken in the hand, fully confirms the identification of this, the second record for England; the first, an adult male, was seen at Cley on nth June 1951 by P. J. Hayman and R. A. Richardson (antea, vol. xlv, p. 262). The 1955 bird was considered to be a first-winter male. When trapped it weighed 8.17 gm. — Eds.] Starlings attacking field mouse. — On 4th April 1952 a group of five Starlings (Stiirnus vulgaris) were seen to be mobbing some objeet on a lawn. Investigation revealed a Long-tailed Field Mouse (Apodemus sylvaticus) in either a sickly condition or so damaged by the birds’ attacks that it was unable to escape. The mouse was put in a box but died shortly afterwards. R. G. Finnis REVIEW I HE GOLDEN EAGLE: KING OF BIRDS. By Seton Gordon, C.B.E. [Collins “ New Naturalist,” London, 1955). 246 pages, 17 photographs. i6s. A MONOGR.\PH on the Golden Eagle in Scotland is long overdue and who could have produced a better one than Seton Gordon? For half a century the author has studied and written about eagles, and now The Golden Eagle: King of Birds summarizes this work of a life-time. Seton Gordon, as always, has an eye for atmos- phere ; and the special atmosphere of the Golden Eagle and the countryside in which it lives comes over vividly. The author rarely states precisely where his eyries are, but again and again one realizes that one knows the very spot — the eyrie high on the forbidding crag in North Harris, and the other where three eaglets were reared for several years running. The first half of the book deals with topics and includes the Golden Eagle in winter and in falconry, its food, nesting and hunting habits, flight and enemies. The author, like his subject, ranges far and he has collected much information, published and unpublished, on Golden Eagles in other lands. The remainder of the book describes personal observations at eyries : at one, the author and his wife spent 500 hours over several seasons ; at another, the author has kept one pair under observation for 8 years. The book is illustrated by many excellent photographs by the author and others. There is an appendix on races of the Golden Eagle and on its status in many countries. A bibliography lists some quite obscure publications, but does not incluae two notes in The Scottish Naturalist on the food of eagles in south-west Scotland. A formidable list of prey found in eyries throughout the Golden Eagle’s range is given and it includes such oddities as grass- hoppers, salmon, rattlesnake, skylark and porcupine. But the prey commonly taken in different countries is similar, ground rodents being preferred. In Scotland, mountain hares, rabbits and grouse are taken in that order of frequency. Regional differences in the food are hinted at but not discussed. The weight-lifting capacity of a given eagle varies greatly with the strength of wind and up-currents. In Scotland, hares are usually dismembered before being brought to the eyrie, presumably since they are too heavy for most eagles ; in contrast, young hares and rabbits are brought in intact. The strength of Golden Eagles varies regionally with their size : the eagle of the Hebrides is smaller than that of the mainland, the smallest race of all is found in Japan and the largest, the female of which is flown from the wrist at wolves, in Turkestan. Seton Gordon makes no attempt to minimize the killing of 87 88 BRITISH BIRDS fvoL. xlix lambs by eagles in Scotland, but states that from more than 6o correspondents, all of whom live and work in eagle country, he has received accounts of only 12 authentic instajices of eagles seen taking live lambs. He has only 2 personal records of live lambs being taken. The author concludes that only when natural food is scarce do eagles take to lamb killing, and with some it then becomes a habit. Golden Eagles are strictly territorial in the breeding season but less so in winter. Territory size may be as little as 5,000 acres. The eaglet remains with its parents until late autumn when it normally leaves or is driven from the territory. Most pairs of eagles are sedentary, but some disappear from the nesting site for several weeks each year. The author is convinced that an eagle which escapes trapping or poisoning may live to be 100 years in the wild. A chapter is devoted to the enemies of the Golden Eagle — which means an account of man’s efforts to destroy it. Of ii European countries in which the species nests, it is protected in only 4; in at least 4 countries the numbers are decreasing. In Texas, where intensive sheep farming attracts eagles from afar, one hunter in 8 years has killed 8,300 Golden Eagles from an aeroplane. This book by a veteran field naturalist summarizes all that is known about Golden Eagles in Scotland but the author carefully points out that much more remains to be learned. The value of the book is twofold : it gives a wealth of readable Information on the Golden Eagle, but it shows too where knowledge is lacking. J. D. Lockie LETTER CENSUS OF BREEDING GREAT BLACK-BACKED GULLS Sirs, — A census of breeding Great Black-backed Gulls {Larus mariiins) in England and Wales in 1956 has been approA cd as an investigation of the British Trust for Ornithology. As organiser I shall be glad of offers of help from those who are willing to undertake the field work in their own areas, or other localities familiar to them. Negative reports from parts of the coast where it is known that Great Black-backed Gulls do not breed are also requested. Will volunteers please communicate with me at South Mullock, Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire? T. A. W. Davis [We hope that everyone who is able to help will contact Mr. Davis, for only in this way can complete coverage be possible. — Eds.] OBSERVATION NEST- BOXES produced by a firm with over 20 years experience in the Trade : that is why “ Greemigg are responsible for the best types available ” {Parks Magazine). Tit or Robin 11s. 9d. Obser- vation and larger B.T.O. type 13s. Hd. Large rustic Observa- tion, made from solid bark slabs, 18s. lid.: very strong. Tit Bells 10s. 9d. Peanut Feeders 12s. 9d. Large Glass Seed Hopper 21s. 6d. : small size 12s. 9d. “Bird Sanctuary” Catalogue 3d. BIRD RINGING Equipment Catalogue 3d. Traps from 15s. 6d., Registers 13s. 9d. Coloured Rings, Clapnets, Springnets, etc. DEPT. 11 GBEENRICG WORKS WOODFORD GREEN ESSEX ZOOLOGICAL RECORD SECTION AVES 1954 The Aves section of the Zoological Record, the only comprehensive bibliography published annually of ornitho- logical literature, is an indis- pensable work of reference for those desiring knowledge of the world’s literature on recent research and developments in the study of birds. Compiled by Lt.-Col. W. P. C. Tenison, D.S.O., the current issue documents references to nearly 2,000 articles and books appearing mainly in 1954, of interest to ornithologists. Obtainable from the pub- lishers, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London. N.W.I., England, Price 7/lOd. post free. Our business is booming and we have been at it for some time now. Don’t miss it but write instead for brochure to Mr. and Mrs. D. A. T. Morgan, Abbey Cottage, Leiston, Suffolk. Phone: 267. SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS AVIARY KEEPER WANTED. — Some experience of breeding and rear- ing birds desirable. Carpentry, photo- graphy, etc., an asset. Wages accord- ing to age and experience. House available. Pension scheme. Write giving full particulars of age, educa- tion and qualifications and enclosing testimonials to Dr. Thorpe, University Department of Zoology, Downing Street, Cambridge. BARDSEY BIRD AND FIELD OBSERVATORY, CAERNARVON- SHIRE, offers accommodation to naturalists from spring to autumn. Inquiries to W. M. Condry, Eglwysfach, Machynlleth, Mont. SHETLAND : Comfortable small hotel in good bird and fishing district. Own 35-acre bird island, uninhabited, with 22 nesting species, including Eider. Black Guillemot, Storm Petrel. Readily accessible seabird colonies. Terms Six Guineas. Henderson’s Hotel, Spiggie, Scousburgh, Shetland. HILL COTTAGE, WESTLETON, Saxmundham, Suffolk, caters specially for ornithologists. Ideally situated near coast and heath. Apply Miss M. S. van Oostveen. WHITE HORSE HOTEL, BLAKE- NEY, NORFOLK. — Situated halfway between the Cley Marshes and Blake- ney Point Bird Sanctuary. Telephone: Cley 312. BANNERMAN THE BIRDS OF THE BRITISH ISLES • VOLUMES 1—4 NOW READY • Available on deferred payment terms of I Os. monthly Please send me full particulars of Bannerman Birds of the British Isles, with special monthly payment terms. Name Address B.B 126 (Block Capitals please) The Globe Publishing Co. Ltd. 6, 8 & 10 Lexington Street, London, W.l Binoculars and Telescopes New and Reconditioned, a good range at reasonable prices. Approval allowed, also part exchanges. Send for list and particulars. ALSO Binoculars and Telescopes repaired, cleaned and adjusted, send your instrument for estimate by return. Hatton OpticalCo.Ltd. Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. Telephone 3071. Established 1930 BRITISH BIRDS The Publishers regret lliiil the Index to I'uliiiiie XLl’III %vill he considerably delayed by the present dispute in the printing industry. It ivill be much appreciated if subscribers will not forward their parts of this volume for binding until the Index is sent out. THE BIRDS OF THE BRITISH ISLES VOLUME IV by David A. Bannerman and George E. Lodge This fourth volume deals with the swifts, nightjars, bee-eaters, hoopoes, rollers, kingfishers, woodpeckers, wryneck and cuckoos. 280 pages, 29 full colour plates, 45s. net. Voluincs I-III dealing with the passerine birds are available at 45s. each THE BIRDS AND MAMMALS OF SHETLAND by L. S. Venables and U. M. Venables. The result of eight years’ obser- vation by naturalists resident in Shetland, this book contains in- valuable information on breeding, status changes and song seasons along with a study and biblio- graphy of zoological literature relating to Shetland. 384 Pages. Fully Illustrated 30s. net. Alfo Aaiilahh' — The Birds of Arabia by Col. R. Meinertzhagen. 610 Pages. 19 Full-Colour Plates. 84s. net. The Birds of the Sudan by Col. F. O. Cave and J. D. MacDonald. 480 I'ages. 12 Full-Colour Plates. 45s. net. The Birds of Burma by B. E. Smythies. 712 Pages. 31 Full-Colour Plates. 84s. net. .Send for Bird Book List to OLIVER & BOYD Edinburgh : Tweeddale Court l.ondon : 39a Welbeck Street Printed in Gt. Britain by Witiierby & Co., Ltd., Watford, Herts. BRITISH BIRDS BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MONTHLY MAGAZINE Edited by E. M. Nicholson W. B. Alexander A. W. Boyd I. J. Ferguson-Lees P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst Editorial Address : 30, St. Leonard’s Avenue, Bedford. Photographic Editor: G. K. Yeates Monthly 3s. Yearly 30s. The Editors greatly regret that owing to the recent dispulc in the printing industry the publication of British Birds has been very much delayed and it has been necessary to omit a number of regular features from the February, March and April issues. Contents of Volume XLIX, Number 3, March 1956 1 i Thick-billed Warbler at Fair Isle: a new British bird. By Kenneth 1 Williamson, Miss Valeric M. Thom, I. J. Fer^uson-Lecs and H. F ! .\xell 1 Melodious Warbler and Lesser Grey Shrikes at Fair Isle. By Kenneth i Williamson ] The amateur and the study of bird display : suggestions for further worl ) Bv Rev. Edward A. .Armstrong ... i 'j Begging responses of certain buntings. By R. J. .\ndrew , Fluctuations in Partridge populations. By Colin Matheson J The interpretation of variation among the Yellow Wagtails. By U Ernst Mayr ... Note: — A useful field-charticter of the U terine Warbler (Kenneth Williamson) 119 P.AGE 89 94 97 107 112 Cover photograph by Eric Hosking: Carrion Crow {Corvus coroue) at nest. 1 ' ^ ^JTT • Blease note the change of Editorial J. • Address as from 25th .April i95(> VoL. XLIX No. 3 MARCH 1956 BRITISH BIRDS THICK-BILLED WARBLER AT FAIR ISLE : A NEW BRITISH BIRD By Kenneth Williamson, Valerie M. Thom [Fair Isle Bird Observatory), I. J. Ferguson-Lees and H. E. Axell An example of the Thick-billed Warbler [Phragmaticola aedon), a bird from south-east Asia and apparently the first of its species to be recorded in Europe, was captured at Fair Isle on 6th October In the fleeting glimpses we obtained of this bird in the field its large size and long, rounded tail at once attracted attention. The rufous rump, contrasting with the uniform olive-brown of the mantle and wings was a conspicuous feature, much more striking in the field than in the hand. In all these characteristics the bird ■strongly resembled a Great Reed Warbler [Acrocephalus arundinaceus). When flushed from the turnip rig in which it was found the bird immediately dived again into cover, and on next being disturbed flew to a dense growth of reedy grass and Heracleum 'sphondylium on the banks of a near-by burn. Its -skulking behaviour as it crept between the stems suggested that an attempt to trap it at this site might prove successful, so the Yeoman net with a portable catching-box was assembled, giving a trap with an entrance less than 3 feet wide. With great caution the bird was moved from the turnips to the ditch, where it threaded its way through the vegetation until finally it was flutter- ing against the glass of the box. The bird was taken to the laboratory for examination; there it was seen that the resemblance to a Great Reed Warbler was purely -superficial, and confined to size and plumage. There was no eye- -stripe; the bill was very different from that of an Acrocephalits . being shorter and deeper, with the culmen distinctly down-curved ; and the wing-formula too was quite different, particularly in the -shape of the ist primary which was unusually long and quite exceptionally broad. The bird was identified as a Thick-billed 'Warbler with the aid of Dresser’s Manual of Palaearctic Birds (1902) and Hartert’s Die Vogel der Paldarktischen Fauna (1910) 1955- 89 90 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX The upper-parts were bright olive-brown, the rump having a decidedly rufous tinge. The chin and throat were yellowish-white, and the breast, flanks and under tail-coverts washed with buff. Lores greyish. Wing- dark brown, the primaries fringed olivaceous, the secondaries with rufous edgings. Axillaries and under wing-coverts buffish-white. Tail of 12 feathers, the outer pair 18 mm. shorter and the penultimate pair 8 mm. shorter than the longest feathers. Upper mandible dark brown, the lower flesh- coloured ; 4 rictal bristles. Legs bluish, inclining to purplish on the sides of the tarsi, toes blue. Iris olive-brown, eye-lid plumbeous. Measurements : Chord of wing 79 mm. Bill from skull 163 mm., and 6 mm. in depth at the nostrils. Tarsus 295 mm. Tail 78 mm. Weight 22.84 gm. Wing-formula: 3rd primary longest, 4th slightly shorter, both emarginate. Next in order of succession were the 5th, 6th, 2nd, 7th and 8th, shorter by 3, 6, 7, 9 and 12 mm. respectively. Broad ist primary 8 mm. longer than longest primary-covert. No ectoparasites were found on examination with chloroform vapour. The bird was ringed and after photographs had been taken by Dr. Maeve Rusk, William Eunson and K.W. it was released. For a short time it skulked in the garden in front of the Observa- tory “ Heligoland,” and then flew low and swiftly — a very rufous- looking bird — to some crags on the hillside above. Fig. I — Weather-conditions over western Europe at midnight on 5TI1/6T11 October 1955, the night beeoke the capture of the Thick- billed W'arbler [Phragmaticola acdon) on Fair Isle VOL. XLIX] THICK-BILLED WARBLER 91 A. A. ARuNMnacEUS AJaI S~nENToR.EUS flEDoN (TPL 1 Fig. 2 — Wing-formulae of three similar warblers: Great Reed (Acrocephalus arundinaceus). Clamorous Reed {A. (arundinaceus) stentoreus) and Thick-billed (Phragmaticola aedon) The Thick-billed Warbler’s important characters of a much larger first primary and shorter second primary are shown up in black and the length of the latter in each species is indicated by its relationship to the sixth primary which is also blacked out. In the Thick-billed Warbler the second primary may be as long as the sixth or as short as the eighth. These diagrammatic sketches are approximately natural size, so that the separate drawing of an average first primary of Ph. aedon shows the true size and shape. The so-called Clamorous Reed Warbler, from Egypt and further east, is variously regarded as a race of arundinaceus or as forming a superspecies with arundinaceus and orientalis (the Eastern Great Reed Warbler). 92 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX The Thick-billed Warbler was part of a considerable drift-move- ment which involved a “rush” of Turdidae and Fringilla spp., in addition to a small number of departing summer visitors among which \\'hinchats [Saxicola riibetra) and Blackcaps [Sylvia atricapilla) were dominant. A vigorous depression moved quickly eastwards across southern Scotland into the North Sea, its occluded front and associated rain-belt extending south-eastwards from Caithness to the Hook of Holland at midnight (Fig. i). The bulk of this drift must have taken place off the continental coast- line from Holland and the Frisian Islands north to the Heligoland Bight, between this occlusion and a quasi-stationary front across the entrance to the Skagerrak. Farther than this it is quite impossible to trace the migration of this warbler, but it is worth while noting that an extensive belt of high pressure had been established across eastern Europe and central Asia for the fortnight before 6th October. ADDITIONAL NOTI'.S ON THE SPECIES .A.S we have already remarked, the Thick-billed is in the field very similar in size, shape and coloration to the Great Reed Warbler and though it has a deeper and shorter bill, a tail longer in proportion, a redder rump, blue legs and lacks an eye-stripe, it would, in our opinion, often be very difficult to distinguish. In the hand, however, the bill-shape is distinctive, while the propor- tionate lengths of tail and wing and the very long, broad, rounded first primary are quite diagnostic (see Fig. 2). It is generally recognized that there are two races of the Thick- billed Warbler, the typical form breeding in southern Siberia and Mongolia, and the other, Ph. a. rufescens, in Manchuria, north- east China and Japan. The latter form is smaller and darker and, at least in summer plumage, more rufous than Ph. a. aedon. The winter-quarters are in east India, Burma, Indo-China and the .Andaman Islands (see Fig. 3). According to the information given by E. S. Ptushenko in The Birds of the Soviet Uiiio)i (Vol. VI, pp. 234-238), the species inhabits damp areas where it is to be found in thickets of bushes among high grass. The eastern race is also recorded in drier, more open areas, however, and even in village gardens. The nests are built from mid-June onwards in birches, osiers, or spiraea, 18 inches to 5 feet from the ground, in a fork or attached to several thin twigs. This bird thus builds rather higher than, and in slightly dilTerent situations from, the reed- and sedge- warblers [Acrocephalus spp.) which are its nearest relatives in Europe. The nest is lightly built of dry grasses and gives an appearance of untidiness from the outside, but the cup is neatly finished and lined with fine grasses and occasionally liorse hair. 4-6 eggs are laid, and these are usually of a striking rose or violet VOL. XLIX] THICK-BILLED WARBLER 93 colour, thickly covered with “veins” or “twisted lines” of black, brown or yellowish-rufous marking's. They are about the size of those of the Great Reed Warbler. Nothing appears to be known about the incubation or fledging periods of this species, and very little about its food other than that it consists of insects. Fig. 3 — The distribution of the Thick-billed Warbler {Phragmaticola aedon) The breedmg range is indicated by the black area and the winter- quarters by being enclosed with a dotted line. The map is based largely on information given by E. S. Ptushenko in The Birds of the Soviet Union, Vol. \T, with modifications in the outline of the winter range based on other authorities. The song, which is uttered from the tops of trees or bushes, is loud and is said to contain imitations of other species. It is described as “partly reminiscent” of the song of the Icterine Warbler [Hippolais icterina), though some loud, flute-like notes are similar to those of the Nightingale (Luscinia megarhynchos). The alarm call of the male is a loud and harsh “chok-chok,” sometimes passing' into a chattering “chok-chok-cherrerrek-chok. ” The authors wish to express their gratitude to D. D. Harber for translation from the Russian of certain passages in The Birds of Ihe Soviet Union. MELODIOUS WARBLER AND LESSER GREY SHRIKES AT FAIR ISLE By Kenneth Williamson [Fair Isle Bird Observatory) A SMALL mig^ratory movement of unusual interest reached Fair Isle on i6th September 1955, perhaps coming’ in from Shetland under fine col conditions o\ernight, but almost certainly introduced to the area by cyclonic drift due to a depression which was centred near Denmark from the night of the i3th-i4th. Very few Passerines were concerned, but among them were four southern elements, two of which are of outstanding rarity so far to the north as Fair Isle. Fair Isle’s first-recorded Melodious Warbler [Hippolais poly glotta) was trapped in mid-morning, and at the same time an adult female Lesser Grey Shrike [Lanius minor) was found near the perimeter wall of the cultivated area. Another adult female Lesser Grey Shrike ■was captured at the south end of the isle on the following afternoon (the 17th): the first remained in the area where it was first seen until the 19th. Two Barred Warblers [Sylvia nisoria) were also ringed on the i6th (and one on the 15th), and a Wood Warbler [Phylloscopus sibilatrix) — a “south-east migrant’’ very rare at Fair Isle in autumn — was seen above the east clifi's. There is one previous record of a Melodious Warbler in Scot- land, at the Isle of May on 27th September 1913; the present occurrence may well be the farthest north recorded for this species, which breeds in France and the Iberian Peninsula and would be expected to occur most regularly as a vagrant in the Irish Sea region, following anticyclonic drift over sea-areas Biscay and Sole in the south-easterly airflow of Mediterranean highs. The Lesser Grey Shrike, which does not breed so far north in France but extends eastwards across Germany, has 9 previous records in Scot- land, 7 of these being at Fair Isle: none has come to our notice, however, since the Bird Observatory began its work in 1948. It seems highly probable that these birds must have travelled to the north out of eastern France and southern Germany ahead of the active cold front of the depression as it pivoted north-eastwards on its centre in Demark (Fig. i), being brought ultimately within the influence of the cyclonic easterly winds crossing Forties on the northern side of the low. No other explanation for this remarkable movement seems possible, and the case is unique among the many synoptic situations studied during the past six years in that it indicates a long overland drift down-wind in the opposite direction of the true migration. Though this deflection overland, caused by the rain and low visibility at the front, is in this instance a matter of a few hundred miles, the case throws some light on the nature of the conditions which could contribute to trans-continental vagrancy from much farther afield ; similar frontal develoimients 94 VOL. XLIX] BIRDS AT FAIR ISLE 95 might conceivably assist the westwards drift of many Siberian vagrants over a considerable part of their course. Fig. I — To show overland drift of Melodious Warbler {Hippolais polyglotta) AND Lesser Grey Shrikes (Lanius minor) recorded at Fair Isle on i6th September 1955 The figure shows the position of the cold front on the night of I3th/i4th September (black symbols) and its situation 24 hours later (open symbols). The arrows indicate the general trend of the airstream ahead of the front. Data from The Daily Weather Report of the Meteorological Office of the Air Ministry. Detailed notes on the birds are given below : Melodious Warbler. — In the field, a small compact warbler with a strongly-made bill, olive-brown upper-parts and very pale ^'ellowish beneath: no supercilium, and no obvious wing-markings. In the hand the secondaries were seen to have narrow fringes somewhat paler than the brown flight-feathers, but these did not form a pale bar or patch in the closed wing as in the Icterine Warbler {H. icterina) — see pp. iig. Measurements : Chord of wing, 66 mm. ; bill from skull, 16 mm. ; tarsus, 22^ mm. ; tail, x'? mm. Wing-formula : ist primary 4 mm. longer than primary 96 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX coverts; 2nd 4 mm. shorter than 3rd and 4th, which were equal and longest ; 5th-gth shorter by i, 4, 8, 10 and 1 mm. successively ; emargination 3rd~5th. Weight : 11.33 gm. Lesser Grey Shrike. — The bird seen on the i6th at once appealed to me as looking very different in build and stance from the Great Grey Shrikes (L. excubitor) which visit us each autumn. Besides appearing somewhat smaller and shorter in the tail, the bird adopted a more upright posture when perching on walls, fences and the telephone wires from which it watched for insect prey. I could make out no black on the forehead even with a fairly close view (ca. 40 yards) in excellent light, but there was no narrow white line dividing the black band of lores and ear-coverts from the grey crown, and no white fringes to the scapulars. The under-parts were flushed with pink, strongly so in a dull light, but not more so than in some Great Grey Shrikes I have seen . (particularly an adult male present at the isle during 20th-22nd October 1955) ; some identification books appear to regard the pink tinge as diagnostic of the Lesser Grey. Later in the day the bird was seen at close quarters by Miss V. M. Thom and others, and they reported the presence of a few blackish spots above the bill. The example trapped on the lylli was not in such immaculate plumage ; the under-parts seemed duller and there was an irregular but nevertheless very pronounced blackish band across the fore- head bridging the black eye-stripes. The wings were very worn. It may be added that a third Lesser Grey Shrike, a ist-winter bird with grey-brown upper-parts and no black on lores or fore- head, was self-caught in the Gully Trap early on 8th October. This followed a similar frontal movement in Germany, with a centre of low pressure in the North Sea, on Gth-yth October (see pp. 92). The bird was examined by I. J. Ferguson-Lees, H. E. .'Vxell and Miss V. M. Thom in addition to the w’riter. Details of both birds are given in the Table below. Table — Structural details of Lesser Grey Shrikes (Laiiius minor) TRAPPED AT FaIR ISLE Character Adult 9 Ist-wintci leasurements in mm.) Chord of wing 115 109 Bill from skull ■ 18^ 19 Tarsus 26 26A Tail 88 87 Weight in gm. 4 8. a,-; 36.72 Wing-formula : ist primary (from p. coverts) +3 = Longest primary 3rd 3rd 2nd shorter by 2 4 4th 3 3 1 1 9 6th 18 14 7th 23 20 8th ,, ,, ? 2.S Emargination on 3rd, 4th 3rd, 4II1 THE AMATEUR AND THE STUDY OF BIRD DISPLAY SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER WORK* By Edward A. Armstrong Twenty-five years ago ornithological field-studies in this country were almost exclusively the concern of amateurs. The publication of The Handbook (1938-44)— the most notable corporate achieve- ment of amateur ornithology — marked the epoch when the value of studying bird behaviour began to be appreciated in scientific circles, although the growth of ornithological professionalism was delayed until immediately after the Second World War. The way had been prepared by a notable succession of naturalists, including Turner, Ray, White, Newton, Selous and Howard. Mention must be made of The British Bird Book (1911-1913) which contained the best series of life-history studies published in this country up to that time. F. B. Kirkman, who edited it, was one of the first British ornithologists to appreciate the importance of supplement- ing field-observation with experimental work. He used still and motion photography to record his results and it is noteworthy that -some prominent bird-photographers were among those who contributed articles to these volumes. If the appearances of compendious publications on birds are to be considered mile-stones marking the advance of British ornithology during a century, the outstanding works are the books by Macgillivray (1837-52) and A’arrell (1837-43) respectively, both entitled A History of British Birds, the Dictionary of Birds by Newton and Gadow (1896), The British Bird Book and The Handbook. The ornithologically favourable situation of these islands, our >sporting tradition, the work achieved by generations of naturalists on the identification of our avifauna and the improvement in field- -glasses, prepared the way for the two great observers of the begin- ning of this century — Selous, the investigator of sexual selection, the discoverer of displacement activities, a man dedicated to the conviction that no item of bird behaviour could be too trivial for 'Scrutiny, and Howard, whose name will always be associated with the territory theory — which still remains a subject of profitable controversy. They stand out as almost the last of the great ornithological individualists and the initiators of bird-watching in the modern style. The study of ethology, the science of behaviour, is now fully established in a number of countries with a professionalism of its * Mr. Armstrong’s comprehensive review has been made at the request of the Editors as part of a reappraisal of the state of knowledge regarding various aspects of British ornithology. It is intended to publish similar reviews on other aspects in due course. — Pins. 97 98 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX own. Any attempt to suggest aspects of bird display deserving of the amateur’s attention must take account of this development. Now, should he wish to embark on serious study of a species or a problem he must acquaint himself with a considerable literature, often in several languages. He must also know something of modern techniques. The crucial distinction between the pro- fessional and the amateur is not that one is paid for his work and the other is unpaid but that the professional is able, on the whole, to look at birds when he wants to, while the amateur has to bird- watch in the time left over from other commitments. Thus all but the few whose conditions of employment permit extensive holidays and the still smaller number whose time is their own are precluded from most tasks which involve long-term, frequent and regular observations. It would be advantageous to society if more grants were available for amateur scientists to pursue specific research. Thus something might be done to prevent the widening of the gulf between the scientist and the public. Ornithology is still one of the scientific disciplines in which amateurs and pro- fessionals can understand and respect each other’s contributions but the rapid advance of ethology may soon lead to a stage when the issues involved and the terminology employed are outside the average layman’s comprehension. However, good work may still be done by busy people who deploy their leisure carefully and do not set themselves tasks beyond their capacity. The outstanding advantage enjoyed by the amateur, which he need never lose, is that he is much commoner than the professional. Perhaps his main contribution in the future will be through co-operation in corporate schemes, though it will be a sad day if he ever feels himself to be but a hewer of wood and drawer of water for others. It is to be hoped that the historian of ornithology 25 or 50 years hence will not have to record the virtual disappear- ance of the individualist observer. The professional has often acknowledged the achievements of the amateur naturalist. For example, Beirne (1952) discussing the history of the British fauna, remarks: “Adequate information on the bionomics, taxonomy and distribution of individual species is available only for those animals which . . . have attracted most attention from non- professional naturalists.’’ TECHNIQUE Bird-watching techniques are so well known that little comment is needed. Experiments with stuffed specimens, models and mirrors are useful but difficult to interpret unless made on a con- siderable scale. Perhaps because of the expense involved, cinematography, especially “ slow-motion,’’ has not been used enough in the study of bird displays. Electronic flash photography can portray postures admirably but needs to be supplemented by motion pictures. On the breeding-grounds of social-nesting VOL. XLIX] STUDY OF BIRD DISPLAY 99 species substantial semi-permanent hides are useful. Sound records of utterances are not only of value for their own sake but may sometimes be used in conjunction with a model to attract males of the species to sing; and display. It is preferable, of course, to study identifiable ring;ed individuals. Much may be learned concerning' behaviour by keeping" birds in aviaries. LIFE-HISTORY STUDIES AND DISPLAY The study of display should be closely related to life-history studies. Here the amateur sometimes enjoys advantages denied to the professional, who is often preoccupied with specialized problems. Many amateurs reside where an interesting and little- studied species is available, or, it may be, in or near an area particularly favourable for special studies, as, for example, where birds which usually breed in lofty trees nest in lower situations or where cliff- or island-nesting species are particularly accessible. Not many professional ornithologists have been able to concentrate on life-history studies involving years of observation. Any amateur embarking on the intensive study of a species should make encjuiries as to what work has been done, or is contemplated, on it. The B.T.O. might be used as a clearing-house for such information. As comparative studies of the behaviour of related species are of particular interest to the professional, who is specially equipped to carry them out, the amateur would usually be well advised to choose species belonging to families not well represented in this country unless his work can be made ancillary to a larger scheme. The bird-watcher abroad enjoys special opportunities. Probably the real future of amateur ornithology lies with those not permanently resident in these islands. THE ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOUR Three aspects of a bird’s display are of special interest — how it has evolved, what function it serves and what causal factors are involved. Although the average bird-watcher may not wish to go deeply into these matters his observations will be more effective if he bears these angles of approach in mind. He should describe what he sees so that his account can be compared in detail with the displays of other species, and his notes will be all the more valuable if he has some comparative knowledge. Similarly, realising that display is essentially a signalling code, he will be interested in recording, not only the type of posturing performed by the bird but its place in a sequence and the reaction of the bird perceiving it. Thirdly, he will consider of what components a display is composed. In practice, each of these ways of regarding display illuminates the others. The observer’s problem is to be candid and unprejudiced as to the facts while cherishing concepts, but not preconceived ideas, as to their significance. The technique of observing display analytically cannot be 100 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX described here. Much can be learned from papers in recent volumes of the ornithological journals and the British Journal of Animal Behaviour. No serious student can afford to neglect the journal Behaviour. Ethological studies are progressing so rapidly that theories and concepts are constantly under review. Few writers on the subject would be prepared to sponsor whole- heartedly the theories and opinions they put forward a few years ago. Some comments seem desirable on the forms and components of display in order to indicate modern methods of study. Display may conveniently be divided into the categories, Sexual, Threat, and Distraction or Diversionary. Each of these types is probably the product of mixed motivation or a conflict of tendencies. The sources of displays are believed to be, for the most part, movements, such as “intention movements’’ — incomplete or checked activities — various “out of context’’ activities called “transference” (Armstrong, 1952; in press) or “re-direction” activities (Bastock et al., 1953), and various movements due to high intensity drives (Moynihan, 1955a). Definitive formulation of these concepts awaits further clarification of the nature of these activities. The observer of a display should try to identify its sources and constituents but caution is necessary in reaching conclusions. SEXUAL OR EPIGAMIC DISPLAY The sources of sexual display appear to be attack, retreat and sexual motivations. The relative strength of these tendencies varies in different species and according to circumstances. It should be borne in mind that some displays which deter males attract females. Hinde’s study of finch courtship (1955-56) exemplifies the technique by which components of such displays may be identified. Certain aspects of sexual display which seem particularly worthy of the amateur’s attention are mentioned below. Aerial displays and song-flights. These, and aquatic displays, can seldom be studied in captive birds and so it is important that the field-naturalist should study them. Flight-displays, many of which have threat significance, are probably commoner than is generally realized. Aspects of interest are: (i) the relationship of display-flight to territorialism and the female; (2) the frequency and seasonal incidence of display-flight; (3) the relation between aerial display, coloration and habitat. The display-flights of many species, especially most of the birds of prey, are imperfectly known and the exact significance of aerial chases, especially when more than two birds are involved, needs investigation. It is important lo determine whether in sexual chases the female is enticing the male rather than the ardent male harrvin. 5 c o ^ 'ZZ '^■ c3 y t)£— ^ ■OJO s g 5^ a G i- ^ o ^ !z: OJ jO CD CD ^ 'OIj , c - 13 p r- — O b "D ^ tx ^ Q -rt K V) o P p t2 ? rt P c Cg p rtii'liyrhyinliu.s) Rrossai'f^il, Norlh-( 'eniral k-clanil : Junr ni:;4 Both birds liave detrclod the approai'h of daiigi'r, and arn alrrl. 'I'lu' f^andiT is in fact standing on tip-loc. t Plate 15 Nioll Rankin Pink-footed (iHIOsh {.li/.vcr arvcnsis brachvriivnchns) KrossArgil, Xortli-C'enlral Jccland: June 11)54 Tills shows clearly tlie citadel of the nest-site, with only one side to [irotect against ])ossible attack from foxes. On all sitle.s except the narrow approach is a sheer drop of 100 feet. The slopes of the hill heliind arc a barren scree. Plate i6 VOL. XLix] MORTALITY OF THE BLUE TIT 177 Islands, where the clutch-size is very low, are almost twice as likely to survive from one breeding-season to the next as are British birds. Thus Blue Tits can either breed slowly and live longer, or breed faster and die sooner. It is suggested that the control lies, ultimately, not in the mortality factors themselves, but in the number of young which they can produce annually in the area in which they live. SUMMARY 1. The annual mortality of the Blue Tit is estimated by the proportion of first-year to adult birds in museum specimens collected in the breeding-season. 2. In the British population the annual mortality of adults appears to be about 70%. 3. The figures indicate that the mortality of juveniles is higher than that of adults in October and November, but from December onwards juvenile and adult mortality are about equal. 4. Annual mortality of adults in different parts of the range is correlated with clutch-size. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to many people, too numerous to mention individually, for making available to me the specimens from which the data used in this paper were drawn. REFERENCES Drost, R. (1951): “ Kennzeichen fiir Alter und Geschlecht bei Sperlingsvogeln”. Orn. Merkbldtter, Nr. i. Heim de Balsac, H. (1952): “ Rhythme sexuel et f^condite chez les oiseaux du Nord-ouest de I’Afrique”. Alauda, 20: 213-242. Kluijver, H. N. (1939): “ Ueber die Variabilitat der Fliigellange in einer beringten Parus ma/or-Population Limosa, 12: 80-86. Lack, D. (1946): “ Do juvenile birds survive less well than adults? ” Brit. Birds, xxxix : 258-264. (1947): “ The significance of clutch-size”. Ibis, 89: 302-352. (1950): ” Family-size in titmice of the genus Parus”. Evolution, 4 : 279-290. (1954 ^) ■ The natural regulation of animal numbers. Oxford. ■ (1954 ti) : “ The evolution of reproductive rates”. In Evolution as a process. London. (1955): “ British tits {Parus spp.) in nesting boxes”. Ardea, 43: 50-84. NOTES INlimetic posturing of Red-backed Shrikes. — A considerable amount of time was spent in 1955, and to a lesser extent in 1954, in an attempt to plot the breeding distribution of Red-backed Shrikes [Lanius collurio) in parts of the New Forest, Hampshire. It is frequently cited in the literature that this bird is both conspicuous and garrulous in its breeding territory, so that the attention of anyone interested is soon drawn to both the birds and the nesting locality. Generally speaking, I found that the behaviour of the New Forest birds was quite the opposite to this. Indeed, in the three years prior to 1954, when no special search was made for the species, but when much time was spent in suitable shrike habitat, only one pair was located. In 1954, after the first pair had been found, a careful search of the surrounding area produced four pairs within a mile square. In T955, ranging over a wider area, at least twenty breeding pairs were recorded. At one time a common and familiar breeding bird in Hampshire, it has generally come to be regarded in recent years as a rapidly disappearing species. On several occasions in 1955 well established pairs were found in areas which had previously been searched well, without any sign of Red-backed Shrikes being found. At other times, when frequent visits were being made to nests, no sign of either bird was seen, except when the incubating female was flushed. Usually, however, the cock did show up on one or two occasions during the incubation period, although these brief sightings were sufficiently infrequent to make the location of new pairs very much a matter of chance. On 20th June 1955 the first clue was obtained to where these missing cocks were hiding, when one was watched in a particularly striking mimetic posture. Subsequently two further records were obtained, which suggested that this method of concealment might be a regular feature of Red-backed Shrike behaviour. The three occurrences are recorded below in chronological order; — (i) The cock of Pair 4 was first located through binoculars at a distance of about quarter of a mile sitting on the dead branch of a thorn bush. As we approached it across open ground, it gradually became visible to the naked eye. When within twenty or thirty yards, it still retained its perch, but gradually adopted a strange flattened posture. At fifteen yards my wife stood still, facing the bird, as I walked round in an arc. As I did this the bird slowly followed me round, until, after passing through about 130° of arc, I hid behind a bush. It then redirected its attention to my wife, thus enabling me to obtain a good side view of the posture. I then approached it to within three yards, and found that even at this range it was almost impossible to distinguish the bird from the surrounding dead twigs, and even when clearly 178 VOL. XLIX] NOTES 179 discernible it was most difficult to believe that it was in fact a bird. At this stage the bird flew off. The female was incubating two eggs at the time in a low blackthorn bush about ten yards away. (2) On the evening of 28th June 1955, soon after locating a pair of Red-backed Shrikes in a clump of bushes which had been looked at on five separate occasions during the past week, many shrike- like droppings were found below a holly bush about quarter of a mile away. On glancing up I found a cock shrike of a new pair (9) sitting on a dead branch in the same mimetic posture as that of the cock of Pair 4, at a distance of only three feet, and slightly above eye level. It then immediately flew off. I felt sure that this bird would not have moved had I not paused to look up. The hen was incubating four erythristic eggs about five yards away. (3) I revisited Pair 4 in the morning of 2nd July 1955. After searching the cock’s regular perches through binoculars I eventually saw it sitting upright and quite still about 50 yards away. As I approached, it gradually adopted the mimetic posture, and permitted me to come within four feet before flying off. The hen was then brooding two small nestlings. On several other occasions birds were seen flying from bushes at close range, and it was suspected that they, too, were disturbed from their concealing posture. The circumstances in which these observations were made have been described in some detail, as it is considered that they have considerable significance to the facts related. I can find no mention of this behaviour having been recorded elsewhere, and it remains for future work to show how widespread and how regular is the practice. Obviously it has high survival value, and is probably one of the main factors in accounting for the apparent scarcity of the species, at least in the New Forest area. Maybe it occurs more commonly during incubation and the early chick stage, when the cocks are less in evidence, than it does later. When both birds of the pair are feeding young, they show up more readily, though even then they can be remarkably elusive. Fig. I — Front and side views of mimetic posture of male Red-backed Shrike {Lanins collurio) 180 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Description of posture. Front view (Fig. la): the head and body is flattened ovoid in shape, the black facial markings in the centre resembling a mask. Through binoculars one can see that the eyes are fully rounded and look straight ahead. The tail hangs down below the oval of the body. Side view (Fig. ib) ; the upper-parts were noted as being curved in an almost perfect arc from the forehead to the tip of the tail. A stiffened (wooden) appearance combined with this curved effect produced a most unbird-like object. In no case were the legs visible, being either hidden from view by the twig on which the bird rested, or concealed by the feathers of the flattened body. John Ash Orphean Warbler in Dorset. — An Orphean Warbler [Sylvia hortensis) was trapped and ringed at Portland Bill, Dorset, in the evening of 20th September 1955. It was thoroughly examined in the hand by Dr. J. F. Monk and myself, assisted by S. R. Hatch and Miss U. Wall, and later also seen by A. J. Bull and Alan Till. The following points have been selected from the full description submitted with this note. Strikingly large, whitethroat-shaped, with stout slate-grey legs and blackish bill. Iris dirty greyish- white. Very dark lores and ear-coverts contrasting with paler grey crown (not brownish) and white throat. Upper-parts other- wise fairly uniform greyish-brown, lacking rufous tinge of White- throat [Sylvia communis). Breast whitish, faintly suffused pinkish- buff; flanks brownish-buff, tinged pink; under tail-coverts paler pinkish-buff ; belly white. Outer tail-feathers mainly whitish ; rest mostly with pale tips, diminishing towards central pair. Wing 78 mm. ; weight 21.2 gm. Shape and general colouration sugges- tive of a very large Lesser Whitethroat [Sylvia curriica) ; dark “mask” and stout bill gave head an almost shrike-like appearance. It was not seen in the field except on release, when it showed white outer tail-feathers as it flew away and disappeared into a large bramble-bush. From iris-colour, it seems probable it was a first winter bird; if so, the grey crown suggests it was a male, though The Handbook states that both sexes in first winter have brownish crowns almost uniform with upper-parts. Alternatively, if it was an adult female, the iris-colour did not agree with “pale yellow to yellowish-white” described in The Handbook. As in the case of the Whitethroat, it may be that there is an extensive over- lap in external characters of age and sex between young males and adult females, making most of them indistinguishable. This is apparently the fifth or sixth British record of the Orphean Warbler, the first since 1916 and the first in Dorset. K. B. Rooke Unusual nest-site of Hooded Crow. — Whilst driving along the VOL. XLIX] NOTES 181 main road past Loch Bee, South Uist (Outer Hebrides), on 19th May 1955, we noticed a nest built on the lowest arm of a teleg'raph pole, and a closer examination revealed it to be that of a Hooded Crow [Corvus cornix) with the bird sitting. This species is common on the island, nesting on the hilly east side, but it seems strange that this normally wary bird should nest by the busiest road on the island along which cars and buses are passing frequently. There is no mention of such a site in The Handbook. Keith S. Macgregor, Frank D. Hamilton and J. D. R. Vernon [We do not know of any other records of Hooded Crows using such a site, at least in the British Isles, but there are many instances of the closely related Carrion Crow (C. corone) doing so. This is particularly the case, as one would expect, in areas where the bird is sufficiently common for there to be a shortage of normal nesting-places. Such an area is Dungeness, Kent, where the Carrion Crow has been increasing enormously since about 1919. N. F. Ticehurst (Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist, vol. viii, no. I, pp. lo-ii) summarizing the change in the status of this bird in that area, includes the following sites : the small platform at the top of a signal post on a disused railway ; the space between two chimney-pots on derelict coastguard houses ; the interior of a large wooden “G” on the top of a tall pole (a War Department mark) and similar site in one half of a “W” ; the top of a gun- mounting; the top crossbar of a telephone pole.— Eds.]. Kestrel nestlings fed on Starlings. — A Kestrel’s (Falco tinnunculus) nest was kept under observation at Hog Hill, Essex, during the years 1954-55. During 1954, when 5 young were reared, nothing unusual was noted in the nestlings’ diet; a known pluck- ing-block adjacent to the nest-site was occasionally examined and usually the entrails and other remains of small rodents were seen. In July 1955 three young hatched, and at about ten days old their diet appeared to consist of small rodents, no bird-remains being seen. However, when the nestlings were about 17 days old juvenile Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) began to figure prominently in the diet, the bottom of the nest being lined with their remains. Also present were the remains of one of the young Kestrels (which may have been killed by its nest-mates as it was the smallest of the brood) and the right wing of a Greenfinch (Chloris chloris). A further check on the nest was made when the young Kestrels were about 24 days old and more Starling remains, plus the foot of some other small Passerine, were found (the nest had been cleaned at the previous visit). In all, 24 pairs of wings of juvenile Starlings were removed from the nest, and since all visible remains, including pellets, were examined, and no other prey was identified, it would appear that the diet of these young Kestrels consisted almost exclusively of Starlings. 182 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Five B.T.O. ring's ■were among' the remains and all were from juvenile Starling's ringed at Romford Ringing Station (5 miles S.E.) during May, June and July 1955. A. C. Parker and D. J. Summers [We should be glad to hear of any other records of Kestrels feeding to a large extent on birds. While this seems to be unusual, there was from several areas during 1955 a suggestion that Kestrels were turning more to birds for their prey. This might be due to one of two indirect effects of myxomatosis and the absence of rabbits : on the one hand, the increased length of grass might have been making it difficult for predators such as Kestrels to locate and catch small mammals ; on the other, we know through the work of H. N. Southern on Tawny Owls (Strix aliico) (un- published) that competition for the small ground rodents was greatly increased and their numbers dropped well below the average. — Eds.]. House Martins perching on tree to feed. — The subject of House Martins {Delichon iirbica) and Swallows [Hirundo rustica) perch- ing on trees has already been discussed at length [antea, vol. xlii, pp. 246-247, and vol. xliii, pp. 254-256) and it was pointed out that most of the records given referred to the late summer. R. W. H. Nind suggested (vol. xlii, pp. 247) that the warm weather had attracted insects to the topmost foliage of the trees and thus drawn the attention of the House Martins. I can now record an instance of this behaviour that supports this theory. During the very hot afternoon of 21st August 1955, at Sopwell Mill, near St. Albans, Hertfordshire, I saw about a dozen House Martins on the leafy topmost branches of an elm tree ; they were clinging to the twigs and through the glasses could be seen to be picking small insects from the leaves. An investigation of the lower branches of the tree revealed only a few odd insects, but a stick hurled to the top of the tree produced a veritable cloud of small flying insects. Bryan L. Sage Siberian Chiff chaff in Dorset. — In recent autumns, at Portland Bill, Dorset, Chiffchaffs {Phylloscopus collyhita) have occasionally been seen which it was strongly suspected belonged to one of the ' northern races, abietinus or tristis. On 14th October 1955 an unusually plumaged Chiffchaff was seen. This bird had remark- ably greyish upper-parts, with a whitish supcrcilium and under- parts, and dark legs. It was so different in appearance from previous “Northern” Chiffchaffs, that it was at first thought to be some other species of PhyJloscopiis. At 13.15 G.M.T. it was trapped, and the following details recorded in the laboratory (brief excerpt): — all upper-parts a uniform dark olive with a distinct greyish suffusion (tlie latter was less apparent in the hand than in the field) ; the under-parts were VOL. XLIX] NOTES 183 all whitish without any trace of yellow anywhere, the upper breast being; pale greyish-buff, rather darker at sides ; axillaries lemon, but none at carpal joint ; the supercilium was conspicuous and whitish with no yellow ; the edges to the wing- and tail-feathers were olive; wing-length, 56 mm. (both measured); 2nd primary^ 7th/8th; weight, 7.5 gms. The bird was also seen by my wife, the Misses M. D. Crosby and D. York, and J. A. Wigzell. John Ash Whinchat singing in winter-quarters. — The Handbook states that the Whinchat [SaxicoLa rubetra) does not sing in winter-quarters. I observed a large number of this species in Sierra Leone (1950-52) and the Gold Coast (1952-53), at the appropriate season, and heard song on one occasion only. This was near Freetown, Sierra Leone, on 4th April 1952, when a male sang the normal song several times in succession from the top of a small bush. W. E. Almond Little Bunting in Co. Dublin. — On 24th October 1954, Mr. J. R. Dick and I flushed a Little Bunting [Emberiza pusilla) along with two or three Chaffinches [Fringilla coelebs), from a tangle of long grass and discarded branches on the shore a few yards above high tide mark at Rogerstown Estuary, Donabate, Co. Dublin. At a distance of less than twenty yards, while the bird was perched in a prominent position the small size, bunting- like shape, bright chestnut cheeks edged with black and fine black streaks on huffish flanks and whitish under-parts caught the eye immediately as did the chestnut crown. Examination later of skins in the National Museum, Dublin, appeared to confirm that the bird was a male. G. R. Humphreys REVIEW BIRDS AND MAMMALS OF SHETLAND. By L. S. V. and U. M. Venables. {Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, 1955). 391 pages ; 8 photographic plates ; 3 maps. 30s. The islands of Shetland, meeting-place of northern and southern elements in our fauna, and maritime outpost of a region where striking climatic changes are known to be taking place, form perhaps the most important zoogeographical area in the British Isles. A fauna of Shetland should be of national rather than local stature. The Venables have met this challenge handsomely, and have produced what is perhaps the most stimulating regional study of recent years. It is now 80 years since the publication of H. L. Saxby’s The Birds of Shetland, and 58 years since this was followed by Evans’s and Buckley’s Vertebrate Fauna. In the past half-century numerous changes have occurred, many of them of more than merely local interest. Such changes often reflect trends and tendencies which are noticeable over a much wider area, and the 184 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX north-east Atlantic reg'Ion of which these islands form an integral part has long received the close attention of ornithologists, and zoogeographers in general. The time was ripe for a new and critical survey of the Shetland avifauna when Mr. and Mrs. Venables settled there lo years ago and began work in this fascinating field. They must have realised at an early stage that their birds called for more specialized treatment than is customary in county faunistic surveys : increase and decrease, abundance and scarcity, colonization and extinction all need to be related to the special qualities of the climate and landscape, and song-periods and breeding activities to the comparative lateness of the season in these higher latitudes. The authors have succeeded well in apply- ing considerations of biology and ecology to their field-observa- tions, and the essays on the more important species — such as Blackbird, Fulmar, Corncrake and the wintering Whooper Swans — are models of this type of approach. The bibliography of some 350 references bears ample witness to their industry in the library as well as in the field, and the book is full of useful comparisons of status and behaviour drawn from neighbouring regions to north and south. In addition to the systematic accounts of birds and mammals (Man, with his present difficulty in maintaining viable communities in the remoter parts of the group, is not forgotten!), the latter written with the assistance of G. T. Kay, there are chapters concerning Shetland habitats, Shetland naturalists past and present, and status changes during the past 80 years. These are ably summarized, but discussion of them is perhaps the least satisfactory part of the book. The authors take the view that “Shetland’s own climate remains unaltered,’’ whilst that of southern Greenland, Iceland, Spitsbergen and north-western Europe has undergone a progressive amelioration; but the chief evidence on which we are asked to accept this view is a series of temperature-records for the period 1871-1930 from Aberdeen, a North Sea port 200 miles to the south and not exposed, as Shetlaad is, to the warming influence of the Gulf Stream and the “tropical air’’ of the Atlantic lows. Air-temperature records from Bergen and Tdrshavn (Faeroe Islands) down to 1920-25 are also given, but their value is dubious. There have been several striking changes subsequent to this period, and several of the earlier ones concern species more likely to respond to water-temperature, such as Common Tern, Gannet, Common Scoter and Eider. There is much of interest In these changes. The final extinction of the White-tailed Eagle, in a land given to sheep rearing, was a foregone conclusion (the wonder is that it held on till 1910!), but the total disappearance of the once-common Kestrel and scarcer Sparrowhawk is difficult to understand. The absence of the former, incidentally, necessitates an alteration to the distribution as given in The Handbook, vol. iii, pp. 28). Song Thrush, Whinchat and Pied Flycatcher have undergone a spectacular VOL. XLIX] REVIEW 185 increase as passage-migrants since Saxby’s time, whilst the Cross- bill, then a regular annual immigrant, has become extremely sporadic. Pintail, Scoter, Shoveler and Tufted Duck have colonized Orkney and begun to nest in Shetland in recent years, and are on the increase in Iceland ; similarly the Black-tailed Godwit, now spreading in Iceland, has nested occasionally in Shetland and Faeroe. In Saxby’s time, 1859-1871, winter visits by different races of the Gyr Falcon and the summering of Snowy Owls were apparently regular events, and both Glaucous and Ice- land Gulls were commoner than now : the reviewer suggests that the recent decline in such records may well be a concomitant of the warming-up of the winter environment in Iceland, Spitsbergen and low arctic Greenland. The only satisfactory records of the nesting of the Snow Bunting and most of the visitations of the Walrus and arctic seals belong to this period. Dr. Saxby is not allowed his claim to have discovered the Turnstone breeding in Unst. The suggestion that the Great Northern Diver may have bred in recent years is more exciting, though still “not proven”. The reviewer cannot believe that the Lesser Redpoll, which breeds only in Britain (C. /. disruptis) and the alpine regions of Central Europe (C. /. cabaret) “was not particularly uncommon in Unst during the last century” as an autumn migrant. There are only 3 definite records for Shetland (including Fair Isle) in the present century, and clearly Dr. Saxby was confused about the forms of Redpoll {flammea and rostrata) visiting Shetland regularly. The Handbook statement that the Lesser Redpoll is “rare at any time” in Shetland must be accounted right, but in other respects the Venables’ research and observations have shown The Handbook to be wrong, and readers should note the following corrections. There is no good record for the Magpie ; the Linnet does not breed (replaced by the Twite, locally “Lintie” or “Linnet”); the Mistle Thrush is an extremely scarce vagrant and does not winter ; there is no evidence that Shetland Wheatears are ever double- brooded ; the Whinchat is regular in autumn, less so in spring, not vice versa. The recent increase in the Whimbrel and especially the Red-throated Diver is very satisfactory ; that of the Great Skua, a protected species, gives cause for alarm. Speculation as to the racial affinities of the breeding Song Thrushes (since ca. 1910) and Jackdaws (since 1940) are pointless in the absence (the laudable absence ! ) of collected specimens : both are variable species, and the migrant Song Thrushes are not exclusively “grey-backed”, the mid-October passage comprising darker birds which can be separated from British skins only with difficulty. The Venables may be right in their view that the birds which have colonized Shetland during the period under review are from Scandinavian populations, representing those southern elements which have extended their range north-westwards through Europe following the general climatic amelioration. They say : “If northern Europe can now support a far larger breeding popula- 186 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX tion of these species, this may well swell our wintering numbers, and so increase the chance that a few individuals may remain to breed”. In other words, the colonization is the “backwash” of the main push of spring migration northwards into Scandinavia. It is an attractive theory, but at the same time there is no concrete evidence to show that this colonization is not simply a northwards extension from the British area. Future workers may find further clues, and in any event it is unlikely that the one hypothesis entirely excludes the other. This most stimulating and authentic study will be a standard work on the ornithology of Northern Britain for very many years, and the Venables are to be congratulated on the results of their enterprise. Not only is the book full of interesting facts, lucidly interpreted and discussed, but it is most attractively produced, with excellent photographs of Shetland habitats, useful breeding- lists of birds and mammals for the separate islands, a calendar of average flowering-dates of Shetland plants, and a good working index. K.W. LETTERS VOLUNTARY WATCHERS NEEDED BY THE R.S.P.B. Sirs, — The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is urgently in need of voluntary watchers to assist in wardening the well-known reserves at Minsmere and Havergate Island in Suffolk for a week or longer, and also to act as watchers at sites of special interest. Both Minsmere and Havergate offer opportunities of seeing a number of rare breeding species, such as Bearded Tit, Bittern and Marsh Harriers at Minsmere, and Avocets and uncommon passage waders at Havergate. A week’s watching assisting the warden and keeping scientific records does provide a very inexpensive bird- watching holiday, because lodging for two watchers is provided free and the only expenses incurred are in travelling and food. We are also seeking watchers for sites of especial interest and importance, e.g. the Bee-eaters in Sussex last year. The watcher must have good ornithological qualifications and also be able to deal firmly but tactfully with all sorts of human intruders. People who would be free to begin watching at very short notice and willing to go anywhere in England, Scotland or Wales would be most useful. If anybody would like to volunteer for either Minsmere, Haver- gate or as a special watcher, we would be very pleased to hear from them. P. E. Brown 25, Eccleston Square, London, S. W. i . VOL. XLIX] LETTERS 187 THE GUILLEMOTS OF AILSA CRAIG Sirs, — There is a danger that Dr. J. A. Gibson’s letter [antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 559-560) may be interpreted as good evidence that the Northern Guillemot [Uria a. aalge) breeds on Ailsa Craig. Actually, neither his recent letter nor his excellent account of the birds of Ailsa Craig (Scot. Nat. vol. 63, pp. 73-100, 159-177) states categorically that the Northern form “breeds”, merely that it “occurs” alongside the Southern birds. Nevertheless, there is a clear inference that these birds are breeders, and in fact in The Birds of Scotland by E. V. Baxter and L. J. Rintoul we find the unequivocal statement, “Dr. J. A. Gibson tells us that Northern Guillemots breed on Ailsa Craig as well as the Southern ” (p. 683). That the Northern Guillemot does “occur”. Dr. Gibson has now shown. But we must not accept the view that a wreck of oiled birds, which may have travelled far before wind and tide, gives a cross-section of the breeding-population of the Craig. Even if this unfortunate oiling was a local phenomenon, the date of the big wreck, 23rd August, does not preclude the possibility that birds moving south from the Hebrides were involved. There is also the complication of immature birds. We should not accept, as proof, birds actually seen on ledges at the height of the nesting- season, unless these are known to have charge of eggs or young. As with other sea-birds, large numbers of non-breeders come ashore at the colonies in summer, and although it is usual for these to segregate on the lower ledges close to the sea, their very presence demands that the utmost care be taken in any field-study concerned with subspecific identification, or counts of “ringed” individuals in the breeding-population. At those colonies I know best (in the Faeroe Islands), these non-breeders spend the later part of the summer higher on the cliffs, and the Faeroe fowlers have designed techniques, “omanfleyg” and “fygling”, to exploit both groups, so that the annual catch is made up entirely of immature birds. It is not unlikely that non-breeders throng the vicinity of Ailsa Craig, and that they include many birds native to colonies farther north. The only good evidence of the taxonomic status of the Guillemots of Ailsa Craig is contained in museums, and the half-dozen specimens I have examined are all good albionis. Since the Northern Guillemot certainly breeds in the Hebrides (though many Hebridean birds are not quite so dark as those in Shetland), one might expect that some mixing of the phenotypes would occur on Ailsa Craig, but I can see no evidence for this in the Royal Scottish Museum. We need only look at the situation in the east for a hint of what must surely happen in the west. F. Salomonsen, in his Atlantic Alcidae, shows that the breeding birds of Stora Karlso contain a small percentage indistinguishable from albionis, although the majority belong to the Baltic form intermedia, the most isolated of all Guillemots in the Palaearctic region. Further, 188 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX soon after H. F. Witherby’s description of albionls (1923 — York- shire), A. J. E. Lonnherg" separated helgolmidica (1923 — Heligo- land) as an intermediate form. If similar aggregations occur on the west side of Britain it seems likely they will be found in the Inner Hebrides : certainly, on such evidence as we have at present, there is no justification for the view that the Guillemots of Ailsa Craig are anything other than “pure” albionis. Fair Isle Bird Observatory. Kenneth Williamson Sirs, — If I may be allov.-ed, I would like to comment on some of the main points raised by Dr. J. A. Gibson’s reply to my letter concerning Guillemots on Ailsa Craig [antea, vol. xlviii, PP- 559-560). 1. We are approaching the truth at last. When Dr. Gibson Asserted that Northern Guillemots {Uria a. aalge) “occurred” on the Craig, I took him to mean (as did also the authoresses of The Birds of Scotland, p. 683) that they occurred as part of the breed- ing population. Now he tells us that they occur only as occasional visitors — a very different matter. 2. Dr. Gibson says that he does not collect skins, but the first supposed Northern bird was washed up dead. Why was this valuable evidence not preserved? It would have been to his advantage if he had obtained confirmatory evidence of his identi- fication, as would thus be possible. 3. Dr. Gibson gives no dates indicating the time of year when these “ Northern birds ” were recorded, except in one case, 23rd August 1948. Presumably at such a time Guillemots would be in full moult, and many of the dark head-feathers would be lost. The identification of our two races of Guillemot, according to The Handbook (Vol.V, p. 153), depends very largely on head-coloura- tion. Dr. Gibson tells us nothing of all this. 4. In addition Dr. Gibson has still not supplied us with any details as to how he was able to identify these birds as “Northern Guillemots” — not even the minimum of plumage description. Surely such a description must be necessary before his statement can be seriously considered at all. M. F. M. Meiklejohn RUFOUS-CROWNED SHORT-TOED LARKS Sirs, — I was interested to read Mr. Kenneth Williamson’s notes on the Short-toed Lark [Calandrella brachydactyla) at Fair Isle on 4th May 1955 {antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 512-513). His description of this bird is similar to that of one I observed along the banks of the River Medjerdah at Sidi-Smail-Gare, Tunisia, on 20th April 1943- The reddish-brown of the upper-parts of that individual, and especially the rufous crown and small crest, relieved by a distinct whitish eye-stripe, gave an entirely difl'erent appearance from the VOL. XLIX] LETTERS 189 Short-toed Larks that I have seen in Eg"ypt, where the typical form and longipennis occurred in the winter, the former apparently being' the commonest. This rufous-headed form from Tunisia and other Mediterranean countries was treated as a separate race by J. I. S. Whitaker [The Birds of Tunisia (1905), vol. i, pp. 280-283), although he mentioned that most ornithologists were opposed to this view. However, whether this is a good race or not it is quite distinct in the field from the brachydactyla that I have seen in Egypt. C. A. White [The form to which Mr. White refers, C. b. hermonensis, has now been clearly shown by Col. R. Meinertzhagen (“Review of the Alaudidae’’, Proc. Zool. Soc. London (1950), vol. 121, pp. 81-132) to be a red-headed colour phase without definite distri- bution but more frequent in some Mediterranean areas than in others. — Eds.] . BLACK TERN MIGRATION ON 9TH MAY 1954 Sirs, — With reference to Mr. I. C. T. Nisbet’s letter [antea, pp. 159-160), I am quite sure that no one will have considered for one moment that my paper [antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 148-169) might con- stitute the last word on immigrations of Black Terns [Chlidonias niger). It will indeed be a sad day when the last word has been said about any species. However, Mr. Nisbet’s letter may stimulate discussion on and further enquiry into such movements and will serve to show how easily the same set of known facts can receive differing interpretations. Mr. Nisbet’s alternative interpretation of the records is, I think, incorrect for two reasons. Firstly, during the night of 8th-9th May, east .and south-east winds occurred mainly in the north- western part of France where Black Terns are seldom found in spring. Winds in mid-France were rather north of east and would have tended to take birds to the Biscay coast rather than to England. Secondly there were at least as many birds east and north of the area which Mr. Nisbet gives for their rough distribu- tion at dawn on 9th May as there were in that area. For birds to be distributed as they were on that morning would mean, for many of them, a journey of 18 to 24 hours from mid-France (if they were travelling at, say, an average speed of 30 m.p.h.). The Black Terns could not, then, have been deflected and travelled from mid- France in the one night. I cannot help feeling that Mr. Nisbet has paid too great attention to the particular weather map included in my paper (p. 158), without bearing in mind that changing weather situations and the exact positions of birds over a period of two days cannot possibly be shown on a single map. I do not know where he finds any suggestion in my paper that “ the disorientated 190 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX flight from the Bay of Biscay took place both by day and night on 8th and 9th May”. I have little doubt that lateral winds do deflect birds during day-time flight, though perhaps to a less degree than during the night. My own opinion is that the Black Terns were deflected, probably from well east of the Biscay coast, mainly during the night of yth-Sth May, and were carried north- wards west of Brittany during that time. Reorientating themselves during the day of 8th May would result in the birds flying in an E. and N.E. direction into the wind. The first apparently began to reach Britain during that day — a point of which Mr. Nisbet’s theory takes no account. Others flying through the night of 8th-gth May, would be slowed down but not deflected again by the wind which was now a headwind. The distribution of birds across Britain from west to east at dawn on gth May and their continu- ing passage in the same direction can be explained in this way. What I do find difficult to explain is tlie lack of records from Wales in view of the large numbers of birds both in the Bristol Channel and also in Cheshire and Lancashire. R. F. Dickens BLACK TERNS IN AUTUMN 1954 Sirs, — In your July 1955 issue [antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 300-307) you published a paper, by Alec Butterfield and Kenneth Williamson, on the passage of Black Terns [Chlidonias niger) in Britain in the autumn of 1954. I feel it is necessary to point out that this analysis was marred in detail to a certain extent by misunderstanding and omission of the East Anglian records. The writers mention no Black Terns for the Wash/Fens before 9th September 1954, when ‘‘more than 200 birds appeared over Terrington Marshes in Cambridgeshire with a further 20 at King’s Lynn”. In fact, Terrington Marshes are not somewhere inland, as is implied, but in Norfolk : they comprise the western bank of the Ouse estuary on which King’s Lynn itself lies — the southern extremity of the Wash. Further, there was thus no reference to the fact that in this same locality there had been a flock from at least 21st August 1954, when watching began there. It numbered 27 on 21st August; up to 32 from 23rd to 27th August; 50 on 28th August; increasing daily to 140 on ist September. The next count was on 9th September, when there were 220 in the Ouse estuary. Of this flock, which appeared at the mouth of the river with each high tide, a substantial proportion (up to 53) flew inland on each of these dates. In addition, in the western corner of the Wash, there were 100 Black Terns in the Welland Estuary on 31st .August and ist September; no later visits were made there. In Blakcney Harbour on the north Norfolk coast there was a flock of 20-30 on nth August, and 25-30 on 25th .August. None of this is mentioned in the paper and consideration of it surely makes some difference to the conclusions drawn. I consider VOL. XLIX] LETTERS 191 it is likely that there was on the East Coast, probably for about a month, a large, increasing permanent flock of Black Terns, slowly filtering inland. The movement of gth September probably marked the peak of this phenomenon. But having regard to the fact that the Wash flock appears now not as a sudden “fall” but rather as a more gradual “build-up”, it is difficult to place complete con- fidence in Messrs. Butterfield’s and Williamson’s interpretation of the movement of gth September. We are told that on that day two flocks totalling i8 birds reached Ireland, and that “smaller numbers (than 20) occurred at various points from Teesmouth, Yorkshire, to Slapton Ley, Devon”. Without the details being published this is not very helpful — especially if the data should prove as inadequate as those given for East Anglia. T. C. Smout Sirs, — The responsibility for any “misunderstanding and omission of the East Anglian records” in our paper on the autumn migration of the Black Tern {Chlidonias niger) in ig54 {antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 300-307) rests largely with those observers who did not respond to our appeal for information on this subject [antea, vol. xlvii, p, 450). It is indeed a ludicrous situation that an observer should choose to withhold germane information, and then blame the authors because the published report is marred as a result ! Apart from the records for gth September, we received no reports of outstanding movements in East Anglia, and although some new data came to hand when our paper had reached the page-proof stage these did not call for a revision or modification of our interpretation, nor did they merit the upheavel which w’ould have followed extensive alterations to the text at that late stage. Not until the paper had appeared was our attention drawn to the full extent of the migration in East Anglia, as now set forth in Mr. Smout-’s letter. As readers will readily appreciate, the amount of information which observers were good enough to supply was very large, as it almost always is in such cases. The Black Tern passage lasted for three-and-a-half months and covered the whole of the British Isles south of the Forth-Clyde valley: small wonder, then, that a conservative estimate of the space needed to print the records alone was over seven pages. Had we supplied comment and analysis to all these records, the paper might well have grown to twenty pages. We felt that readers (not to mention editors and publishers) would prefer a paper as brief and concise as was compatible with a true digest of the situation over the country as a whole, and a discussion of the salient features. This involved selection of the data, and we took the greatest care to ensure that we presented a fair and balanced picture of the migration as conveyed by the information before us. That this was the better choice we have no doubt, and it would seem to be justified by the fact that the considerable body of data I I I 192 BIRDS [voL. XLix which Mr. Smout now publishes does not in any way disturb the general picture or conllict with our main conclusions. Mr. Smout suggests that there was on the east coast, “probably for about a month, a large, increasing permanent flock of Black Terns, slowly filtering inland”. But apart from the 20-30 birds at Blakeney Harbour on iith August, this large flock was not known to be in the area until 21st August. Nor has any evidence been given of movement inland before the peak-day of 9th September. This being so, it is possible that most or all of the birds of the 21st may have reached the Wash with the cyclonic drift of 19th August {op. cit., fig. 4), whilst the gradual build-up from the 27th to the end of the month coincides with the many scattered records which followed the influx of the 25th (fig. 5), “of the residue of this latter invasion moving on in better weather” (p. 306). In other words, it may be that “onward passage” birds were gradually accumulating in this region, which is well known to be attractive to Black Terns. There is no evidence that the large numbers which were at Terrington Marshes (140) iind the Welland estuary (100) on ist September stayed there over the next eight days. Birds were certainly on the move in most parts of the country at the end of .August and probably into September, since records during the first week were mainly confined to the east coast bird observatories, close to the main migration route (p. 302). The heavy concentra- tion in the Wash on 9th September may well have been due to the cause given in our paper (pp. 304-305), especially as it is clear that a number of birds were actually migrating, passing inland up the River Ouse. The extra data now brought forward support rather than conflict with our main conclusions, though it must be admitted that the lack of information from this important area prior to 21st August and between ist and 9th September leaves serious gaps and does not permit us to draw a complete picture of the situation in the southern North Sea and Channel regions. .Alec Butterfield and Kenneth Willi.vmson REQUEST FOR INFORMATION “Soiling” on the faces of leaf-warblers. — In Jersey, during the spring migration of 1955, numbers of Phylloscoptts warblers were seen to have a black substance covering the feathers around the bill. .Several were caught — these all proved to be Chiffchaffs {Ph. collybita) — and samples were taken of the substance. i\ bird in an apparently similar condition was seen by Mrs. J. B. Cowdy in Buckinghamshire. In the spring of 1956 birds in the same state have again appeared in Jersey — one of those caught was a Willow Warbler (Ph. trochilus) — and further samples have been taken. Preliminary analysis of the substance has already been made by Mr. K. H. Palmer and this is being followed up by Professor P. .Mien. It seems possible that some of these “ soiled ” birds may have been observed in other parts of Britain and we should be grateful if any records could be sent to Mr. \\'. 1). Hooke, .Soci^t^ Jersiaise, The Museum, Pier Road, Jersey, C.l. , \ , A AN EXCELLENT BINOCULAR FOR ORNITHOLOGISTS MR. PETER SCOTT, Director of the Wildfowl Trust, is seldom with- out his Ross Binoculars. The model chosen by Mr. Scott for his work is the Ross Stepsun 12 x 50 The well balanced design of these binoculars makes them ideal for nature study, because they can be used for long periods without fatigue and are easy to focus quickly. These and other Ross Binoculars suitable for every outdoor activity are fully described in our catalogue sent free on request. STEPSUN 12x50 £52.12.10 ROSS ENSIGN LTD., CLAPHAM COMMON NORTH SIDE S.W.4 BANNERMAN THE BIRDS OF THE BRITISH ISLES • VOLUMES 1—4 NOW READY • Available on deferred payment terms of I Os. monthly Please send me full particulars of Bannerman Birds of the British Isles, with special monthly payment terms. Name Address B.B 161 {Block Capitals please) The Globe Publishing Co. Ltd. 6, 8 & 10 Lexington Street, London, W I 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 1/-. BINOCULARS AND TELESCOI’ES, new and reconditioned, at reasonable prices. Approval allowed, also part exchanges. 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. BINOCUL.LRS by leading makers. Magnifications 8x to 2ox. Prices from ;^io los. od. Ask for free Catalogue. DOLLONDS, 28 Old Bond Street, London, W.i. NEW BOOKS LIFE IN SHETLAND Ursula M. Venables This charming book gives the general background to the more specialised information contained in the recently published Birds and Mammals of Shetland. While compiling material for that book the author and her husband lived for eight years in Shetland and she describes here the community life of a remote cliff township. 176 Pages. 12 Half-tone Plates. 15s. Birds of the British Isles VOLUME IV D. A. Bannerman and G. E. Lodge “ The treatment both of the birds and the backgrounds makes these plates one of the finest sets that has ever been published to illustrate the British birds. This, the fourth volume of Dr. Bannerman ’s ambitious work, describes the specific characters and gives an account of the life histories of the swifts, nightjars, bee-eaters, hoopoes, rollers, king- fishers, woodpeckers, cuckoos and owls.” — The Listener. 280 Pages. 29 Colour Plates. 45s. BIRDS OF THE SUDAN r. O. Cave and J. D. Macdonald .\ comprehensive field guide to the identification and distribution of all birds known to occur in the Sudan. In addition to the twelve coloured plates, there are over 300 line drawings by D. M. Reid Henry. 480 Pages. 12 Colour Plates. 45s. Send for complete list of Bird Books to OLIVER & BOYD Tweeddale Court, Edinburgh, 1. 39a Welbeck Street, London, W.I Printed in Gt. Britain by Witiierby & Co., Ltd., Watford, Herts. Published by H. F. & G. WITHERBY LTD., 5, Warwick Court, W.C.i. BRITISH BIRDS AN ILLUSTRATED MONTHLY MAGAZINE Edited by E. M. Nicholson W. B. Alexander A. W. Boyd L J. Ferguson-Lees P. A. D. Hollom N. F. Ticehurst Editorial Address : 30, St. Leonard’s Avenue, Bedford. Photographic Editor: G. K. Yeates Monthly 3s. Yearly 30s. Contents oe Volume XLIX, Number 6, June KJ5G I’redation and protection at Dungencss Bird Reserve. By II. E. Axell. (plates 17-18) Further experiments with an artificial nestling gape. By Dr. Monica M. Betts, (plates 19-20) Obituary: Edgar P. Chance (1881-1955) Some photographic studies of ^^'hite-fronted and Lesser White-fronted Geese. Photographed by J. V. Beer, C. T. Dalgety, Niall Rankin, P. O. Swanberg and Philip Wayre (plates 21-28). Text by Peter Scott Song output of unstimulated Skylark. By Noble Rollin The moult-migration of the Shelduck from Cheshire in 1955. By R. H. Allen and G. Rutter Notes: — Green-winged Teal in Co. Kerry (Frank King) Lesser White-fronted Goose in Kirkcudbriglitshire (Donald Watson) Lesser White-fronted Geese in Gloucestershire, 1956 (I’eter Scott and Hugh Boyd) Lesser White-fronted Goose in Norfolk (Hugh Bo\t1, Robin II. Harrison and Michael J. Seago) Apparent hybrid Lesser White-fronted x White-fronted Goose in Hampshire and Sussex (Keith Shackleton) Greater Yellowlegs in Cornwall (Mrs. F. E. Carter) ... Lesser Yellowlegs in Co. Wexford (Frank King) Melodious Warbler on Bardsey (Roy Thearle) (plate 18, lower) Melodious Warbler on Skokholm (Peter Davis) Short-toed Lark in Co. Wexford (Major Robert F. Ruttledge) Review : — Station Biologique de la Tour du Valat : Premier Comple Remlii, ig^o-igjq, et Recueil des Travaux. Edited by Dr. L. HolTman Local Report Reviews: — Herefordshire Ornithological Club, Annual Report — 1953 and 1954. lulited by R. H. Baillie Ornithological Record for Derbyshire — 1953 and 1954. Compiled by Capt. W. K. Marshall Letters: — Displacement coition in the Mallard (Derek Goodwin) Yellow Wagtails in Kenya (Col. R. Meinertzhagen) Paue -’'3 215 216 218 221 2 2() 227 228 228 229 230 23' 232 233 233 234 235 237 238 240 Cover photograph by Eric Hosking: Golden Oriole {Oriolus oriolus) at the nest VoL. XLIX No. 6 JUNE 1956 BRITISH BIRDS PREDATION AND PROTECTION AT DUNGENESS BIRD RESERVE* By H. E. Axell (Plates 17-18) INTRODUCTION This paper summarizes what have seemed to be the more significant of the data obtained during the seasons 1952 to 1955 when efforts were first made to restore a once-successful gullery and a ternery. During the period of the 1939-45 war the colonies had become seriously depleted by human interference and by high populations of natural predators. The results of the protective measures adopted are regarded as preliminary and subject to review in the light of future experience gained from observation of the now annually changing relationship between the predators and the prey available to them in the area. The effects of recent control of some predators have been considerably complicated by the repercussions from myxomatosis. The promontory of Dungeness is a south-eastward extension of Romney Marsh, in Kent. Its area of ten square miles of shingle, the largest in Great Britain, is made up of a series of broad, low ridges, each of which originated as a shore bank built up by past storm periods. On some large, still unspoiled areas west from the ness, the ridges are patchily topped with mats of lichen. Viper’s bugloss, catchfly and foxglove are common in places but most of the vegetation is short (e.g. sea campion, thrift, stonecrops and fescue). Gorse, prostrate broom and creeping bramble are increas- ing their coverage of the shingle. The Reserve owned by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds covers 1,233 acres of * A publication of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. DESCRIPTION 193 194 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX this land and its eastern boundary lies about one mile to the west of the point of Dungeness. Inland the Reserve includes part of the sallow, blackthorn and elder scrub area which roughy separates the shingle tracts from the rich alluvial farmland of the Marsh proper. A small river, the Dengemarsh Sew'er, runs through the Reserve which also includes the Hoppen (or Open) Pits — large, fresh-water ponds thickly edged with reed, sedge and scrub. The first warden on the Reserve was appointed by the R.S.P.B. in 1907. THE COLONIES BEFORE 1940 The part of the Reserve with which this report is principally concerned is that area of Dengemarsh Beach between the sewer outfall (“ Pen Bars ” on Ordnance Survey maps) to Galloways a little more than a mile to the west and to the shingle fringe about three quarters of a mile inland. In this square-mile sector of sparsely-vegetated shingle, the colonies, protected by R.S.P.B. wardens, had considerable success in the 1930s. Lesser Black-backed Gull {Larus fiiscus). — A pair was first known to breed in 1908. In 1932 there were three pairs and by 1938 there were 19 pairs breeding mainly within the Herring Gulls’ territory. Herring Gull {Imkiis argeniatus). — The first pair bred by the Hoppen Pits in 1908. No appreciable increase took place until a colony developed, in 1925, at ils present site ca. 500-800 yards inland from the shore between the Dengemarsh Sewer and Galloways. During 1936-39, various estimates put the colony’s strength between 350 and 700 pairs (Harrison, 1953; Ticehurst, 1953; H. A. R. Cawkell and R. G. Williams, personal communica- tions). .Attempts to check the spread into the ternery area were made by the wardens’ taking or “ killing ” a few hundred eggs annually, on the south side of the gullery. Common Gull [Lams ca/ms).— The species is especially interest- ing at Dungeness where it occupies the only breeding site south of the Scottish border. Four pairs first bred in the area in 1919 and by the outbreak of the 1939-45 war between 30 and 40 pairs bred, generally unsuccessfully, at very scattered points on the promontory from Kent-Sussex border in the west to Lade in the north-east. Four to six of these pair nested at widely separated sites on the Reserve, at least two being at the south-west edge of the Herring Gullery. Black-headed Gull {Larus ridibumlus). — In the past century, thousands had nested regularly at the Hoppen Pits, their eggs being taken in large quantities by local people (Ticehurst, 1909). .After some fluctuations the colony there began to disperse to other areas. In 1930 ca. 50 pairs held a territory at the inland side of VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 195 the present ternery. This new colony increased and spread until by 1940 it occupied the whole of the shingle between the ternery and the Herring Gullery Common Tern [Sterna hirundo). — The species is long-established as a common breeder on Dungeness. Except for very high mortality amongst chicks in 1932, the colony in the present area enjoyed considerable success during the 1930s and by 1939 occupied an area nearly three-quarters of a mile along the shore, stretch- ing inland for ca. 200 yards. There were a few nests within the territories of the Black-headed Gulls and Herring Gulls. Estimates of numbers for this time vary between 600 and 1000 breeding pairs. There was evidence in 1939 of the work of natural predators. Harrison (1953) records that “ Many were found dead, some without heads, which was thought to be the work of ground vermin”. In 1942, all the eggs of a hundred pairs then nesting disappeared — ^‘‘it was thought by a raid on the territory by Black- headed Gulls and Herring Gulls”. However, in 1944 the colony’s complete failure to breed with any success was this time attributed by Mr. R. B. Burrowes, quoted by Harrison, “to the presence of Foxes [Vulpes vidpes) which had greatly increased during the war years”. Little Tern [Sterna albifrons). — Up to ten pairs bred with the Common Terns, sometimes inside their territory but more often at its western edge. OCCUPATION BY THE WAR DEPARTMENT In 1940, the whole Reserve, together with adjacent areas of shingle and scrub, was requisitioned by the War Department as a practice ground for mortars and anti-tank weapons. An exten- sive railway system with cuttings, embankments and large bunkers was created throughout the territory of the Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus) and in part of the territory of the Black-headed Gulls [Larus ridibundus) . Anti-tank guns were fired from the edge of the gullery, the low-trajectory shells crossing the birds’ breed- ing-ground. Each day, at the commencement of the practice shoot, the Herring Gulls left their nests for some rough fields near-by, returning immediately firing ceased, generally at about 16.00 hours. Despite the very considerable interference by men and machines and the great changes made, to the ground surface, the Herring Gulls returned each year to breed in the same location. The Black- headed Gulls ceased to breed after 1943. Because of the absence of a warden and a war-time food shortage, egg-collecting by humans was rife, continuing after the war until 1952. On one occasion in May 1941, the writer counted ca. 300 Herring Gulls’ eggs, mostly c/i and c/2, and on a visit a week later every one was gone. Some terns’ eggs did not fall to human predators because of the greater difficulty involved in finding them. 196 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix A new mortar rang'e was opened in the autumn of 1953 and covers almost all of the territory of the Herring Gulls. RENEWAL OF PROTECTION The effort to rehabilitate the Reserve was begun in April 1952 with the appointment of the writer as warden. The first object was to prevent human intrusion (egg-stealing was by that year almost a local custom) and then to obtain an indication of the general ecology and the need for any intervention to correct the prevailing predator/prey relationship. There had been no warden and little sustained observation on the Reserve for twelve years. Following reports of surveys by Mr. I. J. Ferguson-Lees in 1949 and Mr. R. A. W. Reynolds in 1951, it was considered that human predation was the most important controlling factor. Mr. R. B. Burrowes, joint-owner with the R.S.P.B. of the Walkers’ Outlands area of the Reserve, expressed a strong opinion, however, that the new Fox population would be the ultimate factor in deciding whether successful breeding' of ground- nesting birds would once more be possible. Egg-stealing by human intruders was stopped at the outset of the 1952 season and it was soon apparent that the balance between natural predators (Carrion Crows, Corviis corone, and Foxes were then the most obvious) and prey (eggs and chicks of terns and gulls) was weighted heavily against the latter. Declining vitality of the Herring Gulls. Despite the cessation of egg-taking by humans, the decline in the Herring Gull popula- tion continued between 1952 and 1955 (Table I). No young had been raised in the colony from the early war years until 1953 when only five young fledged. An indication of the birds’ old age was their diminishing egg output; by 1955, with the weather excep- tionally dry and warm, not more than three-quarters of the colony laid any eggs at all. Of some clutches protected with wire- netting enclosures in that year (see below), one c/i was not added to during the incubation-period and only 18 clutches, all of one egg and all soon lost, were found in addition to the protected nests ; thus very few replacements were laid. The colony was subjected to disturbance by mortar-firing but not nearly on the scale suffered by the birds during the war. Protection of gulls’ nests with wire-netting fences. Low fences around nests were first suggested, in 1953, by P. E. Brown, Secretary of the R.S.P.B., principally as an experiemental measure to protect terns’ eggs from their then unknown predator. Some nests of Herring Gulls, Common Gulls and Black-headed Gulls were also enclosed in order to study their efl'ect against known predators in the gullery — Foxes, Hedgehogs {Erinaccus europaeus) and Carrion Crows. At first, half-inch mesh wire- netting, two feet high, was used to form a 50-yard enclosure VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 197 around one nest and occasionally two nests with egg's when these were close together. They were successful in protecting eggs when unenclosed clutches near-by were being robbed and later it was proved that fences only one foot high, of three-quarter inch mesh netting and of as small a perimeter of 12 yards were equally effective. Nests were enclosed very quickly, when they contained freshly laid eggs. The birds appeared to take little notice of the netting, flying back into the enclosure to cover the eggs as soon as the warden left. In the seasons 1953-55, twenty nests of three gull species were enclosed, causing the desertion of only one Herring Gull c/i. Hatching occurred in all except one of these 19 incubated clutches. The fate of the chicks varied with the incidence of nocturnal predation, which increased in 1954 and 1955, after the local rabbits were killed off by myxomatosis. In 1953, one Common Gull brood of two hatched within an enclosure and one young fledged, the other chick dying. The two enclosed broods of Herring Gull chicks disappeared on the night of iith/i2th June when all the chicks then present in the colony were also lost. No holes were found under this fence. In 1954, one Common Gull nest was fenced off with one-foot high netting. Two chicks and an infertile egg disappeared at night. Two Herring Gull C/3S were enclosed separately. One brood of three young were kept within their fence until they were 3|- weeks old. Of the other clutch, two young hatched, one dying. The second chick and the unhatched egg, but not the dead chick, disappeared, again with no holes under the netting. Weather during this period was very wet and cold : shelter tins, which were used freely by all chicks, were placed in all the enclosures. Five pairs of Black-headed Gulls bred amongst the Common Terns in. 1954. Four of their nests and three clutches of terns were enclosed with a 150-yard two-foot high fence of half-inch wire-netting and later separated by a fence roughly across the middle of the compound. After the erection of the fence, another Black-headed Gull’s nest and two more terns’ nests appeared within their respective compartments. All of these eggs hatched except for two single eggs of Common Tern which were not incubated. Eggs from two Black-headed Gulls’ nests had been lost before the new nests were enclosed. There were frequent altercations between the two species but no predation by the gulls upon the terns. In 1955, two nests of Common Gulls were fenced off separately. The first was enclosed with one-foot netting on 31st May when it was c/i (c/2 next day and c/3 on 3rd June). The first chick of this nest did not hatch until 5th July after beginning to star on 2Qth June. The extraordinary long incubation period may have been due to disturbance by mortar firing on the range whose nearest point was ca. 300 yards. A 30-day incubation 198 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX period was recorded from a nest in the same location in 1953. One chick from the second brood of three Common Gulls was found to have gone from its enclosure after a group of Common Gulls and Herring Gulls had been seen milling above the nest. The remaining two chicks were then released and their fate afterwards could not be ascertained. In the Herring Gull colony, whose population had dropped from 60 pairs in 1954 to 45 in 1955, seven nests were enclosed individually that year. Six of these clutches remained safe whilst every other egg in unenclosed nests were lost to predators. The first brood hatched on aoth/aist June in a two-foot high enclosure at the base of a large pole which was the regular perch of a pair of Carrion Crows that it had not proved possible to trap. All three chicks were gone at midday on 22nd June, there being no hole under the netting. In another enclosure, three one-week old chicks disappeardcd at night. Two shallow scrapes, ca. 2 feet long were found in the shingle, leading up to the wall of the one- foot high netting but not passing under it. After this event, chicks were released from other enclosures and soon disappeared. None fledged. PREDATION Carrion Crow {Corvus corone). Except for the winter and in spring and autumn migration periods when continental birds were in the area, the Carrion Crow was a rare bird on the Romney and Walland Marshes (Ticehurst, 1909) until the first pair bred near Brookland in 1919. The species was not seen amongst the gull and tern colonies in the 1930s. But then, with no natural enemy and with very little attempt at their control by humans, the crows soon assumed a dominant status on the promontory. In 1952, eleven pairs were found to be breeding on the 1,200 acres (mostly shingle) of the Reserve and this population density was certainly higher in other areas of the Marsh where nesting sites were more plentiful. In the shingle and scrub areas, crows found it necessary to build nests in gorse bushes and sallows, sometimes only 4-5 feet from the ground. Nests were also built in ruined cottages and regularly on the arms of telegraph poles in three locations— one in the middle of the ternery. Carrioyi Crows versus Herring Gulls. In the first season of renewed watching (1952), it was noticed that four crows began to forage in the gullery as soon as the gulls began nest-building, on 15th April. The first Herring Gulls’ eggs (2 x c/i) were not seen until 5th May although many completed nests had been found during the previous week, when pursuits of crows by gulls had begun. Throughout the breeding-season, the average number of crows present, each day, was eight; sometimes there were up to VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 199 eleven. The rate of predation and replacement laying of eggs in 1952 is indicated by the following: — Breeding pairs 84 Fully-made nests 271 Nests seen with eggs 194 Highest number of eggs seen on one day 70 Clutches of three (short-lived) 10 Opened and broken egg-shells found 90 Young hatched o Most eggs remained no longer than 1-4 days. In the last quarter of the season many eggs were laid on bare shingle, a scrappy nest being built around them afterwards. The rate of predation is also shown by tbe record of the nest in which the most replacements were laid: — Building finished 5th May; first egg found and marked, 14th; i new egg, 17th; empty, i8th; i egg, 20th; I new egg, 24th; still there, 25th; i new egg, 26th; empty, 28th; I egg, 30th; I new egg, ist June; still present, 2nd; empty, 3rd; I egg, 9th; empty, loth ; i egg, nth; empty, 13th. Frequent checks at first and last light showed that many eggs were being lost in the daytime and, on a few occasions, during the night. Continuous observation showed that the only diurnal predators near the gulls’ nests were the Carrion Crows. The technique used by pairs of crows to cause the sitting gull to leave the nest was: — one crow would walk around the nest at 3-5 yards distance and occasionally make short, provocative flights at the sitter whilst the second crow stood on the shingle ca. 50 yards away. The second gull at this time would usually be flying around above the nest, making dives at either crow. Eventually the sitting gull would leave the nest in pursuit of its attacker, where- upon the second crow would fly to the nest, then away, low. On none of -the many occasions when a crow was seen flying away from a gull’s nest was it seen to be carrying an egg and the bill was always closed. The nearest I got to establishing positively that crows removed Herring Gulls’ eggs from the nest was on three occasions similar to the following incident. After a nest had been checked as containing an egg, the gull was watched back on to it and kept under continuous observation. Two crows arrived, one of which went to the nest after the sitting gull had left in pursuit of the other crow, then flew away, low. An immediate inspection of the nest showed it to be empty. On nth May 1952, a whole Herring Gull’s egg was found three-quarters buried in a patch of lichen with the large end show- ing and closely resembling the large, spotted stones with which this lichen patch was strewn. The egg was fairly tightly embedded and there were no particles of loose earth or lichen to indicate that a hole had been excavated. The egg, on removal, showed that it was one marked by the writer two days previously in a nest ca. 50 yards distant. One of the railway cuttings of the 200 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX old anti-tank rang-e, with a 4ft. veritcal wooden side, ran between the nest and the point at which the egg had been buried. One, and sometimes two crows together, were observed pecking' into the shingle in the gullery area, frequently lifting- up their heads in “ drinking ” motions. Having marked the spot on one of these occasions, the warden found a Herring Gull’s egg buried in small shingle, with only a half-inch opened part showing. The broken edges of the shell were moist and the egg was nearly full. A small, shallow scrape in the ghingle at the side of the egg was noticed. A wooden box was then placed over the egg and two hours later a pair of crows were observed on the box and also closely inspecting the shingle around it. Two birds were again at the box early the following morning and one was seen again there the following day. On two other occasions when the spot where crows had been pecking into the shingle was discovered, an empty egg-shell, still containing a little moist albumen, was found alongside a small hole in the shingle. Of the ninety opened or broken shells found in 1952, most were by the side of, or near, these “ egg-cup ” holes. There was no concentration of such burying-places, rather were they scattered throughout the gullery, and earlier marking of eggs in the nest was useful in showing the egg-shells in or by egg-cup holes were 50 to 400 yards from the nests from which they had been taken. One other whole egg was found partly buried in bare shingle in 1952. Except that its colouration blended well with the shingle, it was not well hidden and could be seen to be lying on its side. On 20th June 1953, I. St. G. Light and I, in a hide in the centre of the gullery, observed a crow to fly ca. 400 yards from a gorse patch and alight on the shingle without having deviated from its straight course. It began to peck into the shingle, holding its head up in drinking motions and, after minutes, flew off. Both observers went to the spot, where I. St. G. L. discovered an almost completely buried egg, opened at the top and still with half the contents, which were not fresh. That the crow had pre-knowledge of the egg’s burying place seemed apparent from the bird having flown straight to the spot and begun to eat without first having searched around. In 1952 and 1953, Rabbits [Oryctolngus ciinicuhis) had made many small holes, three to four inches deep, at the foot of grass tufts throughout the gullery. On 20th June 1953, on the supposi- tion that these ready-made egg-cup holes might have been used by predators for egg-burying, I dug at the foot of many hundreds of grass tufts in the gullery and eventually discovered a whole Herring Gull’s egg buried half an inch below the surface in small shingle. As in the other two cases, the shell of this egg was intact. On 15th June 1952, a crow, after being pursued by a gull. VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 201 alighted on the shingle and began to make choking motions — the head well up and then jerking with the bill close to the ground ; there was a very large and prominent bulge in the bird’s throat. The Herring Gull again attacked and the crow flew off, only to return, after about one minute, to the same place, where it began to peck into the shingle. When the gull had again driven the crow away, I searched the spot but could still find nothing. The unsolved problem of egg-burying. The foregoing observa- tions would have been complete had a crow been seen to carry away a Herring Gull’s egg from the nest and then to bury it. In view of the several recorded instances of crows carrying large eggs with the lower mandible inserted into the shell (e.g. Sage, 1953), it is surprising that this behaviour was not seen at Dungeness. It was found impossible to pass a whole Herring Gull’s egg through the gape of a freshly-killed crow. The possibility of an egg being carried between the bird’s thighs, in the way that Woodcock [Scolopax rusticola) sometimes carry their young, was considered but a crow was never seen flying away from a gull’s nest with its legs other than in the fully retracted position. Since egg-carry- ing was not witnessed, it might be supposed that the crows did not take the eggs, but there was evidence that single eggs disappeared when crows were the only predators observed. A convenient solution to part of this problem would be that some eggs were removed and cached, during a period of surplus, by other predators, only to be discovered later by the crows and eaten in situ. The burying of gull’s eggs by Foxes, in scattered positions around a nest, is known (Tinbergen, 1953) but the present case would require the Dungeness Foxes to be often in the gullery in daytime: the warden, living at the edge of the gullery, could not fail to hear the clamour caused by a Fox amongst the gulls in daylight. If, which would be more probable. Foxes removed and buried the eggs at night, then crows could not be aware of their burial places except by thorough searching of the shingle for those eggs not completely hidden under the surface. After 1952, opportunity to gain more information on this question was greatly lessened by the large scale reduction of the crow population, the smaller egg output of the diminishing Herring Gull colony and the increased activities of nocturnal predators. A buried egg in situ is shown on plate 18 (upper). Other predatory behaviour of the Carrion Crow. On many different occasions, a single crow or a pair was observed to make a series of short, vertical up-and-down flights to between ten and fifteen feet ; this behaviour seemed to be connected with attempted predation. Some instances were: — (i) a pair performing on either side of an incubating Herring Gull. (2) A single crow, followed up and down in its flight by an agitated Meadow Pipit [Anthus pratensis). (3) One, of two standing on the shingle, began a series of ca. 10 up-and-down flights. A Hare {Lepus europaeus) was 202 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX near-by and when it made a dash at the performings crow, the other crow was seen to fly at a half-grown leveret, jabbings it with its bill. A battle between these three adult contestants lasted on and off for an hour and was broken off only when the leveret found shelter under a broom bush. At the same position on the followings day a pair of crows were attacking a lone leveret which, despite its spirited rushes at the bird, was three times lifted off the ground in the bird’s bill, to a height of about three feet. This fight ended with the headlong arrival of an adult Hare. The crows twice later returned, one of them jabbing all over the flat broom bush with its bill and breaking off a few small branches. A second short battle was seen here on the next day and twice again within the next three weeks. (4) A pair of crows pursued three fledgling Wheat- ears [Oenanthe oenanthe) which took cover under a prostrate broom bush. Vertical flights began; the Wheatears broke cover and were unsuccessfully pursued by one of the crows. (5) A group of II crows were around three dead (“myxomatosed”) Rabbits. One was making short, vertical flights, each time dropping a small object like a btone which it carried up in its claws. (6) Vertical flights at a Common Gull’s nest developed into a battle between two crows and the gulls. Later, the freshly broken egg-shells of the gulls c/3 were found scattered near the nest. Carrion Crows in the ternery. Checks at first and last light showed that only a few eggs were being lost in the daytime. The most obvious diurnal predators were the 1-4 Carrion Crows in the ternery neighbourhood on most days. They were always readily attacked by the terns when they ventured within their territory. One case of a crow eating a tern’s egg at the nest was seen in 1952. One was seen to fly off with what appeared to be a tern’s egg in its bill, in 1953, and one egg was considered most probably to have been taken by a crow in 1955. The one egg shell found which was known certainly to have been eaten by a crow was considerably broken and had a small hole in the side opposite the main opening. Others opened in a similar manner were found near nest-scrapes along the shore bank but shells with these jagged openings were very few. Two opened shells were found half- buried in earthy shingle in the ternery in 1952. On 21st June of the following season another opened shell was found in an “egg- cup” hole where a small patch of lichen had been turned over and a very similar case was seen on 14th June 1954. Action against Carrion Crows. Evidence for the need to reduce the abnormal crow population having been reasonably established, a conventional crow trap, with a live decoy, was operated in March 1953 and was immediately effective. A second crow trap was built at the edge of the gullery early in 1954 and six to eight large potter traps, baited only with hens’ eggs and dead, day-old chicks, also caught good numbers inside the gullery. The numbers of full- grown Carrion Crows destroyed in each early spring were: 1953 — VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 203 57, 1954 — 62, 1955 — 18. The resulting- diminution of pairs breed- ing- on the Reserve is shown in Table I. The unexpectedly high number of birds trapped — males and females in about equal propor- tion— probably included some migrants in 1953 but the figures are indicative of the high population density not only of the Reserve but of its neighbouring areas. Apparent result of action against Carrion Crows. Following the 1953 trapping period, the number of crows in the gullery was between one and four and these not throughout the day, as in the previous year. Only very few opened gull’s eggs were found and these again were by or near “ egg-cup ” holes. Twenty days after laying began in the 1953 season, 112 Herring Gulls’ eggs were counted, including 28 x c/3, and 70 eggs were known to have been lost. Thus, most eggs remained safe for a longer period than in 1952, when many more crows foraged in the gullery. Further, only ca. 50 replacement clutches were laid (110+ in 1952); birds did not lay again after having- retained their eggs/young for 3-4I weeks. By iith June, 23 chicks had hatched and many eggs were chipping. The next morning, however, all the chicks, none more than a week old, had disappeared and much-broken shells were found in eight nests. This was due to certain other predators (see later). Nocturnal predation of eggs and chicks continued every night after this date. Rook (Corviis fritgilegus). The nearest rookery is at Lydd, ca. two miles to the north. It is the largest colony on the marsh, with 242 nests in 1948, and 289 in 1949 (Harrison, 1953). Rooks did not forage in the gullery prior to the annual arrival of the post-breeding flock, usually about ist May; in preceding weeks a large group of family parties fed chiefly around the farms near-by. On most days in June, ca. 200 adults and young birds foraged in a loose group over much of the shingle area, being principally occupied in probing at the base of plant-tufts and turning over lichen. When they were in the gullery, their presence seldom evoked attacks from the gulls, even when they were foraging within 2-3 feet of a brooding bird. It was noticeable that the Rooks fed near the ternery but not actually within the terns’ breeding-area. At one time five Rooks were perched on the wire-netting enclosing a Common Gull’s nest and three were probing at plants inside the enclosure, the sitting gull making no demonstration. It was noted that, after the arrival of the Rooks, shells of previously eaten Herring Gulls’ eggs would be most often found broken into very small pieces. Two Rooks were caught in potter traps baited with hens’ eggs. The birds were closely watched but no act suggesting predation of gulls or terns was noted. In 1955, a small group of Rooks put in only a brief appearance in the gullery on 8th June. Throughout the month of June the flock 204 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX was engaged in foraging in the rough grass of the outlands, where, because of good weather and the absence of Rabbits, grasses and other hitherto short vegetation was now better developed and held an abundance of insect food. Magpie {Pica pica). The history of the local increase in this species is similar to that of the Carrion Crow. Seventeen pairs bred on the Reserve in 1952 with a much higher density on the Marsh proper. Many nests on the Reserve were in thick gorse bushes and were frequently undomed, but unpractical and unnecessary roofs for these nests were constructed from the headless stems of teazle, up to 4 and 5 feet in lenght. In many cases, easy discovery of these nests was due to the presence of a teazle roof on top of a gorse bush. All the nests were necessarily very low, the lowest recorded being only eighteen inches from the ground to the bottom of the cup. In the guUery. From two to four Magpies were present most days and appeared to find it especially necessary to walk amongst small roosts of immature and non-breeding gulls and also around incubating birds. Usually their presence was not resented by the gulls and half-hearted pursuits were witnessed on only a few occasions. No act of predation upon the g'ulls was observed. In the ternery. In 1952 and 1953, before their decline in numbers (Table I), from one to three Magpies were recorded occasionally in the ternery during each day. Their foraging in in the open shingle areas occurs throughout the year and is not increased in the ternery during that colony’s breeding-season. It was, however, noted that Magpies generally flew lower, about one foot above the shingle, when in the territory of breeding terns and gulls. When attacked by terns, they stood their ground with much more determination than the crows. No indication of predation by Magpies in the ternery was obtained. Gulls in the ternery. At least in the daytime, adult Herring Gulls from the colony near-by passed only infrequently across the ternery on their way to the shore. Immature birds of this species and of Great Black- backed Gulls {Larus marinns) and Lesser Black-backed Gulls passed over more often, however, and each time were attacked by the terns with such spirit that it seemed the gulls were only too glad to be clear of the area. Nearer the shore section of the ternery, young gulls were observed on about 25 occasions in four seasons trying determinedly to get to ground. There were no more than six instances of a gull, on the ground in the ternery, being attacked by terns. The successful and reasonably harmonious breeding side-by-side of a few Black-headed Gulls and Common Terns has been referred to. No gull was seen at a tern’s nest. Heron {Ardea cinerea). One, heard calling when circling low over the gullcry about one VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 205 hour after dark on igth June 1952 and similarly on 12th June 1953, caused extreme alarm amongst the gulls. One to three Herons were seen on eight occasions in daylight, circling above the gullery and trying to land there but apparently being prevented from doing so by spirited attacks from the gulls, most of whom were milling around their territory in the greatest panic ever observed there. Little Owl [Athene noctiia). One was heard calling in the ternery on three nights in May 1953. On 8th June the remains of two adult Common Terns were found in an outbuilding behind the ruined bungalow in which a pair of Little Owls were nesting. This was about three-quarters of a mile from the ternery. In both cases, the wings were intact and still attached to the sternum, which was picked clean. On 13th June of the same year, the remains of another Common Tern, one wing with a little flesh on the humerus, were discovered by the side of a broom bush 400 yards from the ruined bungalow and on the side of the Dengemarsh Sewer distant from the ternery. Grass Snake [Tropidonotus natrix). From six to eight may generally be found in the summer around the Hoppen Pits about a mile and a half from the ternery. One was found alive on the shingle at the ternery’s edge in June 1953. This was the only occurence of a snake in the completely dry areas of the Reserve. Hedgehog [Erinaceus europaeiis). During the first season of resumed watching (1952), shells of terns’ eggs were found five days after the first eggs were seen on 20th May. In 1953, first clutches remained safe for two weeks and then began quickly to sulfer predation at night. Most shells were lying near or by the side of nest-scrapes and had a half- inch long, rather smooth-edged opening on the long side. No indication as to the identity of the predator responsible for the destruction of most of the terns’ eggs was obtained until the 1954 season, when potter traps with hens’ eggs as bait were set in the ternery. The loss of eggs at night had not begun until 27th May (eight days after laying started) and the first trap was set on the following day. Another was set at dusk on 4th June and next morning contained a live Hedgehog. For the next eighteen days no losses were discovered until a c/3 was eaten over-night. Two additional potter traps were set in the ternery and these trapped two more Hedgehogs at night. In 1954 there had been no losses of eggs enclosed in wire-netting circles and, to test their efficiency against Hedgehogs, one of the trapped animals was kept in captivity for four days. It was enclosed in a twelve-yard circle of half-inch wire-netting one foot high, the bottom edge being buried 2-3 inches in the shingle. Out- side this fence, a second one, two feet high, was erected as a safety 206 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX measure. The Hedg;ehog^ was observed makings many attempts to climb the one-foot wall, but it could not do so. It ate hens’ eggs when the shells were broken but it did not eat whole ones. The following points suggest that Hedgehogs may have been the main predators in the ternery in 1952-54: — (1) Very few eggs were lost in the day-time. (2) Most sucked eggs were found near nest-scrapes. (3) The predator was one against which the terns had no defence. (4) Eggs were taken near the low enclosures whilst those inside remained safe. (5) A captured Hedgehog was kept for four days inside a circle of wire-netting one foot high which it was seen to be unable to climb. The netting was dug 2-3 inches into the shingle and the animal made no attempt to dig under it. (6) The holes in the sucked egg-shells were “ pushed-in ” i.e., they lacked the jagged edges usual in eggs eaten by crows. (7) A Hedgehog’s snout was found to fit the holes in the terns’ egg shells. (8) The shingle near the shore, with its sparse vegetation and lichen patches, seemed to be an unlikely foraging ground for these nocturnal animals, unless they were taking the eggs. (g) In the three seasons 1952-54, eggs had not begun to be taken until about a week after laying began ; this appeared to indicate that the predator was not regularly hunting in the ternery area. (10) Hedgehogs were caught in traps baited with egg only. Since almost all unprotected clutches of terns’ eggs were being lost, it is of some significance that most single “ dropped ” (unincubated) eggs remained intact throughout the 1952-54 breed- ing-season ; it may supposed that it was the presence of the sitting bird which led to the discovery of eggs by nocturnal predators. In this connexion and bearing in mind the species’ better camouflage on the shingle, it should be mentioned that eggs of the half-dozen pairs of Ringed Plovers {Chamdrius hiaiiciila) that breed regularly in the ternery, usually remain safe. A Hedgehog was trapped in the gullery in June 1952 and one in the same month in 1954. In the 1955 season, anti-Hedgehog measures look (lie form of Increased use of wire-netting fences around nests and the use of eight potter traps. No Hedgehogs were trapped and because the few shells of eaten eggs which were found were much-broken, it VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 207 was considered probable that they were not present on the shingle areas that year. Further, only one was seen in the Outlands. It was considered that these animals had been destroyed by Foxes in the previous Rabbit-free winter. By 30th June 1955, the 35 pairs of Common Terns were progress- ing towards a high degree of breeding success, only i x c/2 and 3 X c/i being recorded as lost. This was due most probably to the increased use of wire-netting fences. Stoat [Miistela erminea) and Weasel {Mustela nivalis). ' The former species is more often seen in recent years but neither is numerous. The presence of a Stoat or Weasel in the gullery was suggested by potter traps being “ sprung ” on four occasions at night and being found baitless next morning, with a few light- brown hairs on the netting where the animal had squeezed its way out past the door of the trap. Two “inverted bucket ’’ traps were used without success. This type of trap is a bottomless bucket sunk into the shingle upside-down, the opening level with the ground. Bait of highly smelling eggs was lost after the first night but untouched thereafter. Badger [Males males). A female was shot in a grass-lined set in an old Rabitt warren near the Reserve, in the early spring of 1955. Enquiries of local people show a hitherto complete ignorance of the presence of this species in the Dengemarsh area. Since farmers and the writer conduct a thorough search for Foxes’ earths in the area, it may be supposed that the Badger’s occurrence in 1955 was new in modern times, although it would seem strange that its appearance should follow the extinction of the Rabbit, on which it preys commonly. I have not seen one nor any sign of its activity in the area except for the tracks of one in snow, a half-mile from the Reserve, on 4th February 1956. Otter [Liitra Ultra). One is very occasionally recorded on Romney Marsh. In the vicinity of the Reserve, one was seen in the Dengemarsh Sewer in April and October 1953 and I heard one at the Hoppen Pits in October. The species is recorded as taking wild birds but not their eggs (Min. of Ag. and Fish., 1951). Brown Rat [Rattus norvegicus). There were no reports nor signs of any rats on the Reserve between 1952 and 1955. Small numbers were occasionally known in the area of the Dengemarsh Sewer outfall in pre-war years when the few cottages and an inn (now in ruins) were occupied. Fishermen then living there took strong action agamst them in order to protect their nets. 208 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Fox [Viilpes vulpes). Before 1940, the Fox was virually unknown on the Dung'eness promontory and its spread into the scrub and shingle areas is considered to be due to disturbance through the war-time occupation, by troops, of the woods and hills on the west and north of the Marsh and also to the virtual cessation of game-keepering and to the post-war cost of cartridges. The Foxes’ ability to breed successfully in the wastelands would have been due to a large extent to the dense Rabbit population there and to a lack of disturbance by humans in some large areas of the Outlands scrub. The first large-scale shoots by local farmers at the end of the winter of 1952 killed about 30 Foxes on and in the neighbourhood of the Reserve. These shoots became an annual feature and were so successful that it was possible to kill only six over a wide area between February and May 1955. Myxomatosis appeared on the Reserve in November 1953 and by the end of March 1954 had effected an almost 100% kill, but it cannot be said that the absence of Rabbits was a natural cause of the diminution of the Fox population from that time onwards. Foxes shot in the winter of 1954/55, from showing any signs of emaciation as a result of the loss of their main food supply, were well-nourished. Prey hunted more rigorously would have been Hedgehogs, Field Voles [Microtiis agrestis) and stock from the extensive local chicken farms. In 1952 and 1953, the presence of predators at night was indicated by the overnight disappearance of a small number of eggs, but in 1954 and 1955, after the advent of myxomatosis, almost all of the unprotected eggs and some protected chicks were lost after dark. In the spring and early summer of the first two years, a Fox was seen infrequently in the gullery at dawn and dusk, twice, at first light, carrying a Rabbit through the centre of the colony. In 1952, a dead adult Herring Gull was found with a wound in the side of the neck and this corpse was found decapitated next day. Foxes and wire-netting fences in the ternery. Of the four seasons under review, the first three had demonstrated that Hedge- hogs rather than Foxes were the controlling factor in the ternery. Wire-netting fences first used in 1953, had provided complete protection whilst most unenclosed eggs were being lost. As was the case with the gulls, the terns took almost no notice of the netting around their nests and because of this and as an extension of the experiment, one c/2 was surrounded with a one-foot high fence of only four yards perimeter. Apart from extra head- twisting during the first change-over of incubation duties, the birds showed no concern at the fence and the third egg was present next day. In two previous seasons, clutches were enclosed when the eggs were found, but in 1955 a large fence of 300 yards perimeter, two VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 209 feet high and of f-inch mesh wire-netting, was erected before the breeding-season around an area that experience had shown to be used regularly by several terns. On return to their breeding-site the terns appeared to take no notice of the netting and most of the first clutches were laid within this fence. Four clutches laid just outside were brought within the fold by the addition of a further loo yards of netting. Twelve other clutches were wired olf individually in small circles of netting one foot high. An eventual total of twenty clutches were laid inside the main enclosure. By their late dates, five of these clutches were probably repeats from birds that had lost their eggs elsewhere in the ternery, but the others were due to regular use of the same location in the ternery. An example of this was one clutch being in exactly the same position from which a successful brood was hatched in the previous year (1954) and where there had also been a nest in 1953. Thus in these three seasons, eggs were laid at the south side of a flat three-inch-wide stone which had been used by the writer to number the nest, the numbers from the two previous seasons still being present on its underside in 1955. By ist July 1955 the 35 pairs of Common Terns had ca. 30 chicks in enclosures, with other clutches chipping. At dawn next morning, after a wet night, a Fox was put up at the edge of the ternery, where it was found that all but five chicks and six clutches had disappeared from the main compound and young were also gone from two small enclosures. A large scrape, with the shingle thrown back about four feet, had been made under the netting of the main enclosure and there were three smaller scrapes at the netting, near-by. The gap under the netting was about five inches deep. These holes were later blocked and all the fence stakes liberally dosed with “ Renardine ”. This preparation, whose fumes are claimed to be repellant to Foxes and “ vermin ”, was used in the ternery and gullery each season but its efficacy must often have been nullified by wind and rain. However, no further evidence of a predator was discovered until the morning of 6th July. A two-foot long scrape, 3-5 inches deep through lichen into the shingle was discovered at right angles to a small enclosure, stopping at the netting and not passing under it. This enclosure was only ten inches high. The two one-week old chicks were still safe and were found inside their shelter tin (an old ammunition tin with an entrance about three inches square). The following night was one of no wind and a full moon. Soon after dark, from a hide in the centre of the ternery, I saw a young Fox quartering the ground at speed. It approached some meat which I had placed within a small circle of netting as a lure but sheered off before coming within gunshot range. The animal was present throughout the night until dawn (02.15 hours) and its location in the gullery and ternery area could be told almost at any time by the alarm notes of the birds in whose territory it was. 210 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX There was no colonial alarm ; it was, rather, extremely local and during- the Fox’s rounds of the colonies, alarm would be heard from a Common Tern, presently from a Little Tern, then Stone Curlew [Burhiniis oedicnemus), Common Gull and Herring- Gull in turn. Terns did not dive at the Fox and made no “ machine- gun ” attack notes. The Fox did not approach the wall of the main enclosure, near where the hide was, and these birds remained quiet even when the owner of a nest loo yards away was circling and calling above the animal. Terns showed no alarm when a powerful aldis lamp was used in attempts to see the predator at work. A thorough check at dawn throughout the area showed, surprisingly, no losses from any of the ground breeding birds. Two days after this event, another large scrape was discovered under the wall of the main fence, but since one large chick was found outside the fence, apparently having escaped under the hole, others may have got out also and the amount of loss could not be told. That evening, two hurricane lamps were placed in the ternery at dusk, in the hope of deterring any predator. Use of these lamps continued for the next seven nights, during which time no losses were recorded and no scrapes were made at the enclosures. On the morning of 15th July, however, although one lamp had been burning in the centre of the main compound, two scrapes, about six inches deep, were found under the netting and two chicks (out of four remaining) were missing, but none of the eggs had disappeared. The main fence was then dismantled and on the night following its removal, five of the seven clutches of eggs it had enclosed, were lost. Three Little Terns’ nests were enclosed separately in one-foot high netting. One brood of two chicks was found dead in one enclosure which had*a large scrape leading up to it and running about five inches deep beneath the netting. The chicks bore no signs of external injury. In another Little Tern’s enclosure, at which there was no scrape, two of three very small chicks were found dead. A third brood was released. Towards the end of the breeding-season it was learned that the scenting powers of vermin and the smell of ground nesting birds could be temporarily destroyed by the spraying of petrol mixed with heavy oil (Booth, 1954). There was no time to acquire these materials ; paraffin, all that was then available, was sprayed around one small compound but two days later the two chicks had disappeared, there being no scrape under the netting. With the object of studying tbe footprints of any predator that might appear on it, a belt of wet sand, 15 inches wide, was laid around a Common Tern’s nest at a distance of 18 inches. The nest chosen for this experiment was a c/2 on a small tuft of sea- campion on bare shingle. The clutch was complete next day and these three eggs remained safe from 26th June (1953) until 8th/9lh July. During this time almost all other eggs not enclosed in wire- VOL. XLix] PREDATION AT DUNGENESS 211 netting’ were beings lost. On the morningf of 9th July rain from dawn ceased at about 06.00 hours and soon after it was discovered that the eg’g’s had gone. The sand belt was pitted by the rain but some indistinct imprints about one inch across and ^ inch deep could be seen. A group of three foot-prints three to five inches apart were on the inside edge of the sand at one edge and a group of 4-5 were in the middle of the sand at the other. The number, size and position of the prints indicated that they may have been made by an avian predator (Carrion Crow or Magpie) rather than by a mammal. This experiment, which had been suggested by N. W. Orr, was repeated in the following year but was spoilt by frequent rain. In 1955, the stuffed skin of a Common Tern was set on two infertile tern’s eggs inside a large potter trap. The body of another Common Tern, found freshly dead, was used similarly in a second trap. There were, however, no results from these experiments (1955 was the year in which no signs of Hedgehogs were discovered in the shingle area). Table I — Breeding pairs on Dungeness Reserve. Kent. 1952-55 1952 1953 1954 1955 Stone Curlew (Burhinus ocdicnemus) 5 6(7) 6 5-6 Lesser Black-backed Gull (Larus fiiscus) I I 0 0 Herring Gull (Larus argentatus) 84 80 60 45 Black-headed Gull (Larus ridihundus) 2 2 7 0 Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) 26 40 30 35 Little Tern (Sterna albifrons) c-7 8 15 12 Carrion Crow (Corvus corone) 1 1 5 4 2 Magpie (Pica pica) 9 17 5 4 Table II — ■Predation and protection of terns’ EGGS, Dungeness Reserve, Kent Common Tern Little Tern - (Sterna hirundo) (Sterna albifrons) 1952 1953 1954 >955 1952 1953 1954 1955 Breeding pairs 26 40 30 35 c-7 8 15 12 Clutches seen 69 74 33 42 6 9 17 9 Clutches enclosed 036 32 0 0 0 3 Clutches hatched ca. 44 5 ca. 24 5 3-4 ca. 4 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to Mr. I. J. Ferguson-Lees who has read and helpfully criticized this paper; to Messrs. H. G. Alexander and R. B. Burrowes for their helpful advice based on their long experience of the Dungeness area; to Maj.-Gen. C. B. Wainwright, C. B., for instruction in crow-trapping; to Major E. d’Arcy- Clarke, for material help and co-operation of the local military establishment; to Messrs. H. A. R. Cawkell, W. S. Nevin, G. R. Shannon and R. G. Williams for advice and field-assistance; and especially to Mrs. K. E. I. Barham without whose staunch support and hard work in the field many of these observations and experiments woud not have been possible. 212 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX The Council of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds are grateful to the Nature Conservancy for a substantial grant which enabled the Society to employ a warden, who w'as able to investigate the problems discussed in this paper. SUMMARY Colonies of gulls and terns (principally Herring Gulls, Black- headed Gulls and Common Terns) bred successfully on the shingle at the R.S.P.B.’s Dungeness Bird Reserve up to the outbreak of war in 1939- The Reserve was requisitioned by the War Depart- ment in 1940 and used as a mortar and anti-tank firing range. Between 1940 and 1952, when there was no warden, egg-stealing by humans took place on a grand scale and, by the time wardening was resumed in April 1952, the colonies were greatly depleted. The prevention of public access gave scope for the activities of natural predators whose populations had so increased in the war years as now to control successful breeding of the remaining gulls and terns. Predatory activities of Carrion Crows are detailed and their eating of Herring Gulls’ eggs buried in the shingle is described. Crows were known to take eggs from gulls’ nests but were not seen to carry them nor to bury them. The possibility that they, or some other predator did so, is discussed. The apparent effect of reducing the numbers of crows is shown by successful breeding in the gullery. Mammalian predators which had destroyed most of the terns’ eggs were eventually discovered to be Hedgehogs. The successful use of wire-netting fences around gulls’ and terns’ nests is demonstrated. Black-headed Gulls and Common Terns bred successfully in adjacent enclosures. Foxes arrived in the Reserve area in war-time and flourished. A large Rabbit population was destroyed by myxomatosis during 1954 and this event appeared to have repercussions upon the ternery and gullery at a time when some success was being achieved by the control of crows and Foxes and the protection of nests with wire-netting. Reference is made to the known presence and activities of other predators and also to some further experiments in protection and detection. REFERENCES Booth, J. (1954): “ A spray to stop vermin Field, 20. v. 54, p. 919. Fisher, J. and Locklf.y, R. M. (1954) Sea-Birds. London. Gillh.ym, E. H. et al. (1955): The Medway Islands Breeding Bird Census. pp. 19-20. II.YRRisoN, J. M. (1953): The Birds of Kent. London. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (1948); IVild Birds and the Land. London. (1951): Wild Mammals and the Land. London. Marples, G. and A. (1934): Sea Terns or Sea Szvallows. London. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (1952-1955): Bird Protection. London. Sage, B. (1953): In Countryside. Ticehurst, N. F. (1909): A History of the Birds of Kent. London. (1933-1053): In The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist. Tinbergen, N. (1939): A Herring Gull’s World. London. FURTHER EXPERIMENTS WITH AN ARTIFICIAL NESTLING GAPE By Monica M. Betts (^Edward Grey Institute, Oxford) (Plates ig-2o) A METHOD of sampling" food brought by adult birds for their young in nest-boxes, by means of an artificial nestling gape inserted into the nest, has been described in an earlier paper (Betts, 1954). This necessitated using a special nest-box and a darkened hide, and a better method has now been devised whereby the artificial gape is used outside an ordinary nest-box, with a simple hessian hide to conceal the observer. Successful results have been obtained at many nests of titmice {Parus spp.) in the Breckland pine plantations of East Anglia. A hide, with a perforated zinc window for observation, is erected beside the nest-box towards the end of the incubation- period. Perches are provided in front of the box, and a flap of material is pinned across the gap between the box and the hide (see plate ig). After the young have hatched, the parents are first accustomed to being delayed for a few seconds by a stick held across the entrance hole, while the food brought is recorded. The birds are rarely disturbed by this, and the artificial gape may be introduced as soon as they are used to the presence of the stick. The artificial gape, illustrated in plate ig, is made as described previously (Betts, 1954), except that the rubber pipette bulb has been replaced by a baby’s feeding bottle teat, which is stronger and perishes less quickly. The gape is mounted on nine-inch scissor-type forceps and, through a slit in the hide wall, the forceps are inserted behind the material flap between the hide and the box, in such a way that only the gape is visible to the adult bird approaching with food. The adult lands on the perch in front of the box, is prevented from entering by the stick held across the entrance hole, and is induced to feed the artificial gape (see plate 20). This is then immediately withdrawn to prevent the parent bird from retrieving the food which its “young ’’ has grasped but failed to swallow. If the meal consists of only a few items the whole of it may be obtained, but if a large bundle of small items is brought only a portion can be grasped at one time. It is, however, often possible to withdraw the gape, remove the food, and return the gape quickly enough to collect the rest of the meal. The adult will not feed the artificial gape unless this simulates the begging responses of the young and the live young inside the box call. The young generally begin to call when the parent alights on the perch in front of the box, so it is essential 213 214 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix that they are not disturbed in any way, as when frightened they remain silent. The behaviour of the adult birds must be studied at all stag'es in the experiments. Sampling of nestling foods is always alternated with periods of observation at the nest to check that the use of the artificial gape does not disturb the normal feeding behaviour of the parent birds. In 1954 and 1955 this artificial gape was successful in collecting samples of food brought to 13 broods of Great Tits [Pams major), 12 of Coal Tits (P. ater), 3 of Blue Tits (P. caeriileiis) and 2 of Wrens [Troglodytes troglodytes). It is surprising that the same artificial gape was accepted by all four species, irrespective of differences in nestling gape colour and pattern, and of the size of their own nestlings at the time. At one Coal Tit’s nest the artificial gape was fed by a Wren which was bringing food to the young titmice. This bird was not used to the gape, but accepted it and fed- it without hesitation. Possibly the artificial gape provides a super-normal stimulus to the adult bird, as does, perhaps, the large gape of a young Cuckoo [Cucidus canorus). Tinbergen and Perdeck (1950), experimenting with the begging responses of young Herring Gulls [Lams argentatus), found that a model of the red patch of an adult’s beak designed to give a greater contrast than the normal, produced a higher begging response in the young. The study of the food of nestling titmice in pine woods is continuing and the results will be published later. Use of the artificial gape has confirmed, however, that there are differences in the size and species of foods of nestling Great Tits, Blue Tits and Coal Tits in pine woods as in oak woods (Betts, 1955). These results contrast with those of Tinbergen (1949), who found no difference in the diets of different species of tits in Dutch pine woods. The collection of food samples from Coal Tits has also demonstrated the inadequacy of direct observation, even at a range of nine inches, when the adult bird is bringing many different foods at one visit. Under such conditions only the largest items are seen and counted in a bundle of 20-200 small items ; and even caterpillars, 10-15 nim. long, cannot be counted accurately when more than 4 or 5 are brought together. It is therefore necessary to obtain samples of the food, so that the items may be counted and identified accurately. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank John Markham for his excellent photographs and Dr. John Gibb for help and advice. The work is financed by a grant from the Nature Conservancy. SUMMARY I. A description is given of a new method of using an VOL. XLIX] ARTIFICIAL NESTLING 215 artificial nestling- gape to collect samples of food from the parent bird, as it perches outside the nest-box. 2. The same artificial g-ape has been used at nests of 13 pairs of Great Tits, 12 of Coal Tits, 3 of Blue Tits and 2 of Wrens. It was accepted by the adults of all four species, irrespective of differences in their own nestling’s. 3. Food samples collected at nests in pine woods confirmed that there are differences in the foods brought by Great, Blue and Coal Tits to their nestlings. 4. Use of the artificial gape demonstrated the inadequacy of food studies by observation when several items are brought together. REFERENCES Betts, M. M. (1954): “ Experiments with an artificial nestling”. Brit. Birds, xlvii : 229-231. (1955): ‘‘ The food of titmice in oak woodland ”. J. Anim. Ecol., 24: 282-323. Tinbergen, L. (1949): “ Bosvogels en Insecten ”. Ned. Boschb. Tijdschr., 4: 91-105. Tinbergen, N. and Perdeck, A. C. (1950): “ On the stimulus situation releasing the begging responses in the newly hatched Herring Gull chick {Larus ar gentatus argentatus Pont.) ” . Behaviour, 3 : 1-39. OBITUARY Edgar P. Chance (1881-1955) The death of Mr. Edgar Chance occurred on 24th October 1955, at his home at Sandhurst, Berkshire, at the age of 74. He was the third son of Mr. A. M. Chance of Edgbaston, Birmingham, and was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge. He will be remembered for his intensive field study of the breeding-habits of the Cuckoo and the well organized experiments he conducted with characteristic energy and enthusiasm. Under his direction photo- graphs and cinefilms were taken which proved that, contrary to the then generally accepted belief, the Cuckoos under observation laid their eggs while sitting on the nests of the fosterers. Mr. Chance wrote two books on his results. The Cuckoo’s Secret (published in 1922) and The Truth about the Cuckoo (1940). He gave his collection of British-taken birds’ eggs to the nation and the Cuckoos’ eggs, including 87 laid by one Cuckoo in 5 seasons, can be seen in the British Museum (Natural History). G.C. Tb ter •'.V' V £a M SOME PHOTOGRAPHIC STUDIES OF WHITE- FRONTED AND LESSER WHITE-FRONTED GEESE Photographed by J. V. Beer, C. T. Dalgety, Niall Rankin, P. O. SwANBERG and Philip Wayre (Plates 21-28) There are two species of White-fronted Geese occurring in Britain and one of them is split into two rather well-marked races. The comparative difficulty of identifying geese in the field has meant that knowledge of the distribution of these forms has been confused. The problem of identification is largely that of being able to approach the geese closely enough, for at short distances nearly all individuals of the three forms are readily distinguishable. The Lesser White-front {Anser erythropus) (plates 21-24) only a vagrant in Britain, although the western end of its breeding- range is as close as Norwegian Lapland. At the time of publica- tion of The Handbook only one British record seemed to be beyond reproach, but since 1945 the number of individuals identified has been Increased to over forty.* There is no reason to believe that the species occurs any more commonly now than it did formerly, for the relative abundance of recent records can be explained by increasingly intensive observation of the goose flocks in which odd Lesser White-fronts are liable to occur. Thirty of these vagrants have accompained the large flocks of White-fronts {A. a. albtfrons) frequenting the Severn Estuary at Slimbridge in Gloucestershire. Seven others have been found in flocks of Bean Geese (.4. arvensis) (six in Kircudbright, one in Norfolk*). The occurrence of odd individuals of one species of goose in flocks of another species is general, and by no means restricted to closely- related species. The Lesser White-fronts in British goose flocks seem likely to have become attached to the “wrong” species during or soon after the breeding-season, perhaps particularly in the flightless period of the moult. The breeding range of A. erythropus is for the most part south of that of A. cdbifrons although there is an area of overlap in the forest tundra zone of Siberia. In Lapland A. erythropus is known as the Mountain Goose, and in the Siberian parts of its range it also frequents high ground, unlike albifro7is. Similarly, in Lapland and farther east there is some overlap with A. arvensis. The individual illustrated in plates 21 and 22 is not an “ideal” example of the Lesser White-front. The bright yellow orbital ring, which is perhaps the most striking single characteristic of the species, shows plainly enough, but the profile is not very typical. A. erythropus has a very small bill and a slight mane at the back of the head, and most individuals have a high-crowned appearance normally accentuated by the tendency for the white * For details of 1956 records see pages 227-230. — Eds. 216 Pr.ATi- \j 6 ' "U a; c ej > ^ ~ C3 V-* *— (IJ ”7 '75 C -“ y- ^7 ^ Z 9 '{■ 52 QJ ^ ^ = I r' 3 r- <1^ c^ ~ — — S a; S S. ^ O 'o_jz ^ 3 s g -r ^■^ • — ^ < ’— E o c 3 X ' '-^- r 7. P ^ ^ c: C 5 d* ^ _0 lO O Gj t d. ‘O - _ g £ - i; g > - c: .i:2 ^■ r«^ - •— V J, Gj > d d w ^ «- w X w I’l.ATF. iS Eric Iloskiug Hekkint. (in.i.’s {l.anis urgi’itlaliis) Kt'.c. r.\KTi.v bi’kikd in siiinc.lk : I )rN(,i;Ni:ss, Kent One of the unsolved ijroblcms of predation at I)unf»eness Bird Reserve has been the linding of buried Herring (lull’s eggs (see pJiges 200-201). In this ease some of the stones havr> been removed for photographie purposes. 1 1 HW /(llll'i Mrioniors Wakbi.ek {Ilippoim.s polv,t^loll,i): Banosev Iseano, jotii .XrorsT 1055 Note the heavy, pointed head, eharaeteristir of the genus, and the uncons|)ieuous edgings to the secondaries which i.erhaps newr form a wing-palch such as isolten found in the Icterine Warbler {II. id l■ritw)s('r pagi's 2;,2-2_pt nnd coin|)aie vol. xlvii, plate 21. Plate 19 John Markhaiu CuAi, 'I'lT {I’anis aicr) AHot'T to fi:!;!') aim'iitciai. nksit.inc, cai’ic rsKO in takinc, l■■o(Jn-SA.\u’M•;s |■oK anaiasls Tlin oljserver’s liide is on tlio Irl't of llic pliologrnpli nnd ihe g'ap brlwi-en it and thn nest-box is covered bv a Ha|) of niateidal |)inncd across. Wlien a sam].)le of lood is to be taken, tlie adult bird’s enlrv to the box is delayed l)\' a stick across the hole, as shown here, and tlie artificial gape is thrust behind the covering flap (see pages 213-215). I’l.ATi; 20 C'oAi. Tit {PariU! aler) antii-iciai. nkstlinc. c.ai'i- rsi;n in takinc. I'oon-SAMI’I.I'IS I'OU ANAIASIS Anollioi' vi('\v .sliowinj:> tin- adult actuallv Ihi' ncsllina. I'lic f^api’ is cons! ruclcd of a l>al)\’s l('(‘dint'-i)()llli' Irat, c'Ut like a I'cak and linrd with cnloun'd rulihi'r; thn whole is then niounti'd on a pair ol' nine-inch forceps m) that one of the points fornis a tonj^ue (see plate uj) which can close on the other to ffri|) the food. 'I'he a|)paratus is thrust forward in such a way that only the coloured f^aiie is visible (see ]>af>es 2i ;-2i5). johu Marhlmui PlATK 21 P. O. Swmibcrg Anri.T f.KssiiK W’lirnc-i' KoXTi';!) ( ioosE (. I iimv ci'ylli ropux) : L.\ri..\XD 1 lu“ yellow eye-i-inf» and ihe high, white blaze on the foi-ehi'ad are ide.arly ■ihown here, as is the small hill; coinj^are the atiult W’hite-fronls (.1. albijrou.s) in plates 26 and 27. However, in hetid-shape (see .also |)late 22) and in the 'ather heavy markings on the under-it.arts this is hardly a typical individual (see page 216). I.EssKK W'liiTE-i'RONTKD (ioosE (.lii.'Jc’r crvlhropus) ON nest: Lapland As with other geese, incubation is by the female alone and slie is here seen re-arranging the nest-material. The white on the forehetid extends well .above the ye, in some individuals continuing even further as a narrow band (see page 217). Pl.ATK ’4 P. O. SiL'aiihcrf^ Li:ssi':u W’l iith-I'Konthd (mcksk (.Iii.vci' cryihroptts) in i'liciit O. Sicaiihi'rt^' Lkssku W’iiitk-frontici) (ioosK (.■liisi'r crylliropiis), nkst and kc.c.s : Lai’I.am) The nest is usually a shallow dejiression lined with fi'Konti:f) (loosH ulhifroHS flin'iroslris) C. T. Doli^cty (Irffm.and W'liiTH-i'uoNTEn (ioosK (.lii.s'tv alhifrous flavirosiris), nhst and i-ioCiS: \VI-:ST ( iRKFNI.AN’I) Opoi lundra, river-islands and Hat niarsh\- vallevs are tlu' typical nesting- habitats ol’, so far as is known, all the races of the \\'hite-l'ront, which thus normally has much less exacting requirements than the clilT-loving I’ink-I'oot (.1 . arvnisis hrachyrhyuchus) — see, autca, plates t)-i6. The nest is lined with heather and grasses and pale grey down. I'l.ATK j6 I’l.ATE 27 Wmitk-knontki) (1i;i>k {Ausrr alhijroiis) : ( '.i.orcKSTHRsiiiui', i<)47 Immvituk WiUTK-iKoNTKn (.KHsK i>l hi I rou s) : (.l.orCHSTKKsmKH, M \ucn K),S(> Th..s,. birds an- about <, months old and though at this aj^o tlm wluU- Ion tnnd . , ■ ,.ni to -1 .-dult Great Crested Grebe on 16 waters (presumably a breeding season count, but this is not mentioned): first arrived 2nd February, and on 17th October a second brood was still being fed. An exhausted Manx Shearwater on 28th September. Throughout the 1952-53 winter a very tame bird roosted on a railway bridge which “certainly was a Shag and not a Cormorant”. A pair of Common Scoters on 6th April. Buzzard attempted to breed at Buxton. Increase in breeding pairs of Curlew in more than one area. Green Sandpiper in winter. Dunlin throught to have bred in 2 localities. One Arctic Skua shot out of 3 on 3rd September. Black Tern on i6th August. 3 Water Pipits on i6th and 22nd November at Press reservoir. A 238 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Crossbill on 29th July. The Barbrook notes include Little Stint and Little Tern in August and Bar-Tailed Godwit in September. A number of records are undated. Increase or decrease is reported for many species, sometimes general but often for particular areas. For some species both increase and decrease is reported ; no evidence is given and it is difficult to avoid the feeling that these records are of impressions, not facts, and one wonders whether they are well-founded. The Report is not one which should be taken as a model by other counties. In the 1954 Report much more space is given to the systematic list ; the migrant arrival and departure dates are reasonably restricted to little more than a page, but the sequence of species remains haphazard. Some notes are included on birds at opencast coal workings, but these are rather meaningless without any indication of the state and age of the workings. Two dawn chorus lists record the time of first call of a number of species ; both lists are dated 6th June, but the times are about an hour apart because one list is given in B.S.T. and the other in G.M.T. Most records are dated in the systematic list for 1954: the following items are extracted: — Red-throated Diver on 3rd April. 96 adult Great Crested Grebes in the breeding season ; a very few wintered. Gannet on 21st September. A duck Goldeneye at Bar- brook on i3tb June. Velvet Scoter in December. Common Scoter in March, August and November. 42 Goosanders on nth February. A record of 60 Pinkfooted Geese flying over on the very early date of 8th August is hard to accept without supporting evidence. 76 Bewick’s .Swans on 20th March. Corncrake heard in June. Oystercatcher in August. Curlew still extending breed- ing range in a number of areas. Wood Sandpiper in August. 2 Knots in October. A Stone Curlew on 7th November. Only 9 Herring Gulls recorded in the whole year. Kittiwake in April. total of about 32 Black Terns on 9th May. Short-eared Owl from April to September. An undated Black Redstart. 2 pairs Pied Flycatchers feeding young: “species has been introduced by exchange of eggs just outside the county’’. Great Grey Shrike in February. No evidence is published in support of any of the above records except that of the Stone Curlew. P..\.D.H. LETTERS DISPLACEMENT COITION IN THE MALLARD Sirs, — I read with interest Mr. W. G. Hale’s note on “ Displacement coition in the Mallard ” (autea, p. 84). I think, however, that a different interpretation of the actions observed is rather more likely to be correct, i.e. that the sexual behaviour shown by the male Mallard was autochthonous and not displacement behaviour. .'\t least until the commencement of the moult into eclipse VOL. XLIX] LETTERS 239 plumag'e Mallard drakes have strong sexual impulses and, when their mates are ineubating, frequently pursue other ducks and attempt to rape them. As Heinroth long ago pointed out, the different manifestations of sexuality shown by the Mallard drake are of great psychological interest. Towards his own mate he is almost always “ considerate ” to a degree, whereas if he is sexually aroused by a strange female he makes completely uninhibited and brutal assaults on her. Under natural conditions this behaviour is not harmful to the species, since it tends to cause a spacing out of the breeding pairs and its potential evils are thus mitigated. Where man, by destroying predators and supplying food, has caused an abnormally high density of breeding- Mallard, sucb behaviour occasions much suffering and sometimes results in the death of individual females. In Inner London, for example, incubating females that leave the nest for food or water are often harried unmercifully and become the centre of a “rugger- scrum” of twenty or more frenzied drakes, few of whom will desist till they have succeeded in treading her. Usually the female’s own mate — if present, as he often is — is “ on her side ” and may even attempt to fight off her attackers. Occasionally in this situation his sexual impulses get the upper hand and he may dislodge one of her ravishers only to follow his example ! I have noticed, however, that even when this sort of behaviour is at its height, female Mallard with small young are very seldom molested, and never, in my experience, with any degree of persistence. This suggests that the presence of ducklings inhibits the Mallard drake from making sexual attacks on their mother. Such a “ safety-mechanism ” might be expected, for whereas, under natural conditions the incubating female — if pursued when off the nest — can usually escape from the two or three drakes that are the most that are likely to chase her, and even if caught suffers no .serious damage, the case would be very different with a female with small young. With the above in mind I would suggest the following explana- tion for the behaviour observed by Mr. Hale: — A female Mallard, accompanied by her young had attracted the interest of a drake, possibly, but by no means certainly, her own mate. This drake was inhibited from overt sexual behaviour towards her by the presence of the ducklings. The drake’s attacking of individual ducklings that strayed far from the mother might be due to their then being considered by him (as would a sparrow in the water, a frog, or a mouse) as prey. Alternatively, aggressiveness (? caused by sexual frustration) might be vented on the lone duckling rather than on the many around the mother, owing to the latter being defended by her. The two explanations are not, perhaps, mutually exclusive, since in the Mallard it is not always clear where re-'dir'ected aggression (which is habitually shown by London Mallards towards many species of smaller waterfowl, pigeons, and other birds) ends and food-seeking predatory behaviour begins. 240 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX The drake’s attack on the duckling' and/or the presence of the observer elicited an aggressive approach (? or distraction display) from the female. Her moving away from the brood “ permitted ” her to be regarded by the drake as an object of sexual attack and he reacted accordingly. The above suggestions are offered very tentatively, since I am well aware of the dangers inherent in trying to interpret a piece of bird behaviour that one has not personally witnessed. It is to be hoped that any other readers who chance to see similar behaviour will also record it in detail. It would be particularly worthwhile to know if any Mallard drakes do, in fact, show any real solicitude for ducklings. I have never seen any indication that they do. Most male Mallards take almost as active a role as the ducks in seeking out suitable nesting sites, but, once laying commences, their interest in the nest and its contents seems to evaporate. Derek Goodwin Sirs, — With reference to Mr. D. I. M. Wallace’s paper on Yellow Wagtails [MotaciUa flava) in Kenya [antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 337-340), I have nothing to add to my remarks on this species in The Birds of Arabia. There is one point, however, which I wish to make. Wallace talks of the possibility of flavissima occurring in Kenya, whilst recording three specimens observed at Meru. This “possibility” is actually a certainty for V. G. L. VanSomeren {Novit. ZooL, 1922, p. 183) obtained 14 adult males in Kenya (now in New York ex Tring) and I have in my collection two males from Klsumu on the Victoria Nyanza, dated 30th March igi6. At Entebbe (on the Victoria Nyanza) where the congregation of many races occurs in spring, I estimated that flavissima were in hundreds. The adult males cannot possibly be confused with hitea and when in such numbers, cannot be accounted for by genetical instability. I was at Meru in Kenya in March 1956 and saw two undoubted males of flavissima. But whilst all these sight records and specimens show that birds identical with British flavissima do in fact occur in Kenya, it remains to be proved that they are a part of the British population. One other point. Van Someren (op. cit.) obtained three Yellow Wagtails with white heads and I obtained one with a white head in Egypt. None of these are leucocephala nor even heema. In these specimens the mantle is not pale as in heema but dark as in M. f. flava, and I have always considered them to be aberrant M. f. flava. The Yellow Wagtail complex remains unsolved, the greatest confusion occurring in Southern Russia. An accurate survey of the species in this area of greatest confusion would perhaps solve the problem but would not convert those whose views on “ over- YELLOW WAGTAILS IN KENYA lap ” are adamant. R. Meinertzhagen NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS British Birds publishes material dealing with original observations on the birds of Britain and Western Europe, or where appropriate, on birds of this area as observed in other parts of their range. Except for records of rarities, Papers and Notes are normally accepted only on condition that the material is not being offered to any other journal. Photographs (glossy prints showing good contrast) and sketches are welcomed. Proofs of all contributions accepted are sent to authors before publication. After publication 20 separates of Papers are sent free to authors; additional copies, for which a charge is made, can be provided if ordered when the proofs are returned. Contributors are asked to observe the following points, attention to which saves the waste of much editorial time on trivial alterations: 1. Papers should be typewritten with double spacing, and on one side of the sheet only. Shorter contributions, if not typed, must be clearly written and with similar spacing. Failure to help in this way may result in delays to publication. 2. Notes should be worded as concisely as possible, and drawn up in the form in which they will be printed, with signature in block capitals and the writer’s address clearly written on the same sheet. If more than one Note is submitted, each should be on a separate sheet, with signature and address repeated. In the case of rarity records, any supporting description which is too detailed for publication should be attached separately. 3. Certain conventions of style and lay-out are essential to preserve the uni- formity of any publication. Authors of Papers in particular, especially of those containing Systematic Lists, Reference Lists, Tables, etc. should consult the ones in this issue as a guide to general presentation. English names of species should have capital initials for each word, except after a hyphen (e.g. Siberian Thrush, Yellow-headed Wagtail), but group terms should not (e.g. thrushes, wagtails). English names are those used in The Handbook of British Birds, with the exception of the changes listed in British Birds in 1953 (vol. xlvi, pp. 2-3). The scientific name of each species should be given (in brackets and underlined) immediately after the first mention of the English name. Sub- specific names should not be used except where they are relevant to the discuss- ion. If is sometimes more convenient to list scientific names in an appendix. Dates should take the form “ist January 1955” and no other, except in Tables where they may be abbreviated to “ist Jan.”, ‘‘Jan. ist”, or even ‘‘Jan. i", whichever most suits the lay-out of the Table concerned. It is particularly requested that authors should pay attention to Reference Lists, which otherwise cause much unnecessary work. These should take the following form : Tucker, B. W. (1949): ‘‘ Species and subspecies: a review for general ornitho- logists.” Brit. Birds, xlii : 129-134. WiTHERBY H. F. (1894): Forest Birds: Their Haunts and Habits. London, p. 34. Various other conventions concerning references, including their use in the text, should be noted by consulting previous examples. 4. Tables should be numbered with Roman numerals, and the title typed above in the style used in this issue. The title and any headings within the Table should not be underlined, because this sometimes makes it difficult for the Editor to indicate the type to be used. It is most important that the lay- .out of each Table should be carefully planned with an eye to its final appearance; above all, it should be borne in mind that Tables must either fit into the width of a page, or be designed to fit a whole page lengthways. All Tables should be self-explanatory. 5. Figures should be numbered with Arabic numerals, and the captions typed on a separate .sheet. All line-drawings should be in Indian ink on good quality drawing paper (not of an absorbent nature) or, where necessary, on graph paper, but this must be light blue or very pale grey. It is best if maps, graphs, etc., are drawn twice the size of the final reproduction (ideally, therefore, for the normal 4" width the original should be 8" wide); sketches of birds, however, should be only slightly larger than the size at which it is intended they should appear. It is always most important to consider how each drawing will fit into the page. The neat insertion of lettering, numbers, arrows, etc., is perhaps the most difficult part of Indian ink drawing and, unless he has had consider- able experience of this kind of work, an author should seek the aid of a skilled draughtsman. The publishers regret that, owing to rising costs, it will in future be only in exceptional cases that they can undertake to have lettering inserted. THE BIRDS OF THE BRITISH ISLES VOLUME IV DAVID A. BANNERMAN and GEORGE E. LODGE This fourth volume deals with swifts, nightjars, bee-eaters, hoopoes, rollers, kingfishers, woodpeckers, wryneck, and cuckoos. 280 pages 29 full colour plates 45s. net. Volumes Till dealing with the passerine birds are available at 45s. each. THE BIRDS AND MAMMALS OF SHETLAND L. S. VENABLES and U. M. VENABLES The result of eight years’ observation by naturalists resident in Shetland, this book contains invaluable information on breeding, status changes, song seasons, along with a study and bibliography of zoological literature relating to Shetland. 384 pages Fully illustrated 30s. net. Send for full list of Bird Books to OLIVER & BOYD, TWEEDDALE COURT, EDINBURGH SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS 91- 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 1/-. BINOCUL.\RS AND TELESCOPPZS, new and reconditioned, at reasonable prices. Approval allowed, also part exchanges. 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. BINOCULARS by leading makers. Magnifications 8x to 20x. Prices from ;^io los. od. Ask for free Catalogue. DOLLONDS, 28 Old Bond Street, London, W.i. CAMBRIDGE BIRD CLUB: 50th Anniversary Rejiort. Notes on birds of (Cambridgeshire and the Fens. 5/- from I. C. T. Nisbet, King’s ('ollege, Cambridge. ESSEX BIRD REPORT 1055, 60 pages, now available from G. A. Pyman, 09 Galley wood Road, Chelm.sford, Essex, [irice 4/6 post free. ' NORFOLK — Well-furnished cottage on private estate: coast road, between Blakeney and Cley: :dl mains, newly decorated, 3 bedrooms, batliroom, tiiring-cupboard: from middle of June for not less than 3 months, with option of longer: 4^ guineas weekly. .Suit 2 ladies or quiet couple: regret no children or dogs. Two references required. Box (156. WITH the help of 50 other eminent contributors, Ludwig Koch has compiled in this one volume ALL the subjects on which those interested in Bird Life are likely to require information. There are descriptions of every known species of British Bird, not only those resident in the British Isles or regular visitors, but some which have paid only one recorded visit so far. Also, among tthe TOTAL OF NEARLY 500, are most of the Continental species and many from America, Africa and Asia. The descriptions give, as well as the usual points of identification etc., accounts of their daily life together with their songs and calls, gathered from the Editor’s lifelong observation. ENCYCLOPEDIA OF BRITISH BIRDS including every Rare Visitor from Overseas Edited by LUDWIG KOCH Arranged Alphabetically in 592 Pages with 600 Black and White ILLUS- TTRATIONS and over 50 PLATES & CHARTS— 42 in FULL COLOUR. FREE EXAMINATION FORM TO THE WAVERLEY BOOK CO., LTD. (Dept. B. Bds. 2), 96 & 97, Farringdon Street, London, E.C.4, Please send me, carriage paid for seven days’ FREE examination, “ENCYCItO- PEDIA OF BRITISH BIRDS.” It is understood that I may return the volume within eight days with no further obligation. If I keep it I will send you a first payment of 7/6 eight days after delivery and eleven monthly payments of 61- thus completing the purchase price of £3 13s. 6d. or CASH PRICE WITHIN 8 DAYS. £3 10s. Od. ' Name. Address. Occupation State if householder Signature Date (Or parents if under 21.) Please fill in all particulars ashed. B.Bds.2. <TJ ^S M *^00 a OOM^ i/^rofO ooow ^ >-> 0\ tT N ^s N CO O' O H. o'® ° O O M 4 Ch tJ- ts tv rj* a^ o\ ^ N M M ^ CO COOO*-» N^s» »j- tt m _ 00 m o\ e^ o N I I ONfOct o;;f coo^ lO 01 C\ tv 0< CO H O o a 00 N O' o -• tvoo N 00 O' tvO 'O O' Ot oo CO m tv o o O w o O M ^ 1? ^00 O m N o ^ 00 Ci td cc O o « O'^’^ 00 N _ N CO o O COM O' CO ot ot 0\»nO' O'Ot^ cowM O' M CO O' M »n M w 00 CO oo ■«*' tv m w ct o •ui u c5 mco o co O U3 tr> M < »o * tv O 00 »n 'O CO O (/} Ih (/) t/5 'O o *o CO tH o ui (^iS SIS ^o'o'o good • c/) 9^ T3 0< ‘«’0 o-a CiJ »-« o H 'S 4) .2 .O ui 4> M-. ^ !Z g O O o ^ 6 6 d hzy;z jis S;5 5'S'o'o H C/) f/i ?-2 R-P O O o 5, owo ^ i/> u;g 'O IS or: ^ o OX) . c o w;^ I'd o o >-• (A O (U y ^ . 2 "S • w y M T3 O Jh ^‘o'o'o to .. . COCO wz)2;;z: ^ C< M IN tN. Os tJ- CO CO'O >0 O' »0 M N M M N H Cl Ui o :'0 O M O M O o o o o : 'd i-t o : • u. o M- M »0 C^ O w O CO VO 00 00 O' O' UO UO IT) 1 I \n CO VO d N T^ CO ^ • 'd • u o d 'd P< 0 W) U ^■H8| U) P4 cd (A U c/i w-HSl 0 'd ft >—7 tA ^ fA ^c'28| rrt ‘d y G-° '^■0 j- i*H M-l 5 ° ° 0 ^ o'd'o 5.S 0 ° 0 S d d d g d d d 8^ d d d wZZZ wZZZ t/2 ZZ2 a « o . »-* cj . M • tn y I t:! 1-2 °-3 $ y y y .S 73-^ '->Xi O *3J **H rt ° ° o "g o' d d I^'Z’Z'Z, O • c/) 5^ ^ 'O V) ^ ^ Vi W ^ O 'rt W- T3-° S MH J o O o ? d d d ^•z'z'z ®p CO tx L,’ d ^ s. <^^5: ^ o\ ^ O ^vo Ov (O °0 H VO CO N CO d <0 o\ CTv O' ^ IN O' d lx Ixco ^ O 00 d 00 O' 9_ Tfoo 5" ?s ^ 2 00 m ^ CO VO lx CO u-> d “2 mm :t3 * o * vj 9^ in"^ ^ ■2 S'H < . . . O O O O hxi o'o 264 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. o c H 5 Q O o Q Ui u < H ( U < CQ b: .j ffl < H •c ► c 2 o o ^ o n VO 0 1 00 CO O Q £!i o u Id Ci U3 Cu a cs o c/3 U3 CO H 2: O o H JO S '2 c 03 > O B p tc p < jt a < 5 03 00 »n 5 C« O O' M 5^00 •-• o^ rv ro N N M N M • crt 03 ^'O Pi fy> JS ^ u^z:^:z *j : i ■a ;/3 b g 8 o . g ^ '4S .•a-H s-s I3g;§ : -o Ui o is. M ^ O O' 00 M »0 M O O o po N VO o\ lO ci tr> M ci v§ 2 - 2 CO 00 w NO Is t3 : a • W.is ^fp •d c o o ^ o i ^ d d o’ ^ZZZ Si 4>.a ° o d <5 J S. “0 cn d ‘^■3 9-3 w.t! .2 o o O 3 d d d 'd c J5 *5) c : *o u O Q «q ; oV ^ 'P 03 .i3 03 »Q u 5*0 Oo ^ . a o o a XLIX Platk 29 Rock Tiirpshes (Moulicola saxalilis): IIi'noarv line lell-hand jihotograph shows tlie female, and the oilier the male. This scries of plates once more illustrates the value ol photography as an aid to the iilentidcation of the food of birds; thc> female is carrying an ermine moth caterjiillar (Spilosoma s]i.) while the male lias one of the scarabid beclli's — Rltisul rogus acquiiioctialis (see page 270). Plate 30 I <1^ ^ 0) 4 c 2 ‘ 3 '01- I- o X -lij V- I O t3 5 5 3 > 3 G,' ” ^ ^ r; w o “■g 5 ’M « jj C/5 • =J o c: O T a — C5 3 05 C 'ZC Cg C c: 3 00 . c ° ^.S!: C3 JD ^ O ^ J= ^ 3 ” tyo'^ 05 ^ < u u 5 3- ^ >1^ i5 .. C 3 tUD • P , CO 3 C5 CO ^ --55 CO I y • »> - — ahovo ;md more orange below. Plate 31 Si O 05 t! c ^ CC CL ^4-1 .' .— O S -G , S- 53 g-.S o ^ C3 ji'S •= ^-s C C--73 O 3 -s ^0-0 ii -S o o •" P ; •^■5 « ' tUD ^ — ; c tUD C/3 o 05 ■ :3 05 00 — ^ l;;3 H m ^ — * C TO ./••O ti£l o a. tjo S -r c 05 •C5 17) TO 05 D C£ H ^ r- :3 5 -^ (/) ■? ^ ojd§]3 05 05 T IT TO "to 05 TO °l-._ -13 O 5 O O ' b;5 < TO -- »> 05 -r • > Jr o iS o ^ TO r- 05 QJ 0> O) 0) TO ^ “ u TO S-S E TO -E TO -§ 5^ <1^ TO •": C-jTO nJ • - ^ tUD c/5 C 0; ® 15 n c 'C ‘o. cs (sec jiage -’70). Plate 35 K. K off an Rock Thrushes (MonUcoIa saxalilis) in flight; Hungary The upper shows the male, the lower the female. Light here unfortunatel}' exaggerates the size of the white patch on the back of the male, but this plate does serve to show that it is the lower back, rather than the rump, which is white. Except in its display-flights (see page 269) the Rock Thrush is usually rather secretive and flies low, dropping out of sight among the rocks. Plate 36 VOL. XLix] BLACK-TAILED GODWITS; 1938-52 Cn I 00 ro CN Q OS O u til cs Ci u c« C/5 a til o a 03 s 2 H 2 O S Q O o 0 a d < H 1 U < CQ oa < H S re »-i o OH 0) O'® O O M CS M VO VO O' dv ® in VO ^ c u 0> I C Ih -}-• • to 0) b no O. ^Is-s 'Oio S3 JS o o o bC . . . a o o o w;2;:2Z 00 Tt- JN. VO 'O fO w M VO ® N M H VO fO N : § «'2 S' "’’2 8-H tS o o3 Rood ; "O • tf) C/) rt V/5 «-' tf) T3 goo (/3:z;:z; T3 C 'O 'O fl fa « 3 O O o Qcn P w.g o ro fO o’H o .fa ) 'o *0 j 6 d ;;2;z o . o : ^'S PT3 J o o o :z:z;z o u to 5^ »o P< 1/1 W I- T3 G, v« Jii 5S I/) ^ O »rt w.b rI ^ O o o ’^666 ^2;;sz 265 TOTAL No. ofbirds... 3,297 3.i95 2,657 3,152 893 442 1,938 6,077 6,663 6,216 1,820 4,688 41.038 No. of records ... 66 59 105 201 149 60 139 319 252 ir3 60 79 1,602 No. of birds per record 50.0 54.2 25.3 15.7 6.0 7.4 i3-9 191 26.4 55.0 30.3 59.3 25.6 266 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX and Venables (1955). Therefore it would be cominonsense to suppose that a plentiful food supply is one of the chief factors determining- the distribution. It would be an interesting- piece of research to assess the relative feeding values of different estuarine deposits, and see if there is any relation between godwit population and the invertebrate populations of various geological habitats. We do not yet really know where our godwits are bred, as there have been no recoveries in the British Isles of birds ringed abroad. However, we approached two Dutch ornithologists, Messrs. J. Kist and J. E. Sluiters, for information on the present status and trend of population of the species in Holland, where it breeds so commonly, and so closely to cur own islands. Mr. Kist replied that from 1920 to 1950 there has been a continual increase in Holland in the breeding population. There are no data for the last five years, but he believes that this increase has now stopped, and indeed in 1955 there was an evident decrease in several localities, perhaps due to the bad spring weather. Mr. Sluiters stated that the Black-tailed Godwit is generally widespread, and locally sometimes numerous as a breeding bird. It is increasing in some places in the north and north-west of the Netherlands, but decreasing in other places such as North Brabant. But he also says there are no detailed reports over the last six years, and the species being so common, it is difficult to make a good census of its population. The value of an analysis of published records depends ultimately on the assiduousness and accuracy of local ornithologists, and thus we wish to express our hope that natural history societies should see their way to publishing in full the notes of numbers collected by their members. The spectre of expenses is always at the elbow of the compilers of annual ornithological reports, and it must often be tempting to do some telescoping by such a phrase as “26 seen on July 15, thereafter observed regularly till the end of the year”, or ‘‘seen in every month except June”. But it does seem a pity that when material has been collected some of it should become lost, perhaps for ever, and especially when by its inclusion a more accurate picture could be built up of a decreasing or increasing species. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wish to acknowledge our indebtedness to the following individuals and institutions for help in the preparation of this paper: — D. G. Andrew, A. W. Boyd, A. J. Bull, Bird-ringing Committee (Miss E. P. Leach and R. Spencer), British Trust for Ornithology, E. Cohen, W. M. Condry, Dr. F. Darling, E. T. Edmondson, Edward Grey Institute (W. B. Alexander), I. J. Ferguson-Lees, J. D. Harcourt- Roberts, E. W. C. jenner. The Rev. P. G. Kennedy, W. G. Luton, Radcliffe Science Library, B. W. Rogers, Dr. K. B. Rookc, Major R. F. Ruttledge, VOL. XLix] BLACK-TAILED GODWITS: 1938-52 267 J. Staton, H. Shorrock, J. F. Thomas, W. A. Thornley, Dr. P. R. Westall, G. Waterston. We are very grateful to Miss E. ’Espinasse who helped with the tedious work of extracting and checking figures, and to J. Kist and J. E. Sluiters for supplying information from Holland. REFERENCES Baxter, E. V. and Rintoul, L. J. (1953): The Birds of Scotland. Edinburgh. Bull, A. J. (1953): “The Wildfowl and Waders of Poole Harbour”. Proc. Dorset Nat. Hist. & Arch. Soc., Ixxiv: 149-170. Kennedy, P. G., Ruttledge, R. F. and Scroope, C. F. (1954): The Birds of Ireland. Edinburgh. Morley, a. (1939): “The Black-tailed Godwit in the British Isles, 1890-1937”. Brit. Birds, xxxiii ; 98-104. PiLKiNGTON, A. D. (1947): “Black-tailed Godwit breeding in Caithness”. Brit. Birds, xl: 57-58. SiiACKLETON, K. (1955): “Unusually large numbers of Black-tailed Godwits in Hampshire”. Brit. Birds, xlviii : 281. Venables, L. S. V. and Venables, U. M. (1955): 'Birds and Mammals of Shetland. London and Edinburgh. LIST OF JOURNALS AND SOCIETIES WHOSE ANNUAL REPORTS WERE CONSULTED Barrow Nat. Field Club, Bedford Nat. Hist. Soc. & Field Club, Birmingham & West Midland Bird Club, Bournemouth Nat. Science Soc., Bristol Nat. .Soc., British Birds, Cambridge Bird Club, Caradoc & Severn Valley Field Club, Cardiff Nat. Soc., Carlisle Nat. Hist. Soc., Cornwall Bird Watching & Preservation Soc., Devon Bird Watching & Preservation Soc., Derbyshire Arch. & Nat. Hist. Soc., Dorset Nat. Hist. & Arch. Soc., Edinburgh Bird Bulletin, Essex Bird Watching & Pres. Soc., Essex Field Club, Fair Isle Bird Observatory Bulletin, Gibraltar Point Nature Reserve, Glasgow and West of Scotland Bird Bulletin, Great Yarmouth Nat. Soc., Hampshire Field Club, Hastings & East Sussex Naturalist, Hereford Orn. Club, Herts Nat. Hist. Soc. & Field Club, Hunts Fauna & Flora Soc., Irish Nat. Journal, Isle of Thanet Field Club, Isle of Wight Nat. Hist. & Arch. Soc., Kent Orn. Soc., Lakeland Ornithology, Lancs. & Cheshire Fauna Committee, Leicestershire & Rutland Orn. Soc., Lincolnshire Nat. Union, Liverpool Nat. Field Club, London Nat. Hist. Soc., Lowestoft & N. Suffolk Field Nat. Club, Manx Field Club, Mersey- side Nat. Association, Middle Thames Nat. Hist. Soc., Nat. Hist. Soc. of Northumberland, Durham & Newcastle upon Tyne, Norfolk Nat. Trust, Northants. Nat. Hist. Soc. & Field Club, Ornithological Record for Derby- shire, Ornithology of the Isle of Man, Oundle School Nat. Hist. Soc., Oxford Orn. Soc., Report on Birds Observed in Herts., Scottish Naturalist, Socidte Jersiaise, Somerset Arch. & Nat. Hist. Soc., South-Eastern Bird Report, South Essex Nat. Hist. Soc., Suffolk Bird Report, Suffolk Nat. Soc., Sussex Bird Report, Torquay Nat. Hist. Soc., West Wales Field Soc., Wiltshire Arch. A- Nat. Hist. Soc., Yorkshire Nat. Union. PHOTOGRAPHIC STUDIES OF SOME LESS FAMILIAR BIRDS LXXI. ROCK THRUSH Photographed by Karoly Koffan (Plates 29-36) The Rock Thrush (Monticola saxatilis) and the Blue Rock Thrush (M. solitarius) are both birds of the mountains of southern Europe and Asia, breeding from Spain (also Aiorocco and, in the case of the Blue Rock, N. Algeria and Tunisia) to China. In parts of its range, particularly Europe, the Blue Rock is mainly a resident, but saxatilis is almost everywhere a summer-visitor, wintering chiefly in tropical Africa. In Europe the Rock Thrush extends its range rather further north than the Blue Rock and is found breeding in central France, southern Germany and Hungary and Rumania. It was in Hungary, in fact, that Mr. Koffan for several years studied and photographed this species and we are extremely grateful to him for providing not only a fine selection of the results but also a short account of the birds as he knows them. In addition, his colleague. Dr. Tibor Farkas, has kindly sent us some notes on the food of the species. Both these contributions appear below and there is therefore little need for us to discuss the features brought out by the photographs. It seems worth remarking, however, that while the male’s striking colouring of blue head and mantle, white lower back, orange under-parts and tail, and blackish wings is, of course, entirely lost in black-and-white photography, the distinctive markings of the female, noteably the crescent-barrings on the under-parts, are well brought out in these shots (see plates 29, 31 and 33), as is the characteristic, upright, chat-like stance of the species (plates 29, 32 and 33, in particular). Finally, we have here again examples of the value of photography as an aid to the identification of the food of birds, a method already developed in this country by Eric Hosking and Dr. Stuart Smith (e.g., aiitea, vol. xlii, p. 358). I.J.F.-L. SOME NOTES ON DISPLAY AND NESTING For many years I have studied Rock Thrushes (Mo)iticola saxatilis) in the barren mountains of Budaors in Hungary. .About 5-6 pairs breed here; the nests are constructed in the crevices of old quarries, in the well-hidden recesses of rock-faces, under blocks of stone and on the sides of slopes and ditches. Since the 1939-45 war, however, the thrushes have shown a preference for frequenting the ruins on the fringe of the village. The bird nests in May, but the males arrive some time earlier than the females — for instance, in 1955 the males came on 3rd .\pril whereas the females did not arrive here until the 2Sth. 'I'he 268 VOL. XLIX] ROCK THRUSH STUDIES 269 males sing vigorously even before the arrival of the females, and they perform really acrobatic feats in mid-air. They hurtle up from their perches, high into the air, and then suddenly drop again ; after a steep dive of about 5 or 6 metres, apparently still carried along by their own impetus, they start to rise again — this time, however, not so steeply as in the first upward flight from the perch ; the highest point of flight is reached amid ever more rapid wing-beats. This game is repeated 4 or 5 times, until they finally alight once more on their perches. The display-dance of the Rock Thrush is a very lovely sight. I was once able to observe the dance of a male who, still wet from a dip, was singing to a female, bowing with his wings hanging at his side, waving to and fro his fanned-out tail. As regards their nests, I have noticed that if the nest is visible from any quarter, the bird always puts the eggs on the opposite side of it, so that they are always out of the line of vision of any' intruder. The number of nests which come to grief is large. Such breeding-pairs as lose their brood make a second or even third attempt; then, as a rule, the new nest is not far removed from the old one. Second broods are also frequent; for instance, the pair I photographed in 1953, whose first brood flew on loth June, were on 17th July already feeding the fledged young of their second brood. The behaviour of the parents varies, as does their relationship towards their young. The male of the breeding-pair I mentioned above, for instance, never once did the feeding while I was photographing. On the other hand, another male flew several times running in succession to my camera before settling on the nest. When both parents do the feeding undisturbed, it takes place approximately every 10 minutes. It has also happened that the male has done the feeding directly before or after the female. Animal food is brought alive to the nest ; cherries are eaten whole with their stones. Whenever the brood has been fed on cherries, the flooring of the nest is full of the stones. Excrement is always taken away from the nest ; I have never known the parent Rock Thrushes to swallow it — a habit common among, for instance, Song Thrushes (Turdiis philomelos). The nature of the food may be responsible for this. Before feeding the brood, the parents always settle on their customary perch, and only after they have looked around and noticed nothing unusual do they fly to the nest. Now and again a few notes are sung by male and female alike. These photographs, which are of two pairs, were taken from a distance of i metre. The first pair had their nest on a rocky hillside; the female here, judging from her behaviour, would be more properly described as “masculine”, since her actions and movements were erect and proud. My work here lasted 2^ days, during which I was repeatedly hindered by unexpected downpours. This pair ate only animal food ; if one of them let anything fall out 270 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX of its beak, he would throw himself down after the dropped prey. The female even carefully picked up ag'ain the broken-off tail of a lizard. In this way I was able to compile valuable records of the birds’ food, especially the hairy caterpillars. From my tent I could well observe the beauty of this beautiful bird’s way of life, unfortunately better than my camera could catch each detail of it. Karoly Koffa.n FOOD AND FEEDING-HABITS I have already written (Farkas, 1955) the essentials about the feeding-habits and food of the Rock Thrush [Monticola saxatilis) in Hungary. Now I would like to take the opportunity of discussing in more detail such points as in that earlier work 1 was able only to touch upon. The feeding-material of the Rock Thrush in Hungary comes under the following three categories : (a) Insects, (b) Other animals, (c) Plants — in that order of importance. I would now like to consider briefly these components and the way in which they are taken. (a) Insects. — In this category hairy caterpillars above all are of great importance. That small birds too, eat such caterpillars — a special treat — has recently been more emphasized, for example by Mansfeld (1955) with reg'ard to tits (Parus spp.) and Chaffinches [Fringilla coelebs). In the first photograph (plate 29, left) the female is carrying an ermine moth caterpillar [Spilosoma], so it seems that they not only eat such caterpillars but also feed them to their young! Plate 32 should prove not without interest, since it confirms the fact that the birds eat Hypha^iiria ciinea, a dangerous pest. Different species of beetle make up a considerable part of the Rock Thrush’s food: Copris lunaris (plate 34, left), Geotrupes sp. (plate 34, right) and Phisotrogus aequiuoctialis (plate 29, right) also testify to the active nature of tlie bird. Unfortunately Herr Koffan has not yet succeeded in getting photo- graphic proof of the capture of Cetonia species, which beetles — by reason of the large numbers in which they appear in the bird’s habitat — are an important item. Cetonia and Rhisotrogus are mostly caught in flight, and the pellets lying around the various perches of the bird shimmer with the remains of these beetle’s wings. The bird kills and rends this kind of prey with strong hammering blows of its beak; this was also ol>served in cag'ed specimens, which mastered the Cockchafers {Meloloutha melolontha) and Rose Chafers {Cetonia aurata) thrown to them, by means of woodpecker-like blows, directed vertically down- wards. Somtimes the birds would warily circle a larger beetle and deliver each blow from a different direction. (b) Other a}iiinals. — In this category the most important section is undoubtedly the vertebrates. That these birds also sometimes seize upon vertebrate animals was already to be conjectured from the writings of La Touche (1920) and Broekhuvsen (1941) VOL. XLIX] ROCK THRUSH STUDIES 271 among others. La Touche remarked of a Blue Rock Thrush {Monticola solitarius pandoo) that this bird had killed a mouse. Broekhuysen gave tree-frogs (Hylidae) as 2% of the food of Monticola rupestris. As regards Monticola saxatilis, the capture and eating of 4 vertebrates has so far been established — and partially, too, documented by photographs : the lizards Lacerta agilis (plate 36), Lacerta miiralis (plate 33) and Ablepharus kitaibeli; and the European Tree Frog [Hyla arborea). Cag'ed Rock Thrushes kill and rend young Green Lizards [Lacerta viridis) thrown to them ; I once threw to a Rock Thrush a young female lizard of this species — about 10 centimetres long — that had died shortly before. Although the lizard was already half-stiffened, the bird showed a noticeable respect for this large item, but got it into position with a few strokes and then began eating it head first. .\fter 5 minutes the tail was still hanging out of his beak. Ordinarily (when they are not in captivity). Rock Thrushes always go about the killing of a lizard with adroit jumps to the side, designed to avoid the bites and blows of their struggling prey. In such incidents the sportive grace of this bird is displayed to best advantage. It must here be observed, however, that the capture of lizards is not, with the Rock Thrush, of everyday occurence, and this fact must in no way prejudice our opinions as to the use- fulness of the bird. Small frogs [Hyla arborea) appear much more rarely and are killed only by chance ; I was more frequently able, however, especially during the breeding-period, to establish the eating of small snails [Cepaea, Zebrina). The high calcium carbonate content of these molluscs seems to me to have a certain attraction for the birds in this period. (c) Plants. — The preference of the Rock Thrush for cherries [Prunus cerasus and P. avium) is undeniable. At Dunabogdanv, where both types of cherry-tree abound, I was able to confirm this by observing the excrement — coloured purple by cherry-juice — of countless nestlings ; also, the beaks and mouths of the feeding adults were coloured purple. On the other hand, there were some Rock Thrushes there at the same time who bore no trace of this habit. Lastly, the bird seems to show a remarkable taste for saxifrage. I saw grown fledgings pecking at the puffy leaves of this plant. When offered to tame cage-birds, such leaves were torn to shreds and the juicy parts eaten. Tibor Farkas REFERENCES Broekhuysen, G. J. (1941): “Some observations on the diet of a young Cape Rock-Thrush (Pctrornis rupestris)'’. Ostrich, 12:71-74. Farkas, T. (1955): “Zur Brutbiologie und Ethologie des Steinrotels (Monticola saxatilis)" . Vogelwelt, 76: 164-180. La Touche, J. D. D. (1920): “Notes on the birds of north-east Chihli, in north China’’. Ibis, (ii) 2: 883. Mansfeld, K. : “Buchenrotschwanzspinner als Vogelnahrung’’. In Referat an d. konstituirenden Versainmlung d. Intern. Union f. Angew. Ornithologie, 1955, Frankfurt a.M. NOTES ON THE AVIFAUNA OF THE SOVIET UNION WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE NEW RUSSIAN HANDBOOK By G. P. Dementiev and N. A. Gladkov The variety of nature in Russia, and her fauna in particular, has long since drawn the attention of both her inhabitants and her administration. Back in the i6th and 17th centuries, soon after the Russians had occupied Siberia, there arose the problem of investigating and exploiting the natural resources of the then unknown country. Thus, an extensive and systematic study of the fauna in Russia had already begun as far back as the i8th century, when numerous and well equipped expeditions were organized for this purpose, and in which the Russian Academy of Sciences, founded by Peter the First in 1772, played no little role. The results of these fauna studies were summed up by P. S. Pallas in his well known work under the heading Zoographia Rosso-Asiatica. The first two volumes of this work, in which the author gave a description of animals and birds, were published in 1811 in a small edition ; and while the first list of birds in Russia published by I. P. Falck in 1786 enumerated only 222 bird species, the Zoographia by Pallas practically doubled this figure, increasing the list to the number of 425. In Russia, this Zoographia was, during a lengthy period, recognized as the zoological handbook, and there is no doubt that its publication contributed no little to the further development of ornithological investigation in Russia. In the 19th century the study of birds in Russia already proceeded on a regional scale, some of these regions covering vast territories. As a result, there soon appeared Kessler’s Birds of the Ukraine (1851), Birds of the Caucasus by Radde (1884), Birds of the Orenburg region by Eversmann (1855), Severtsoff’s Turkestan birds (1873), Eastern Siberian Birds by Taczanovski (1891-1893), and others. At the close of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, the number of similar works on bird investigations had increased both in quantity and quality, their publication being connected with such names as P. P. Sushkin, N. A. Zarudny, S. A. Buturlin and others. This new trend in ornithological investigation was due, to a considerable extent, to the appearance of M. A. Menzbier’s well known work Birds of Russia (1895), which contained what was for that time a remarkably complete critical analysis of data on systematics, geographic distribution and biology of birds in European Russia and the Caucasus. The great quantity of new faunistic data, however, which had accumulated since then, the reform in the systematics of ornithology, vividly expressed in the classical work Die Vogel der Paldarktischen Fauna by E. Hartcrt, the heightened interest in problems of general biology connected with bird study, and the widespread development of ecological 272 VOL. XLix] ORNITHOLOGY IN THE U.S.S.R. 273 investigations, in particular, had brought us to the point where Menzbier’s Birds of Russia could no longer be considered as “up to date”. It was apparent that the need for a new critical revision of all data dealing with the avifauna of this country had ripened. This task was rather a difficult one. Nevertheless, thirty years of intensive work on the study of ornithology in our country made it possible to solve this problem. And besides, the modern handbooks on birds of adjacent countries recently published such as The Handbook of British Birds by Witherby and his collaborators in the first place, and that of Niethammer on the birds of Germany in the second, were of considerable help to us in this work. Several times in the years igi 1-1916 attempts were made to compile a complete revision of bird species in Russia. The Academy of Sciences began issuing a series on Fauna of Russia and adjacent countries in which several bird groups (petrels, divers, grebes and falcons) were fully treated. But for various reasons this attempt, as well as subsequent ones, was not brought to a conclusion. Therefore, in order to solve this pressing problem, it was decided to begin making up a list of birds in the U.S.S.R., their distribution and description, combining it with keys. The work, under the heading Complete Keys of Birds in the U .S .S .R., five volumes of which were published in the years 1934-1940, was compiled by the Moscow zoologists S. A. Buturlin and G. P. Dementiev. In this work, the authors had already brought up the number of bird species known to have occurred in the U.S.S.R. to the figure of 672. But the very mode of dealing with the bird problems, however, was too concise in form, and what is most important, no information dealing with the biology of birds had been given. In order, therefore, to give a complete monographic description of the avifauna of the Soviet Union, the Moscow University zoologists went on gathering material of this kind, and even enlisted for this purpose several well known ornithologists from other institutions. The preliminary work progressed, and by the end of World War II, the publishing plan was finally fixed upon, and the treatment in the rough of several orders completed. This problem was discussed and approved at the conference of the biological section of the Moscow University held on 23rd December 1944. Many zoologists, including professors of the Moscow University and other High Schools, participated in this conference. G. P. Dementiev was authorised by the conference to head this work, and when in 1946 N. A. Gladkov again resumed his work at the university, he, too, personally took part in it. Of vital importance, when writing up this work, was the fact that the authors could refer to the collections of bird species available at the Moscow University Zoological Museum, in the creation of which the principal authors had taken a most active part. The number of specimens at this museum had considerably 274 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX increased during the last thirty years. This increase is largely due to the fact that the numerous bird collections of S. A. Buturlin, G. I. Poliakov, V. N. Bostanjoglo and others were turned over to the museum. Of no less importance, however, were the expeditions equipped by the museum and the birds collected by its collaborators. The object of these expeditions was to study both the composition of the fauna species and their biology in various regions of the Soviet Union such as the Polar zone, the Caucasus, the deserts, the mountains and oases of central Asia, the Altai Alpines, the Trans-baikal, the Ussuri region and many others. Many groups underwent a thorough systematic revision on the basis of the material gathered in these regions, and in many cases it was possible to write up a comparative essay on the ecology of certain species and to determine the geographic variations in their ecology. Several corresponding members of the Museum had been sending us notes from the most remote parts of the country, the Kurile islands, the High Arctic latitudes, from Kamchatka, Sakhalin, etc. Of paramount importance was, of course, the scientific work which was conducted at the state reservations. Most of these reservations carried on their research work in close contact with the Zoological Museum of the Moscow University. Thus was created the scientific base necessary to carry on work of this kind in Moscow; and we, of course, availed ourselves of the rich collections of the Leningrad Zoological Institute of the Academy of Sciences and of other collections as well. To accomplish this work by the approximate time for which it was planned, we were obliged to enlist the services of many out- side specialists. The principal authors issued invitations to all the leading ornithologists of our country to cooperate. And so, besides the Moscow University collaborators who headed the compilation, several ornithologists from other towns also took part. In order not to delay the publishing of these volumes we were obliged, to some extent, to violate the sequence of arrangement of bird orders adopted in science, and to publish them as soon as they were ready for print ; taking care, however, that the group- ing of these orders did not deviate much from the commonly adopted arrangement. In the six volumes of The Birds of the Soviet Union, now all published, are described the birds belonging to 26 orders with the number of species and subspecies totalling 1,297. The illustration of these volumes was effected by the most renowned animal painters of our country, including academician A. N. Komarov, V. A. Vatagin, N. N. Kondakov, V. F. Fedotov, and A. A. Keleinikov. When writing up these volumes the authors mainly devoted themselves to the problems of zoogeography and peculiarities of bird life. In dealing with the distribution they diverged from the VOL. XLix] ORNITHOLOGY IN THE U.S.S.R. 275 routine commonly practiced in similar works, characterizing' it not only by the areas, but by the biotopes and the features of seasonal distribution, too. The results of bird-ringing in the Soviet Union for the last 25 years were also made use of. The distribution beyond our country was described for each species, but this was done in the main according to data from the most reliable foreign handbooks recently published. No special critical analysis of foreign literature dealing with birds was attempted. Neither did we comment on subspecies found beyond the Soviet Union, whereas all subspecies in our country underwent a most critical revision, with the result that many of them were synonymized. A similar fate probably awaits some of the subspecies displayed by us on the maps for other countries (we again stress here, with no critical analysis), on which also are shown the revised ranges of the sub- species in the U.S.S.R. In writings up the accounts of each bird, the authors made full use of the material and literature available. At the same time in a number of ways we could give only scanty information concern- ing the important question of the biology of the species and on the recurrent phenomena in particular. The authors in this respect hold to the op^inion of N. A. Severtsoff, a founder of modern ecology, claiming that only from the recurrent phenomena may the problems of propagation, seasonal distribution and moult be considered. The food problem has not been widely discussed in The Bir*ds of the Soviet Union. Although the authors tried their utmost to generalize this material, they nevertheless did it in the most possible concrete form proceeding from the theoretical point of investigation, thereby promoting the solution of such an extremely important problem as the geographic variability in the ecology of species, comparing these variations with certain morphologfcal features of population, etc. Considering the vastness of territory in our country and her variety of conditions, the generalization of data would have led to an absolute break from local features, and would have given nothing new to the student. But by outlining the material in a concrete form, the authors were able to point out what is known or not known about each phenomenon, imparting a more profound knowledge to the student; whereas, though a “generalization” of data does display a more or less fair knowledge, it, however, does not discover that which remains unknown and does not stimulate further investigations. The authors have expended much time and energy in drawing up maps of distribution of birds in the Soviet Union, as the task which confronted them was to illustrate not only the range of each species within the Soviet Union, but to display the range of all these species as a whole, at the same time reflecting as far as it was possible their seasonal distribution and geographic variety. It was the first time that work of this kind — the preparation of world distribution of 680 bird species — had been undertaken, and it is quite probable that in several cases some 276 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX inaccuracy may have been overlooked ; still, we believe that we have succeeded in outlining the main character of distribution correetly, and what is most essential, that the science of ornithology has at last acquired quite reliable data on geographic distribution for the vast territories of two continents. The avifauna of the U.S.S.R., numbering 704 species, constitutes 8.16% of that of the world, assuming as a basis the calculations of E. Mayr (1946, Auk, vol. 63, pp. 64-69; 1951, Amer. Mus. Novit., no. 1496, pp. 1-42). The perching birds form 43.1% of the total in the U.S.S.R., that is, relatively rather less than on a world scale (59%, aecording to Mayr). This is explained by the geographic position of the U.S.S.R. where the vast arctic and subarctic regions are sparsely inhabited by the Passerines. For the very same reason, the percentage of hydrophylic species and groups is relatively high. Thus while the Passerines in the U.S.S.R. total somewhat less than 6% of the world figure, the waders constitute almost 31.7%, while the divers even total 100%. In the following table is given the number of bird species in the U.S.S.R. according to their families. The first eolumn shows the total number of species in the world (according to Mayr) ; the second column, the number of species of each family met with in the U.S.S.R.; the third, the number of species breeding in the U.S.S.R. Table — The number of species in each family represented in the U.S.S.R., COMPARED WITH THE WORLD TOTAL* World U.S..S.R. Total Total Breeding Corvidae (crows) 100 14 13 Dicruridae (drongos) 20 2 0 Sturnidae (starlings, mynas) 103 6 6 Oriolidae (orioles) 37 2 2 Fringillidae (sensu lalo) (finches, buntings, etc.) 426 73 68 Alaudidae (larks) 75 14 14 Motacillidae (wagtails, pipits) 48 14 14 Parulidae (New World warblers) 109 2 0 [*The sequence, nomenclature and treatment followed in this table differ in several ways from the normal used in Britain, but we considered it desirable that both the taxonomic and the general views expressed in this paper, which are entirely the authors’ own throughout, should be left unchanged. In explanation, however, it should be pointed out that the swifts, grebes and divers follow the nomenclature which has long been used in .'\merica, though for the last of these the use of Gaviidae has already become the practice in British Birds; the barn-owls (Tytonidae) are separated from the rest of the owls (.Strigidae); the Charadriidae here include not only the plovers, but all the .Scolopacidae, i.e. the bulk of the rest of the waders; the skuas, which are normally separated under the Stercoraridae, are grouped with the gulls and terns (Laridae); more confusing, two of tlie three species of the east and south ,'Vsiatic family of parrotbills (Paradoxornithidae) which appear in the LhS.S.R. list are birds that we normally grouj) with the tits (Paridae) — Bearded Tit (Panurus hiarmicus) and Long-tailed Tit {Acgilhalos caudalus). The order in this table is not unlike that in The Handbook of British Birds, but the sequence in current use in Russia approximates more nearly to the “Wetmorc" and runs from the grouse to the Passerines (see IX 1). llarber's review, anlea, xlviii, p. 218). — Eds.] VOL. XLix] ORNITHOLOGY IN THE U.S.S.R. 277 Zosteropidae (white-eyes) World Total 80 U.S.S.R. Total Breeding I I Certhiidae (treecreepers) 6 4 4 Sittidae (nuthatches) 29 3 3 Paridae (tits) 64 12 12 Parodoxornithidae (panotbills) 19 3 3 Laniidae (shrikes) 67 10 9 tiampephagidae (cuckoo-shrikes, minivets) 72 I I Bombycillidae (waxwings) 3 2 2 Pycnonotidae (bulbuls) 109 2 0 Muscicapidae (flycatchers) 378 13 1 2 Regulidae (goldcrests) 5 3 0 Sylviidae (Old World warblers) 313 51 50 Turdidae (thrushes, chats, etc.) 304 50 46 Timaliidae (babblers, laughing thrushes) 282 I I Prunellidae (accentors) 12 8 8 Troglodytidae (wrens) 63 I I Cinclidae (dippers) 5 2 2 Hirundinidae (swallows, martins) 74 9 7 Micropodidae (swifts) 76 5 5 Picidae (woodpeckers) 210 14 14 Upupidae (hoopoes) I I I Coraciadidae (rollers) 16 2 2 Meropidae (bee-eaters) 25 2 2 Alcedinidae (kingfishers) 87 5 I Cuculidae (cuckoos) 128 6 5 Caprimulgidae (nightjars) 67 3 3 Strigidae (owls) 123 17 17 Tytonidae (barn-owls) 1 1 I I Pandionidae (ospreys) I I I Accipitridae (hawks, harriers, eagles, etc.) 205 37 34 Falconidae (falcons) 58 10 9 Ciconiidae (storks) 17 2 2 Threskiornithidae (spoonbills, ibises) 28 4 3 Ardeidae (herons) 59 15 12 Phoenicopterldae (flamingos) 6 r I Phalacrocoracidae (cormorants) 30 6 6 Pelecanidae (pelicans) 6 2 2 ■Sulidae (gannets) 9 2 0 Fregatidae (frigate-birds) 5 I 0 Anatidae (ducks, geese, swans) 14s 57 51 Procellariidae (petrels, shearwaters) 53 13 4 Laridae (gulls, terns, skuas) 89 35 32 Alcidae (auks) 22 18 i6 Charadriidae (waders) 150 69 65 Rostratulidae (painted snipe) 2 I 0 Glareolidae (coursers, pratincoles) 16 4 4 Burhinidae (stone-curlews) 9 I I Otididae (bustards) 23 3 3 Gruidae (cranes) 14 8 7 Rallidae (crakes, rails) 132 1 1 10 Turnicidae (hemipodes) 15 I I Pterocletidae (sandgrouse) 16 4 4 Columbidae (pigeons, doves) 289 1 1 10 Colymbidae (grebes) 20 5 5 Gaviidae (divers) 3 3 3 Tetraonidae (grouse) 18 8 8 Phasianidae (pheasants, partridges) 174 12 12 Total (65 families) 5158 704 641 278 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Of the 704 species recorded in the U.S.S.R. no less than 91.5% actually breed ; these represent 26 orders of birds. Of the 641 breeding" species 284 are Passerines. The number of monotypic species of all groups amounts to 246, or almost 35%. This considerable number is relatively bigger than that of the world avifauna, where the number of monotypic species totals only 25%, according to Mayr’s calculation. This is partly explained by the fact that a great portion of the Soviet Union territory is included in the European and Asiatic sector of the Arctic and Subarctic zones, where the geographic variability is feebly marked. It would be of general interest to mention here the comparison between the number of bird species and the mammals found in the U.S.S.R. relative to that of the world fauna. According to data presented by N. A. Bobrinski, B. A. Kuznetsov and A. P. Kysiakin in 1944, the number of mammal species in the U.S.S.R. amounts to 294, which is 8.4% of the world total of species of this class. This percentage is approximately the same as that of the bird species. In some respects this fact is rather interesting to note. One is under the impression that with regard to zoogeographical and ecological capabilities, these two distinct classes, so diverse in morphology and habitat, are in some ways quite alike, which is the more surprising as their mode of moving about radically differs one from the other. NOTES Movements of Manx Shearwater in St. George’s Channel. — In view of the fact that few observations have been made on the movements of the Manx Shearwater {ProceUaria puffimis) between Pembrokeshire and S.E. Ireland (R. M. Lockley, antea, vol. xlvi, supplement, p. 27), it may be of interest to record what I saw in this area in 1955. On 28th May 1955 I was on board the steamer from Fishguard, Pembrokeshire, to Rosslare Harbour, Co. Wexford. Usually these ships cross during the hours of darkness, but we were running an hour late so I was able to begin watching at 03.30 hours (all times given are G.M.T.), when about half way across. No shearwaters were seen from 03.30 to 04.15 (though light was insufficient for long range work before 04.00). Then a strong movement began. All shearwaters were flying N.W. or W.N.W. Between 04.15 and 05.10 (;’.e. between 18 and miles E.S.E. of Rosslare Harbour), 225-250 birds were seen. The main concentra- tion was during the period 04.40 to 04.55 (10 to 6 miles out) when about 150 shearwaters passed. Wind was light nortlierly, visibility good. Later in the summer, while on Great Saltec, Co. WTxford, I tried to get more information. On 21st .August I kept watch towards the south from the South Summit of the island between VOL. XLIX] NOTES 279 05.45 2.nd 07.30. During this time, 239 Manx Shearwaters were counted flying approximately west and 4 flying east. The westerly movement increased in rate to a peak about 06.30 and then decreased so that few were passing when I stopped watching. Wind was fresh (force 5) N.E., visibility good. On the following two days, Messrs. J. S. Furphy and W. N. Howe kindly joined me in making observations, but we saw no shearwaters at all. J. S. F. and I watched from 05.40 to 07.30 on 22nd August (wind light E.N.E., visibility i mile). On 23rd August J. F. S. and W. N. H. watched from 06.00 to 07.15 (wind light east, visibility 1-2 miles). However, on two days very similar movements had been seen. The direction of both indicates that the birds came from the Skokholm/Skomer breeding colonies. Dispersal there takes place before dawn (Zoc. cit, p. 24). On 28th May, the peak occurred about ^ hour after sunrise, 50 miles N.W. of Skokholm. On 21st August, the peak came about hours after sunrise, 65 miles W.N.W. of Skokholm. These figures correspond closely with those given by Lockley for other places at similar distances from Skokholm. The irregularity of these movements towards the west from Pembrokeshire probably explains why previous observers at Tuskar Rock, Carnsore Point and Great Saltee have not seen large morning flights {loc. cit, pp. 27-28). The variable factor is presumably the wind. On both 28th May and 21st x'Yugust 1955, shearwaters dispersing towards the north or N.N.W. from Skokholm and Skomer would have been drifted south and west of their normal routes. P. W. P. Browne Purple Heron in Essex. — A Purple Heron [Ardea purpurea) frequented Abberton Reservoir, near Colchester, Essex, for at least a month in the late summer of 1955. It was encountered on a number of occasions between 22nd August and 20th September by Major-General C. B. Wainwright and B. Winchester, while P. J. Penning and J. H. Sparkes saw it once. The bird spent most of its time in the reeds fringing the western end of the reservoir where it was often found perched on broken reed stems. I had the bird under observation on iith September. It appeared to be smaller and more slender than the Heron {A. cinerea) with purplish-brown upper-parts and sandy or buff under-parts from bill to breast. No trace of black colouration was visible either on the head or neck and thus it was taken to be immature. The wings appeared purple in flight save for the darker primaries and lacked the contrast to be found in the “Common” Heron. In flight the wing beats were rather quicker than the Heron’s and the neck had a more pouched appearance. The species has now been recorded twice at the reservoir in three years (see antea, vol. xlvii, pp. 350-351). Previously it had only been known to have occurred once in Essex. M. S. J. Snoxell 280 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Spoonbill in Staffordshire. — At Blithfield Reservoir, Stafford- shire, on 25th June 1955, we noticed a large white heron-like bird fly in and land in a small bay. It was clearly an adult Spoon- bill [Platalea leucorodia). We approached to within 100 yards and with the aid of glasses observed the crest, spatulate bill and black legs. On being disturbed it gave a grunt-like call and as it flew away we saw the neck extended in front and the black legs trail- ing behind. are unable to trace any other recent record for Staffordshire. E. Reeve and T. W. Ford [This appears to be only the second Staffordshire record of a species which is very seldom recorded in non-maritime counties. — Eds.] Shelduck breeding inland in Somerset. — In view of the recent notes on the inland breeding of Shelduck [Tadorna tadorna) in Berkshire and the fens [antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 277, 362-363), it may be of interest to record a similar event in Somerset during the summer of 1955. At Chew Valley Reservoir, near Bishop Sutton, twelve miles from the coast, a single duckling, considerably less than half-grown, was seen with an adult Shelduck on a temporary island at the northern end of the reservoir on 17th July 1955. It was again seen on 24th July but not on subsequent visits. This appears to be the first recorded occurence of the species breeding deep inland in the county, although Mr. A. E. Billett, in a personal communication, gives an unpublished record of a pair breeding three miles from the coast at Bleadon Hill, near Hutton, in 1945. Bernard King and R. H. Poulding [.'Xs we go to press Mr. King informs us that Shelduck again bred at Chew Valley Reservoir in 1956, a pair and 8 ducklings being seen on 24th June. — Eds.] Brent Goose in Staffordshire. — A small goose was seen on Blithfield Reservoir, Staffordshire, on i8th December 1955, and identified as a Pale-breasted Brent Goose [Branta bernicla hrota). The bird was swimming with Mallards (Anas pJatyrhynchos). Brent Geese are only exceptionally recorded well inland and this appears to be the first record for Stafl'ordshire since 1922. J. Lord and T. W. Ford Goshawk in Cheshire. — Shortly after dawn on 25th December 1955, I had the good fortune to see a Goshawk (Accipiter geniilts) over Caldy Hill, near West Kirby, Cheshire. The bird was flying over the crest of the hill, remaining almost stationary against a strong west wind, and I was able to watch it for 4-5 minutes, at 20-30 yards’ range, before it gave a quick wing-beat and stooped down the hillside at great speed. Through my binoculars I watched it flying well out over the Dee estuary in the direction of N. Wales. I am familiar with the species, having previously seen birds in VOL. XLIX] NOTES 281 this country and also in Spain, and had no difficulty in identifying the bird as an adult female. The upper-parts were generally dark grey-brown, but there was a considerable area of white on the leading edge of the wing and lesser wing-coverts which was conspicuous, and a whitish stripe above the eye. The under-parts and under-wing were generally whitish, closely and finely barred, except on the under tail-coverts which were unmarked. There was, however, apparently some buff or greyish ground-colour on the flanks. The tail was broadly barred above and below. The bird was very large and at a glance I first took it to be a Buzzard [Biiteo biiteo) until I noted the long tail and relatively short, broad, “accipiter” wings. The only birds in the air near enough to serve for size comparison were two Herring Gulls [Larus argentatus) ; whilst shape and build were entirely different, the birds were of the same order of size. There was no trace or sign of jesses or other indication of captivity and it has been ascertained that neither the local zoo nor a local owner of Goshawks had lost a bird. R. J. Raines [In recent years Goshawks have been recorded with some regularity in the south-eastern corner of England, in certain counties east of a line from the Wash to Bournemouth (though it is of course not known how many of these birds have escaped from captivity), but in the west and north-west the species remains a very rare vagrant. — Eds.] Crane in Outer Hebrides. — On 20th May 1953, D. J. Mackinnon and I went in search of a large bird — “like a heron but much bigger” — which had been reported to have been frequenting the west coast of Benbecula since 21st April. We found the bird without difficulty, for it was very conspicuous, on the stretch of machair south-west of Castle Borve. We had good views of it on the ground, where it was feeding, and in flight, under good conditions, but the bird, which was a Crane [Griis grus), was very alert and owing to the absence of cover we were unable to get nearer than about 200 yards. The next day, however, I had perfect views from within 70 yards. On the morning of 22nd May, it was feeding close to the main road, but when I returned three- quarters of an hour later with E. M. Nicholson and A. B. Duncan it had disappeared ; we heard subsequently that it had been disturbed and had departed northward shortly before we arrived. On 24th May, when in North Uist, quite by chance we found the Crane again, on the machair west of Knockintorran, some ten miles north of its Benbecula haunt, and once more splendid views were obtained, Duncan stalking within 40 yards. Details noted previously were confirmed ; the bird was evidently not fully mature, for although the elongated, pendulous inner secondaries were well developed, there was no trace of red on the crown, and much of the upper-parts was a pale buff and not slate-grey. Apart from the absence of red on the back of the crown, head, neck and throat 282 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix were as described for adult birds. The bill was whitish-horn in colour, and the legs and feet greyish-black. Whilst on the ground, the Crane appeared to provoke no hostile reaction in the abundant population of breeding birds on the machair, but whenever it took wing, which was fairly frequently, it was subjected to fierce mobbing. In Benbecula, where the breed- ing population of Lapwings [V anellus vanelhis) is dense, its flight produced remarkable demonstrations, and once when it flew near the Castle loch it was attacked by a mob of Black-headed Gulls [Lams ridibundus) and Common and Arctic Terns [Sterna hirundo and macriira) which breed there. The Crane was reported to have remained near Knockintorran, North List, for a few weeks, and then to have returned to Benbecula, where it was last seen at the end of September. There is a previous record for the Outer Hebrides, one having been shot near Stornoway, Lewis, on 14th May 1906 [Annals of Scottish Natural History, 1907, p. 84). James W. Campbell Some field-notes on the Caspian Plover. — The arrival of a “trip” of Caspian Plover [Charadriiis asiaticus) at Dar es Salaam, Tanganyika, on i8th September 1955, enabled some additions to be made to the few published field-observations on this species (including those by the writer in The Handbook). Jackson (1938) mentions only one record of this species from the East African sea-board (an exhausted bird) and quotes Meinertzhagen (1930) to the effect that the coast is avoided except for stragglers and that arrival in its winter-quarters is to be expected in early November. One occurrence in September, at Lake Naivasha, Kenya, is however listed. Grant and Mackworth- Praed (1952) give October as the arrival-date and indicate that short and often burnt grass of the inland plateaux is the preferred winter-habitat. Benson’s record of occurrences in Northern Rhodesia as early as 25th August, as well as loth October, has only recently been published (1955). The appearance of a trip in the centre of the town of Dar es Salaam so early as the middle of September was therefore entirely unexpected and it is of interest that, although it was at least six years since the species had come under the writer’s notice, and although none of the birds showed any trace of summer plumage, they were at once identified without difficulty or glasses at a range of fifty yards. Subsequently the birds, whose tameness was equal of that of Dotterel [Ch. morinellus), allowed approach to within ten feet. It is indeed with the Dotterel that the only possibility of confusion in winter-dress arises. The Caspian Plover can, liow- ever, be distinguished immediately by the forehead, which in winter or immature plumage is in fact creamy-buff, but looks white at a distance. The white of the forehead, continuous witli that of the eye-stripe, lores and cheeks gives a white-faced VOL. XLIX] NOTES 283 appearance to the bird even in flight and sets off the dark smudge through the eye in a quite distinctive manner. At close quarters there are of course many other points of difference from the Dotterel (e.g. the lack of a dark subterminal band in the tail), but it should be noted that the difference in the colour of the feet referred to in The Handbook and by Meinertzhagen (1930), is an unsafe guide. The Caspian Plover’s are sometimes much more yellowish than greenish-grey, probably a sign of immaturity as with the Dotterel. The trip, although it gradually dwindled from eight to four birds, remained at least a week in Dar es Salaam, showing a very marked preference for a hockey-pitch. Its second choice was a not far distant football-ground, and only when disturbed would it settle for a while on the surrounding golf-course, though the short grass of the fairways looked much more attractive than the hard beaten, and in places bare, surface of the playing-fields. At high tide the plovers would be joined by, and associated closely with, about 20 Ringed Plover {Ch. hiaticula) from the beach near-by. In flight at a distance the Caspian Plovers could be picked out from the flock of Ringed Plovers, which they tended to “lead”, not so much by the slightly larger size as by their darker appearance from below. On the ground the Caspian Plover’s up-right, “long-necked” stance is entirely different from that of the ordinary “sand-plovers” and for this reason the Great Sand Plover {Ch. leschenaidti) which, as Jackson observes, resembles the Caspian in colour and is not very much smaller in size (but is darker about the face and whiter below with a more sharply defined band across, or sometimes only on either side of, the breast) should never be confused with it. For this reason also, I consider the retention of the Caspian Plover in the separate genus Etipoda preferable to including it, with the Dotterel and Golden Plovers, in the genus Charadrius or “sand-plover” group, as is now generally done following the most recent B.O.U. Check- List (1952). The frequently uttered flight note was again recorded as a sharp “kwhit” sometimes with a slightly spluttering quality — “ptrrwhit” — and by no means the “soft pipins:” described by Jackson. When nervous at one’s approach individual birds would frequently settle down in a mock brooding attitude; occasional bobbing and wing-stretching were also noted. H. F. I. Elliott REFERENCES Benson, C. W. et al. (1955): “Further records of waders in Northern Rhodesia”. Bull. B.O.C., 75: 81. Grant. C. H. B. and Mackwortii-Praed, C. W. (1952): B/rd,? of Eastern and North Eastern Africa. London. Jackson, Sir Frederick (’1938): The Birds of Kenya Colony and the Uganda Protectorate. Edinburgh. Meinertzhagen, R. (1930): Nicoll’s Birds of Egypt. London. WiTHERBY, H. F. et al. (1940): The Handbook of British Birds. London. vol. IV, pp. 381-388. 284 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Great Skuas on the Scottish mainland. — Previous attempts by the Great Skua [Stercorariiis skua) to breed on the Scottish main- land in 1949, 1951 and 1952, have been placed on record by I. D. P. [antea, vol. xlvi, pp. 262-263). following" additional information relating' to 1955 has been received by B. L. S. Whilst searching- for Arctic Skuas {S. parasiticus) on the Scottish mainland during late May 1955, Mr. Peter T. Wilson saw a pair of Great Skuas, and on ist June he found a nest containing one egg. This nest was re-examined on 6th and 9th June when it still contained only one. egg. He was unable to visit the area again, and the fate of the egg is not known. This site was situated about one mile north of the previously recorded nesting-area. From information obtained locally by I. D. P. it appears that three Great Skuas, sometimes more, were seen in this district throughout the summer, the three birds frequently being together. It has not been possible to ascertain whether or not the odd bird was a juvenile. Bry.\n L. Sage and Ian D. Pennie REVIEW LOCAL REPORT THE WEST MIDLAND BIRD REPORT 1953 (48 pages, 3 half-plates) and 1954 (64 pages, 2 half -plates). Editor: J. Lord, 369, Chester Road, Boldmere, Sutton Coldfield. Obtainable from J. Sears, 5, Acheson Road, Hall Green, Birmingham 25. Price 6s. each. The Birmingham and West Midland Bird Club is one of the strongest in the country with membership approaching 500. Its Reports are substantial and well-produced, covering the counties of Warwick, Worcester and Stafford. Classified notes form the main part of the Report and follow the sequence and names used in the B.O.U. Check-List of 1952. Under each species notes referring to each county are listed separately, but not all of the commoner species occuring within the area are mentioned. No indication is given about the standards applied in accepting records, nor whether records are assessed by the editor alone or whether he has the help of a committ.ee ; clearly, in a club of this size, no one man can really know the capabilities of all members. In the case of some rarities supporting details are given, but there is no information on how several autumn Arctic Terns were identified. A new Staffordshire reservoir, Blithfield, contributed a number of interesting records in 1954. In addition to the classified notes there arc articles, in the 1953 report on “Breeding birds of the Tamworth district’’ and “Notes on seasonal population distribution of Curlew’’ ; and in the 1934 report on “Birds of the Malvern district”, “Migration of Swifts in north Warwickshire’’ (5 pages), “Buzzard Survey 1934’’, and “Birds of Cannock Rescr\oir’’ (7 pages). Both Reports contain tables of migrants’ arrival and departure dates. VOL. XLIX] LOCAL REPORT REVIEW 285 In the 1953 report the following' records may be mentioned: — Slavonian Grebes in Staffordshire in February, October and November. Little Grebes hatched on late date of 30th September (Staffordshire). Cormorant in Staffordshire with characteristics of Southern race on 30th March. In September one Shag- in Warwickshire and 2 in Staffordshire. A Bittern at Aqualate (Staff'ordshire) in December. A Green-winged Teal in Warwick- shire [antea, vol. xlvii, p. 244). Garganey bred in Warwickshire. The Ferruginous Duck recorded in Worcestershire in 1951 is now to be placed in square brackets. Goldeneye at Bellfields (Stafford- shire) reached 70 in January. 5 Long-tailed Ducks recorded (Warwickshire, Staffordshire). A Velvet Scoter at Upper Bittell (Worcestershire) in December. Flocks of White-fronted Geese in January (Worcestershire) and October (Staffordshire). Bewick’s Swans in Staffordshire in January and December. Buzzards recorded breeding in one or two localities in Worcestershire. A Kite over Cannock Reservoir (Staffordshire) on 4th August. A bird is recorded (in square brackets) as a Marsh Harrier in Staffordshire on 15th November on what appears to be very slender evidence. A Hen Harrier was seen later in the month, also in Staffordshire, and a Montagu’s in Warwickshire in April. Osprey in Warwickshire in May and in Worcestershire in September. Quail heard at several places in each of the 3 counties during summer. Oystercatchers in all 3 counties but principally Staffordshire. 4 Little Ringed Plovers in Staffordshire on 20th August. Golden Plovers of the Northern race in spring (Staffordshire). Several Turnstones in Staffordshire. 47 Whimbrel at Bellfields (Staffordshire) on 23rd August. Black-tailed Godwits in March and May, and a Bar-tailed in August (all Staffordshire). Green Sandpiper in winter in all 3 counties. Spotted Redshank in Warwickshire in August, and in Staffordshire in May, August and October. Knot in Worcestershire and Staffordshire in October; Sanderling in both these counties. Great Black-backed Gulls in Warwickshire in February and September and in Staffordshire February-May and October-December. A pair of Common Terns again bred successfully in Staffordshire. A Little Tern in Warwickshire in September, and in Staffordshire In September and on ist October. A party of 24 Sandwich Terns near Coventry (Warwickshire) on 9th September, and others in Warwickshire and Staffordshire in May, July and September. A Razorbill in Worcestershire in May. A Tawny Owl nested on the ledge of a house in Birmingham (Warwickshire). A Hoopoe in Worcester- shire In April. A Swallow roost at Wychall reservoir (Warwick- shire) was estimated at 15,000 on 17th September. House Martin at Nuneaton (Warwickshire) on i6th December. Ravens In Worcestershire in March, April and July. A Worcestershire Rookery was built amongst girders supporting insulators. About 50 Alagpies occupied a Worcestershire roost in January A Worcestershire Blackbird was brooding 4 eggs on 30th December 286 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX (this is additional to the records of winter nesting given antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 1 24-125). Black Redstarts nested in the centre of Birmingham (Warwickshire). Marsh Warblers recorded in Worcestershire and bred in S. Staffordshire. A description is given of a Tawny Pipit in Staffordshire on 29th December {antea, vol. xlvii, p. 443). Variant Yellow Wagtails were seen in May in Warwickshire and Staffordshire. Great Grey Shrike in Warwick- shire in October. A flock of about 350 Tree Sparrows in Stafford- shire on 28th March. The 1954 Report includes the following records: — Black- throated Diver in Staffordshire in January and December, and Great Northern Divers in the autumn. At Blithfield reservoir (Stiiffordshire), which had begun to fill only 18 month previously, there was a colony of at least 30 nests of Great Crested Grebes in a small area, and 335 birds on 25th August; a Red-necked Grebe there in September and October. Slavonian Grebes in Staffordshire in December. Black-necked Grebe bred in Warwick- shire for the first time. A Gannet at Bittell reservoir (Worcester- shire) on 28th July. Several Shags in Staffordshire in the autumn. Garganey in Warwickshire, April-June. Pintail reached 36 at Blithfield (Staffordshire) in December. Several Scaup were seen in each of the 3 counties, notably 3 drakes in July at Alvecote (Warwickshire), where also Pochard bred. Long-tailed Duck in Staffordshire in January, April, November and December. A pair of Red-breasted Mergansers on 25th April: the first Warwick- shire record for over 50 years. A number of records of Shelduck in all 3 counties. Grey Lag Goose in Staffordshire. One, probably 2, pairs of Buzzards bred in Warwickshire, 13 pairs (plus probably another 7-1 1 pairs) in Worcestershire, and one pair in Stafford- shire. A bird thought to be a Goshawk in Worcestershire on 14th May. Marsh Harrier at Alvecote (Warwickshire) on 8th May, and an Osprey in Staffordshire in August. Hobby in Worcester- shire on 27th June. Small numbers of Red Grouse on Cannock Chase (Staffordshire). 8 Black Grouse at a N. Staffordshire “lek”. Oystercatchers seen in each of the 3 counties. Little Ringed Plovers on several dates in Worcestershire and Staffordshire. A Grey Plover at Blithfield (Staffordshire) on ist October. Two parties of Golden Plovers of the Northern race identified in spring" (Staffordshire). A Great Snipe in Staffordshire on 25th April. Curlew extending range, breeding in many areas. Black-tailed Godwit in Worcestershire in May, and one in September at Blith- field (Staffordshire) where also Bar-tailed Godwits in May and September. Spotted Redshank in Warwickshire in September and October. Knots seen in all 3 counties. Little Stint, unusual in spring, at Cannock reservoir (Staffordshire) in April and May. Great Black-backed Gull in Staffordshire through the summer, also seen in spring and winter. 2 adult and an immature Little Gull at Blithfield (Staffordshire) on 3rd September; Kittiwake there in April, September and December, also in Warwickshire in December. Marked concentrations of Black Terns on 9th May VOL. XLIX] LOCAL REPORT REVIEW 287 and 5th xA.ugust, when about 100 and 200 birds respectively in the area of the 3 counties (cf. antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 148-169 and 300- 307). Arctic Terns reported in spring and autumn without observer or features being mentioned. Little Tern in April in Warwick- shire and 3 as late as 30th October in Staffordshire. 5 Sandwich Terns in Staffordshire on 2nd July. Hoopoes in Warwickshire in April and October, and one in Worcestershire in May. Ravens in Worcestershire in April and December. Black Redstarts in winter in Warwickshire and Worcestershire. Marsh Warblers increased in Worcestershire: at least 6 pairs in one locality. Garden Warbler with aberrant song reappeared for 4th year near Kidder- minster (Worcestershire). A winter Chiffchaff in Warwickshire on 6th February. Very late Yellow Wagtails were seen, 2 in Warwickshire on 29th October and one on 30th, and 2 in Worcestershire on 4th November {antea, p. 79)— -but the latest date given in the table of migrant departures at the end of the Report is 13th October. Blue-headed Wagtails in Warwickshire in April and June. A party of 21 Bullfinches in Staffordshire on 22nd December. A Snow Bunting at Cannock reservoir (Staffordshire) on loth March. P.A.D.H. LETTER THE COLLECTION OF RECORDS FOR ANALYSIS Sirs, — May I, without returning to a controversy in which both •sides have stated their case, make two further remarks of a general mature on points that have arisen out of the paper by .Alec Butterfield and Kenneth Williamson on Black Terns {Chlidonias niger) in autumn 1954 {antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 300-307)? Papers of this sort depend on a large number of observations from widely scattered amateurs; it is therefore obviously most important that the writers should receive all the material in time tto incorporate it fully into their analysis. It is, in this case, a •matter of opinion how far the omitted records affected the writers’ picture, but I fear such omissions will inevitably multiply as this type of paper becomes commoner, unless steps are taken to prevent them. At present, a request for information appears in British Birds, a cross-section of observers read it, a small number take notice of it and fewer still comply — and those who do are not necessarily the most competent or the most knowledgeable about local condi- tions. This cannot fairly be attributed to mere apathy: even the most public-spirited field naturalist finds his time and enthusiasm for correspondence flagging in face of five or six enquiries of this •sort a year (to say nothing of separate B.T.O. enquiries and any- thing for which the local club may be asking). On the other hand, almost everyone takes the trouble to send notes to the Editor of their local report at the end of the year. Consequently, the total of records printed there is much fuller than those on which the paper concerned is originally based' — the 1954 reports of 288 BRITISH BIRDS I L^vOl. xlix Cambridg'e, Essex, Leicester and Norfolk, to take a random sample, demonstrate this with the Black Tern enquiries both for spring' and autumn of that year. My first plea, therefore, is for the closest possible co-operation between the editors of local reports and the authors of analytical papers. Though local editors are much overworked, they usually have one or more assistants who are, like themselves, thoroughly familiar with local conditions; surely it would be worthwhile appointing a British Birds representative for each area who can assess the information as it is received in the local files, and thus make sure the writers get all the information properly sifted. Such a man would be able to extract material from active local observers before the end of the year, so there need not be a longer delay in collection than there is at present. The system would have the overwhelming advantage that the writers could speculate from the most complete information possible. Secondly, it has recently sometimes been the policy of British Birds not to publish in full this collected data, largely for the very pressing requirements of space. This, however, involves a sacrifice. The critical reader can no longer see foi what the generalizations are based — awkward gaps or conflicting material can, perhaps unconsciously, be glossed over by a vague phrase, to suit a theory or make a picture more shapely defined than it should be. A false impression may then be made which cannot be contradicted, and at least until a better liaison between observer and writer is established, I feel that inability to examine records must lead to a loss of confidence in any analyst’s conclusions. T. C. Smout [Mr. Smout has raised some important issues, but we do not feel that his suggestions amount to a satisfactory solution, particularly where he proposes area representatives of British Birds. This would conflict with the settled and successful policy of supporting and working with Editors of local reports in their efforts to raise standards and to improve coverage of local ornithology in as many areas as possible. We recognize that not printing full details in British Birds is open to the objections stated, but these would be met if all organizers of Investigations would deposit with the Edward Grey Institute, Oxford, at least one copy of all material used. The whole set of data would then be permanently accessible for critical inspection without overtaxing our space and the patience of our readers by publication to the last detail. Ornithology is one of the leading sciences in adopting this commonsense system which will have to be increasingly used. For various reasons the number of such investigations has rcccntlv been a heavy burden on all, and it is lo be hopc'd that the experience gained will enable future investigations to be kept within the capacity of observers and editors to handle, and wi! make full use of local reports even at the cost of some delav. — Eds.1. BINDING The Publishers regret that it is still impossible to bind volume xlviii (1955) of “British Birds” as the Index has not yet been published, though it is hoped that this will appear at the beginning of September. Meanwhile, this delay has given us an additional reason for considering the possibility of TEMPORARY BINDERS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR’S ISSUES It has long been felt that readers would welcome some form of holder to act as temporary binding for the year’s issues of “British Birds” until the time came for permanent binding. Recently, therefore, arrangements have been made to produce a wire-type binder to hold up to twelve issues of “British Birds”. This holder is made strongly of board with flexible spine and the whole is attractively bound in blue cloth with the lettering BRITISH BIRDS blocked in gold on the spine. The issues are held in place by wires threaded on straps at the top and bottom — in such a way that any page in any issue will readily open right out flat. The straps can be adjusted to contract the flexible spine so that even if there is only a single issue in the binder the back and front boards will lie parallel. It is a quick and simple operation to add or remove the copies. A limited quantity of these binders is in stock at the moment and they can be obtained from Messrs. H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., 5 Warwick Court, W.C.l, at 10s. 6d. each. SMALL ADVERTISEMENTS )'/- for 3 lines (Minimum); 3/- for •,tach extra line or part thereof. For hhe use of a Box Number there is an extra charge of 1/-. I . I UNOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, I ' ew and reconditioned, at reasonable I I rices. Approval allowed, also part ' 'xchanges. Lists from Hatton Optical ' lo. Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, ' ’ lants. IINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, spaired, cleaned and adjusted; send our instrument for estimate by return, latton Optical Co. Ltd., Lansdowne, Bournemouth, Hants. BINOCULARS by leading makers. Magnifications 8x to 20x. Prices from p£,To los. od. Ask for free Catalogue. DOLLONDS, 28 Old Bond Street, London, W. i. SECRETARY seeks position witli Ornithologist. Reliable and conscientious worker with excellent references. Experienced accounts and records. Willing to travel. Write: i Marston Road, New Milton, Hants. “ THE BRITISH WARBLERS ”, Eliot Howard, illustrated Grbnvold; 9 vols., ]3ublished 1907-1914 at 21s. each. Fine condition. Offers to Miss Peele, Dogpole, Shrewsbury. <S. Eedman, T. J. Richards, D. Richardson. R. A. Eichardson. R. G. Rigden, the late B. B. Eiviere. the late Commdr. A. W. P. Robertson, M. G. Robinson, A. Eobson, R. W. Eobson, B. Eodgers, Dr. K. B. Eooke, Lady N. Rootes, E. W. Eoyston. Mrs. Euck, Ma.ior R. P. Euttledge. Col. H. M. Salmon. M. Sanderson, Rev. L. C. Sargent. D. Scott, P. .Scott, M. .1. Seago, D. R. Seaward. A. Seddon. H. J. C. .Seymour. C. Shaddick, J. Shepperd. E. Simms, Lt.sCol. B. C. L. Simson, M. Sinclair, R. Slater, A. El. Smith, A. J. .Smith, A. V. Smith, F. R. Smith, F. W. .Smith, Dr. D. W Show. M. S'. J. .Snoxell, Mr. Spedding, R. D. E. Spencer, H. M. Stanford, the late J. Staton. A. W. Stelfox, Commdr. B. R. Stewart. I. Stewart. W. P. B. Stonehouse, B. M. Stratton, D. Stuart, L. Sunderland, D. Swindells. Mr. Taylor. G. W. Temperley, L. G. Temple, Sir 'William Tennant, A. Tewnion, W. Thomson. A. ,J. B. Thompson. N. L. Thompson, M. Thursfleld, P. Tod. R. G. Tomkins. Mrs. Traill-C'loiiston. D. M. Turner. M. Vaney, L. S. "V. Venables, TJ. M. Venables, P. F. Verschoyle, A. E. Vine, A. W. Vivian-Neal. A. P. G. Walker. C. Walker, ,T. M. Walker. T. .T. Wallace, A. J. Wallis, IWr. and Mrs. J. I. Ward. E. C. Ware. E. H. Ware, Brig. A. E. Warry. G. 'Waterston. II P. Weekes. Dr. P. R. Westball. E. E. P. Whitelaw, J. A. 'Wiezell. V. IT. Williams. K. Williamson. J. Wilson. Miss Wilson-Jobnston, A. W. H, Wincott. R. H. Winterbottom, Mrs. R. R. Winton. T. C. Wyatt, Prof. V. C. Wynne-Edwards. J. J. Yealland, E. J. Young, G. H. Young. REFERENCES L.tCK, D. (1054): The Natural Regulation of Animal Numbers. Oxford. •Sv.ARDSON, G. (1955): “Crossbills in Sweden in 1953”. Brit. Birds, xlvii: 425-428. Williamson, K. (1954): synoptic study of the 1953 Crossbill irruption”. Scot. Nat., 66: 155-169. WiTiiERBY, H. F. et al. (1938): The Handbook of British Birds. London. ON THE MOVEMENTS AND SURVIVAL OF WOODPIGEONS AND STOCK DOVES By J. S. Ash {Game Research Station, Fordingbridge, Hants.), M. W. Ridley and N. Ridley The migration of the Woodpigeon {Columba palumbus) in the British Isles has long been a problem. It appears that the popula- tion, especially in the south of England, increases considerably each winter, and it has been generally supposed that British birds are joined by others from abroad, or from further north in Britain. Ringing recoveries do not suggest that either of these suppositions is correct. Lack and Ridpath (1955) have recently discussed this problem, and although they provide evidence for an apparent migration of this species within the country, they have no definite evidence of birds arriving from abroad, in spite of long and careful watches from ships and vantage points along the coast. It is proposed here to discuss the data obtained from a total of 257 Woodpigeons and 57 Stock Doves (C. oenas) ringed since 1943 at Blagdon, Northumberland. Besides information on age Table I — Woodpigeons [Columba palumbus) and Stock Doves [C.oenas) RINGED AT BlAGDON, NORTHUMBERLAND, I943-I952 (a) On monthly basis.* Species April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Total Woodpigeon 16 5 9 40 77 98 12 257 Stock Dove 7 3 4 25 10 8 — 57 Total 23 8 13 65 87 106 12 314 •Note ; — These are all nestlings except the following Stock Doves : i adult and 1 juvenile in .lun®. 7 adults and 3 juveniles in July, 2 adults in August, and 3 adults in September (total 17). (b) On annual basis. f Species 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 Total Woodpigeon 23 30 23 — 75 39 20 2 42 3 257 Stock Dove II 12 18 — 7 3 6 — — — 57 Total 34 42 41 — 82 42 26 2 42 3 314 fNoTE : — These are all nestlings except the following Stock Doves : i adult in 1943, 4 adults and 4 juveniles in 1944, 3 adults in 1945, 4 adults in 1947, and i adult in 1949 (total 17). 298 VOL. XLix] MOVEMENTS OF COLUMBIDAE 299 and survival, the movements of both species will be considered in some detail. Table I shows the distribution of numbers of Woodpigeons and Stock Doves ringed on an annual and monthly basis. This is not intended to give a picture of breeding activity, as nest-searching was far from thorough throughout the season. Nests containing eggs and young were found from March to November in the case of the Woodpigeon, and from March to September in the case of the Stock Dove. The latter species commonly commences breeding in this area in early March. A larger proportion of nests found in August and September contain young, so that searching was intensified at that time. Most of the nests found were located in conifer plantations on a large estate where game is preserved. Red Squirrels [Sciurus vulgaris leucourus) were common in some parts of the area, but the Grey Squirrel (S. carolinensis) was absent. Other possible predators include Carrion Crows [Corvus corone) in abundance; Magpies [Pica pica) and Sparrow- hawks {Accipiter nisus) were frequently seen; and both Long- eared Owls (Asfo otus) and Tawny Owls (Strix aluco) were common breeding species. RECOVERIES Of the 257 nestling Woodpigeons ringed, 41 (16.0%) have so far (8th March 1956) been recovered, compared with 3 out of 40 (7.5%) nestling Stock Doves. One other of the latter, ringed as an adult, has also been recovered, making a total for this species of 4 out of 57 (7.0%). This difference is probably due to the different behaviour and habits of the two species (see below). It is possible that a few more of these birds are yet to be recovered, but these are unlikely materially to alter the following conclusions. MOVEMENTS The directions taken by Woodpigeons recovered over 5 miles away from their place of birth are shown diagrammatically in Fig. I. This shows that whereas only single birds were recovered from points N., N.N.W., W. and E., a total of eleven birds were reported from south of these directions, which suggests that the birds have a preferred southerly element in their winter move- ments. A complete break-down analysis of distance covered and direction of flight is given in Table II, which suggests that the majority of birds are either sedentary or disperse at random over short distances from their place of birth. Two birds travelled into Yorkshire, 60 miles S., and 78 miles S.S.E., which are the greatest distances covered within the country. A third bird was recovered in Eire, 320 miles S.W. This was presumably a representative of the small migratory Table II — Direction of flight and distance covered by Woodpigeons {Columba palumbus) ringed at Blagdon, Northumberland, 1943-1952 300 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Total VOL. XLix] MOVEMENTS OF COLUMBIDAE 301 element present in most species which normally do not undertake a regular seasonal migration. If the winter (November to March) recovery figures only are considered, it is seen that there are 12 of which 9 were south of Blagdon and 3 were not. Five of these 12 were juveniles under 12 months old, which again suggests southerly dispersal in the winter, involving many young birds. N Fig. I — Directions taken by Woodpigeons {Coliunha pcilumhus) ringed at Blagdon, Northumberland, 1943-1952 If substantial numbers of Woodpigeons from the North of England did migrate to southern England, it is considered likely that this fairly large sample of Northumberland-ringed nestlings would have provided some evidence of it. It is possible that birds breeding further north in Scotland may undergo larger move- ments, but the few ringing recoveries so far do not suggest this. The large-scale trapping and ringing of wintering adults in southern England would in time provide the answer to this problem. This species is one of the few shot extensively during 302 BRITISH BIRDS [vol. xlix the brecding-'Season, so that the return of rings from their breeding-quarters is likely to be relatively large. In five cases both nestlings of a brood have been recovered. In the first example, one bird was shot 8 months later in December, 23 miles S.S.E., and the other 19 months later in November near where ringed. In the second, one bird was shot 7 months later in April, 9 miles S.S.E., and the other 15 months later in January, 14 miles S.W. In the third, one bird was shot 43 months later in April, 5J miles W., and the other 95 months later in August at the ringing locality. In the fourth, one bird was killed by a cat soon after ringing, and the other was shot 70 months later in August whilst breeding, 4 miles S.W. In the fifth, one nestling was found dead soon after ringing, and the other shot 42 months later in September at the ringing locality. The small number of recoveries of Blagdon-ringed Stock Doves suggests that their movements follow a similar pattern. Two ringed as nestlings were recovered where ringed (one in the nest), and a third was returned from 31 miles S.S.E.. An adult was shot 4 miles away due E. AGE The oldest Woodpigeon recovered so far was shot at its place of birth 95 months (7 years, ii months) after being ringed as a nestling. From Table III it will be seen that 9 birds were recovered within their first six months, 9 between this time and one year, 7 in their second year, i in its third, 8 in their fourth, 3 in their fifth, 2 in their sixth, and one each in its seventh and eighth. The average time elapsing between ringing and recovery, based on 38 birds and omitting the three killed as nestlings, was 2 years 4 months (27.9 months). Table III — Time elapsing in months between ringing and recovery of WooDPiGEONS [Columba palumbns) Months elapsing 0-6 7-12 13-24 25-36 37-48 49-60 61-72 73-84 85-96 No. recovered 9 9 7 I 8 3 2 I I The oldest of the four Stock Doves recovered was 3 years 7 months old. The average age was 13.3 months. Further evidence is provided by the Blagdon birds in support of Colquhoun’s (1951) suggestion that it is the juvenile birds which move the greatest distances ; and also that all the more distant (at least 30 miles) recoveries occur in winter. The average age of 34 Woodpigeons recovered locally (excluding 3 young birds near or at the nest) is 29.1 months, whereas that of 4 distant recoveries VOL. XLix] MOVEMENTS OF COLUMBIDAE 303 is 16.5 months. Colquhoun’s figures were ig and 10.5 months respectively, and included some of the Blagdon data. SURVIVAL Table IV suggests that the fledging success of later broods is better than earlier ones. If the figures are grouped, of 70 nestlings ringed April-July, 10.0% have been subsequently recovered; whereas of the 187 ringed August-October, 16.6% have been recovered. Table IV — Survival of Woodpigeons {Columba palumbus) based on MONTH OF RINGING Month ringed April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Total No. ringed 16 5 9 40 77 98 12 257 No. recovered 2 I ■ 4 II 18 2 3« Of the 41 birds recovered, 35 (85.4%) were recorded as being shot ; 4 were reported as being found dead (one dead and eaten in the nest). One was seen killed by a Sparrowhawk, and another found being eaten by a cat soon after ringing and close to its nest. The high recovery percentage (16.0) of the Blagdon Woodpigeons compared with the figure (4%) quoted by Colquhoun for 2,916 birds ringed during 1909-1942, is probably due to the intensified control of Woodpigeons by shooting, instigated by the Ministry of Agriculture during and since the war. The largest number was shot in the period January-April, which is the time when birds are mostly killed flighting into roosts. Where roost-shooting occurs on game preserves this is normally not permissible until towards the end or after the close of the Pheasant [Phasianus colchicus) season. A second peak in August- September probably largely refers to birds shot over decoys at harvest time. Summarising the cause of death of all recoveries of Blagdon Woodpigeons, we find that in January, 5 were shot and one found I dead (5 locally, i.e. under 30 miles from place of ringing ; and one distant, i.e. 30 miles or more from place of ringing); February, 8 shot (7 locally, one distant) ; March, 4 shot and one found dead (4 locally, one distant) ; April, 4 shot and one found dead (all locally) ; May, 2 shot and one killed by Sparrowhawk (all locally) ; August, 4 shot locally ; September, 3 shot and one found dead (all locally); October, one nestling eaten by cat; November, 2 shot (one locally, one distant) ; December, i shot locally. Total, 33 ?shot, 4 found dead and 2 other causes (35 locally and 4 distant). Of Stock Dove recoveries, one was found dead in the nest three weeks after ringing. The other three were shot. The lower 304 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX recovery rate of this species is probably clue to two main factors : — (a) Dift'erent roosting^ behaviour. Many of this species roost (and probably die) in holes in trees and cliffs, and so are less frequently found dead. (b) Stock Doves are smaller, faster and more agile fliers, presenting a smaller and more difflcult target, and are thus shot in proportionately smaller numbers. This fact, combined with a different roosting behaviour, tends to lessen their chance of recovery. DISCUSSION The evidence obtained so far from the recovery of ringed Woodpigeons points to the view that the species is only a partial migrant within the British Isles. The summary of long-distance recoveries, combined with the data from birds ringed at Blagdon, and an examination of the recoveries recorded by the B.T.O. Ringing Scheme since Colquhoun’s report, all suggest that Wood- pigeons’ and Stock Doves’ movements are more in the manner of a random dispersal (with a southerly trend) than a true migration. Whether or not these birds return to their breeding-quarters has not yet been proved. Of particular interest is a series of four recoveries of nestlings ringed in Stirlingshire, Scotland, of which three travelled 6o, 75 and 120 miles N.E., and a fourth 65 miles S.S.E. ; negative evidence of a long passage to the south of England. It is also worth noting in this respect that no obvious hard-weather movements have been noticed in the Blagdon area, and in severe conditions many Woodpigeons die of a combination of cold and starvation. Several authors (Beeston, 1931; Alexander, 1940; S.E. Bird Report, 1947; Wilkinson 1950; Colquhoun, 1951; Snow, 1953: Lack and Ridpath, 1955) give evidence of either southerly move- ments of Woodpigeons inland, or of the arrival of the species on the coast. The latter authors have shown, in the case of birds seen arriving on the South Coast, that these have already left the coast elsewhere and are merely returning after a short flight out to sea. This behaviour is probably an expression of latent migratory urge. There is further negative evidence of a trans- North Sea crossing in Owen (1953) who watched from a Lightship off the Thames Estuary for a fortnight in October and November, and recorded only one Stock Dove, flying west, in this time. It is now suggested that the large flocks of Woodpigeons occurring in this country from late autumn onwards through the winter can easily be accounted for by the aggregation of smaller flocks of local breeding birds. The larger flights recorded inland at this time of the year have still to be accounted for, although it seems probable that they may consist of birds on local move- ment, or on feeding flights. Systematic observation on feeding flocks and roosting behaviour is very necessary to provide further VOL. xLix] MOVEMENTS OF COLUMBIDAE 305 information on this interesting phenomenon. The flight of Wood- pigeons to roosts is known to vary considerably in height depending on the immediate meteorological conditions. SUMMARY 1. The recoveries resulting from the ringing, in a Northumbrian locality, of 257 Woodpigeons [Cohimha palumbus) and 57 Stock Doves (C. oenas) are analysed. 2. 16.0% of the Woodpigeons and 7.5% of the nestling Stock Doves have so far been recovered. 3. Direction of recovery from place of birth tends to be random dispersal with a southerly bias. 4. Of the 35 Woodpigeon recoveries only four were over 30 miles from the ringing locality, and these all moved between S.E. and S.W. 5. The average time elapsing between ringing and recovery of Woodpigeons was 27.9 months. 6. There is some evidence that later broods survive better than earlier ones. 7. The majority of recorded birds are shot, and most of these are in late winter. REFERENCES Alexander, W. B. (1940); “The Wood Pigeon”. Journ. Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl., 100: 1-9. Beeston, T. J. (1931); “Migration routes of Wood-Pigeons in Worcestershire”. Brit. Birds, xxiv: 326-328. CoLOUHOUN, M. K. (1951): “The Wood Pigeon in Britain”. A.R.C. Report Series, No. 10. London: H.M. Stationery Office. Lack, D., and Ridpatu, M. G. (1955): “Do English Woodpigeons migrate?” Brit. Birds, xlviii : 289-292. Owen, D. F. (1953): “Migration at the Kentish Knock Lightship”. Brit. Birds, xlvi : 353-364. Snow, D. W. (1953): “Visible migration in the British Isles; a review”. Ibis, 95 : 266. Wilkinson, A. D. (1950): “The annual immigration of the Wood-Pigeon and Stock Dove on the coast of East Sussex”. Brit. Birds, xliii; 233-238. THE STATUS OF THE LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL IN HERTFORDSHIRE By Bryan L. Sage and A. B. Sheldon The status of the Lesser Black-backed Gull {Lams fusciis) as a migrant in the British Isles has been dealt with in detail by Barnes (i953)- Hertfordshire, however, had little or no mention in that paper, and the following information may therefore be regarded as supplementary to it. A perusal of the published Hertfordshire records of this species does not give a true picture of its actual status. It is, as the evidence we give will show, a regular and numerous passage-migrant through the county. Wintering has occurred in recent years and will also be dealt with. Map I shows the county of Hertfordshire in relation to its neighbours and gives the positions of the various localities mentioned in this discussion. Map I — To show flight-lines of Lesser Black-backed Gulls {Lams fuscus) NOTED IN Hertfordshire The arrows indicate observed lines of flight and the dashes are presumed ones. Hilfield Park and Aldenham Reservoirs, on the southern border of the county, are respectively marked by a circle and a cross. 1 he map is not to scale. MIGRATION Spring and autumn movements of small numbers of Lesser 306 VOL. XLix] GULLS IN HERTFORDSHIRE 307 Black-backed Gulls have been recorded at the Tring Reservoirs for many years, the general direction being from S.W. to N.E. in spring and the reverse in autumn. The largest numbers recorded at Tring are 13 on 30th August igo8, 30-40 on 4th September igio, 14 on 5th May igi2, 12 on 2gth September ig42, and 2g on gth April igS4. These are no doubt birds travelling between the Wash and the Thames Valley, or vice versa, as suggested by Rowberry (ig33). In the autumn these birds would enter the county somewhere along the Herts. /Cambs. border, probably west of Royston, and then follow the escarpment of the Chiltern Hills. The majority of these birds probably pass through the Hitchin Gap and continue in a southerly direction until they reach the Colne Valley. A minority certainly veer south-west after passing through the Hitchin Gap and follow the escarpment along its eastern flank until they reach the Tring Gap. They then drop down to the reservoirs, whence they continue across the Vale of Aylesbury. It is also fairly certain that a number of these birds, no doubt those which enter Hertfordshire well to the west on the Herts. /Cambs/Beds. borders, follow the escarpment on its west- ward side and reach the reservoirs from the N.N.E. rather than the N.E. as do those birds which come through the Tring Gap. Small numbers of birds have also been seen approaching Radlett and Hilfield Park Reservoir (see below) from the N.E. If these birds have been keeping a direct course, then they must have entered the county east of Royston, perhaps through the gap between the eastern extension of the Chiltern range and the Gog Magog Hills. The Lesser Black-backed Gull is rare in east Hertfordshire, and we have no evidence of even a small regular passage on that side of the county (down the Stort or Lea Valleys). An accurate estimation of the numbers of Lesser Black- backed Gulls that pass through the Tring Reservoirs during the spring or autumn passage has never, so far as we know, been made. Such a task would only be possible by regular daily counts at a fixed spot on the route, or at a favoured resting place — some- thing which there does not appear to be in north or west Hert- fordshire. In the extreme south of the county lies Aldenham Reservoir. This has always been a well watched spot, but there are only some half dozen records of Lesser Black-backed Gulls, from the reservoir, and with the exception of 8 birds referable to the Scandinavian race (L. /. fuscus) on 23rd November ig47, and 12 of the British race (L. f. graellsii) on 13th September ig52, all records refer to single birds or couples. The Colne Valley has long been known as a migration route for various species of gulls, including Lesser Black-backs. Observa- tions at Radlett in previous years have provided evidence of regular spring and autumn movements of gulls in a general N.E. -S.W. direction and vice versa. Gatherings of Lesser Black- backed Gulls have been recorded in previous years at some of the flooded gravel pits in the lower Colne Valley at Rickmansworth, e.g. in ig54 10 were seen at Maple Cross on ist August and 308 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX 90-100 on 26th September (K. R. Jones). At Springwell gravel pit flocks of 230-300 were seen on several dates between i8th September and 2nd October [London Bird Report, 1954, p. 27), and a flock of ca. 100 on 4th and 5th November [antea, vol. xlviii, p. 370). Until 1955 this was the only locality in Hertfordsire where such g'atherings had been witnessed. In 1952 the construction of a new 115-acre reservoir was commenced by the Colne Valley Water Company at Hilfield Park (see map), about half a mile due west of Aldenham Reservoir, and 2| miles east of the Colne Valley. From ist June to 30th October 1955 we were able to maintain an almost daily watch at the Hilfield Park Reservoir, and from the latter date until the end of the year visits were made at least once weekly. We found that it was being" used as a reg'ular resting"-place by migrating Lesser Black-backed Gulls. Practically all the birds seen were of the British race, but birds referable to the Scandinavian race were seen as follows: 6th September, 2; 12th September, ca. 20; and 15th September, 4. A number of individuals with mantles of an intermediate shade were also seen during the peak of the passage. These facts suggest that not all of these birds were of British origin. The majority of the birds seen were adults, the number of juveniles being negligible. The first birds seen were a party of 3 on 12th June, followed by 14 on i8th June. Thereafter none was noted until July when small parties were recorded daily from the ist to the 24th with a maximum of 13 on the latter date. On 26th, 27th and 28th July flocks of 40, 47 and 57 respectively were seen. Numbers in August never fell below 33, and the maximum numbers were counted between the 8th and nth inclusive, the figures for these days being 12 1, 126, 160 and 139 respectively. The passage reached a peak during September with 308 on the 4th, 608 on the i2th, 160 on the 19th and 246 on the 20th. These numbers were maintained during early October, e.g. 223 on the 2nd, but fell off towards the end of that month, the highest number recorded between the 22nd and 29th being 85 on the 23rd. During November not more than 45 birds were seen at any one time, and considerably less than this at the end of the month. Only single birds or couples were seen in December. All the figures quoted above were obtained during counts made in the evening, about two hours or so before dusk. Morning counts gave considerably smaller totals. This passage movement followed a regular pattern, with small parties arriving at the reservoir at intervals throughout the day from the north (main movement), north-east and north-west. The numbers approaching from the last direction were very small, and were probably birds coming from the Colne Valley between Radlett and Mbalford. The significance of birds arriving from the north-east was mentioned earlier. On arrival at the reservoir the birds would drop down to the water’s edge to rest, and mostly remain there until the evening. A’ery infrequently a partly would circle the VOL. XLix] GULLS IN HERTFORDSHIRE 309 reservoir and then continue on a south-westerly course. Just before dusk all the gulls at the reservoir would depart en masse in a general south-westerly direction, a course which if maintained would take them down the Colne Valley to the vicinity of Staines. On no occasion were any Lesser Black-backed Gulls seen to roost at the reservoir. (Compare this with the results obtained by H. H. Davis at the new reservoir in the Chew Valley, Somerset, in 1954 {antea, vol. xlviii, p. 368-370).) The actual number of Lesser Black-backed Gulls counted by us at Hilfield Park between I St June and 30th November was 5409, but the total number that passed through must have been considerably in excess of this figure. Most of the flocks approached the reservoir at heights between 100-250 feet. From the evidence presented above it appears that the autumn passage commences in June and continues until late November. It should perhaps be mentioned that the scanty information available from previous years’ observations, mainly at Radlett, suggests that the spring passage through Hertfordshire is on a smaller scale and follows a somewhat wandering course. We would suggest that the route along the Chiltern escarpment, through the Hitchin Gap and thence down the Colne Valley is the main one for birds of this species travelling between the Wash and the Thames Valley. The birds passing through the Tring Reservoirs are, we believe, as suggested earlier, those which have drifted too far westwards, or have deviated from the main course after crossing through the Hitchin Gap. The reason that the numbers involved in this passage have not previously been appreciated is due to the fact that (a) there has not before been a suitable concentration point in Hertfordshire, and (b) the flocks are generally small and pass at irregular, and often long intervals. WINTERING As is well known the wintering of this species in the British Isles is a fairly recent innovation which has been fully discussed by Barnes (1953). So far as Hertfordshire is concerned the habit apparently began in the early 1940’s, and the numbers involved have never been great. The habit is practically confined to the lower Colne Valley at Rickmansworth, sample figures being 30 at Watford sewage farm on 13th February 1947, and 20 at Maple Cross on 3rd January 1954. Single birds have been seen at Tring in December, and the species is said to occur in small numbers in the Bishop’s Stortford area in winter. It is evident that as far as Hertfordshire is concerned true wintering birds do not appear until early December or very late November. As usual some of these birds are referable to the Scandinavian race. REFERENCES Rowberry, E. C. (iq.!";): “ Gulls in the London Area ”. The London Naturalist, 1033, PP- Barnes, J- A. G. ('1953): “ The migrations of the Lesser Black-backed Gull Brit. Birds, xlvi : 238-252. PHOTOGRAPHIC STUDIES OF SOME LESS FAMILIAR BIRDS. LXXII. GYR FALCON Photographed by Arnold Benington, F. S. R. Cerely and J. H. Sears (Plates 37-43) The Gyr Falcon (Falco rusticohis) is a bird of wild open country, either rocky or mountainous, chiefly in the far north ; it breeds across the Holarctic from Alaska and Canada to Greenland, Iceland, Norway and other parts of northern Scandinavia, throug"h the northern parts of Siberia to Kamchatka and the Bering- Straits, only in three places (Kamchatka, Alaska and Hudson Bay/ Labrador) nesting' south of latitude 6o°N. To Europe south of its breeding-quarters (including the British Isles) it is no more than a rather irregular straggler, but in America and the U.S.S.R. birds occur occasionally in winter as far south as 40°N. or 45°N. This population has been divided into 8 or 9 races, as much as anything on colour, which ranges from dark grey to almost white, but there is a lot of variation in most areas and the populations can be characterized only on the relative abundance of dark or light birds, so much so that it is often unsafe to attempt to decide upon the origin of winter-stragglers, even in the hand. Yet the colour extremes are very different. The birds of Labrador (F. r. ohsoletiis), for example, tend to be dark, as do those of the typical race in Scandinavia and the majority of those in northern Siberia {intennedius), but in eastern Siberia [grehnitzkii) and in Green- land (candicans) white birds predominate, to a marked extent in the latter country. The birds of Iceland, where these photographs were all taken, are generally separated as islandus, which race tends to be paler and larger than the typical Gyrs, but not as white as the majority of the Greenland birds (birds from S. Greenland are indistinguish- able from Icelands). It can be seen in plate 38 that the individual concerned has fairly broad pale tips and edges to the feathers of the upper-parts, while plate 40 shows that the under-parts are lightly marked with spots rather than bars, even on the flanks. The under-part markings of the species as a whole vary from noticeable barring, chiefly on the flanks, through spotting and what is little more than fine streaking, to pure white, while the feathers of the upper-parts have very narrow or almost absent pale edges in the typical race, which give way to broad edges and bases, so that only a dark centre remains, in the white populations. Juveniles (plates 42 and 43) are browner, and in the while popula- tions darker, than the adults, with the under-parts broadly streaked with dark brown; Mr. Cerely’s two fine photographs arc, incidentally, taken from his book The Gyr Falcon Advcnlure. 310 VOL. XLIX] GYR FALCON STUDIES 311 Even the darker races of Gyr have only a trace of a moustachial streak (plates 38-40) compared with that of the Peregrine (F. peregrinus). The wings are shorter than in that species, coming to an end well before the tip of the tail when the bird is at rest (plate 38). In flight the silhouette is of a bird with a longer tail than the Peregrine’s, and slightly shorter wings which are at the same time broader at the base and slightly rounder at the tips (because of the longer third and fourth primaries and the fact that the first few primaries are usually spread slightly more). Gyrs are, of course, larger and paler than Peregrines in flight, and the wing-beats are noticeably slower. Plate 37 shows a typical nesting'-area in N. Iceland and the actual site of the eyrie on a rocky buttress. The same site tends to be used year after year and thus it is usual for the rock below the nest to show up white from the birds’ droppings (plate 37, lower); for the same reason it is common for there to be a considerable accumulation of food-remains in and around the breeding-ledge (plate 41, lower). The species is essentially a cliff- breeder in most areas (though in some parts of the range a few nest in trees), but the “cliffs”, as here, are sometimes no more than 20-50 feet high. The eyrie (plates 38-41) is usually little more than a scrape on a ledge, like that of the Peregrine, and where there is a collection of sticks and grass this is the old nest of a Raven (Coruus corax) or Rough-legged Buzzard [Buteo lagopus) that has been taken over. As far as Arctic-nesters go, the Gyr Falcon breeds fairly early, mostly in late April and early May. Three, or more commonly four, eggs form the normal clutch and incubation, as with most falcons, lasts 28-29 days. The young appear to be in the nest about 6^-7 weeks : the period is given, for example, by V. C. Wynne-Edwards {Auk, vol. 69, p. 365) as -46-49 days (one nest, Baffin Island), and estimated by Y. Hagen (1952, The Gyr Falcon in Dovre, Norway) as 45 days (several nests). One of the fuller studies of the Gyr Falcon is that of Yngvar Hagen {op. cit.), He gives an interesting list of prey, based on pellets and on the food-remains discovered at plucking- places and in the nest. The list includes 214 individuals of vertebrates and is made up of 6 species of bird and 3 species of mammal. No less than 95% of the total consisted of Ptarmigan {Lagopus mutus) and Willow Grouse (L. lagopus) — 205 individuals in all. All the birds were adults. Hagen emphasizes that his food-studies were made only in years when micro-rodents were numerous, yet in the mammal prey of the Gyrs he studied he was able to record only 2 Mountain Hares {Lepiis tunidus), 3 Lemmings {Lemmus lemmus) and i vole {Microtus oeconomus) ; 2 beetles were the sole invertebrate prey he found. Hagen reaches the conclusion that the Gyr is a specialist in Lagopus and that, because of this, it is able to settle on the high-fjell where grouse are the only food-supply for the large bird-eating raptors. Like 312 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX the Peregrine, the Gyr takes its prey by a stoop or by direct pursuit and there are many tales of its prowess at catching birds which in different areas include many auks, waders, ducks, gulls and also small Passerines. On the other hand, in some parts of the range small mammals, particularly lemmings and hares, form a much greater proportion of the bird’s diet; sometimes they are taken exclusively. For some reason, too, the Greenland Gyrs appear to be generally considered much less adept than other populations at catching birds; they seem to be comparatively slow and feed, chiefly by surprise, on lemmings, young ground-birds and small Passerines. According to Hagen, the Gyr treats its bird-prey somewhat differently from the way the Peregrine does. While the latter usually leaves the wings unplucked, Hagen found that the Gyr Falcons in Dovre had, with only three exceptions, extracted all the wing-quills. That this is certainly not universal, however, is shown by plate 41 (lower). I. J. F.-L. A NOTE ON FIELD-IDENTIFICATION OF PRATINCOLES By P. J. Hayman (Plate 44) R. Meinertzhagen {Birds of Arabia, p. 474) has shown that specimens exist which are intermediate between the Pratincole {Glareola p. pratincola) and the Black-winged Pratincole {Glareola nordmanni). The latter bird which is dominant in S.E. Europe and S.W. Asia is considered to be a colour phase of G. p. pratincola. I have not seen any of these intermediate birds either in the hand or in the field and the following discussion refers to typical birds of both forms. Most observers, when first seeing a pratincole, invariably look for the colour of the under wing-coverts, but these are often difficult to determine, especially in G. p. pratincola as the red colour becomes lost in the shadow of the wing. The pattern of the upper-parts is in fact a surer guide to specific identification in flight. Once aware of the differences between the two forms, I have had no trouble in separating them in the field. Features common to both forms in summer and winter, i.e. head-pattern, under-parts, rump and tail, black legs and the white shaft of the second primary, which have no direct bearing on identification, are omitted in the following notes. Pratincole Upper-parts : In flight this form shows a strongly contrasting wing-pattern (drawing, plate 44), whereas the Black-winged form has almost uniform upper-parts. Inner primaries and outer Pr.ATF, 37 J. II. .SV((/'.v Ni';sTiNf;-siTi'; oh' (isi^ I'.u.con (Falro ni.sl i coins) Noim'h Icia.and: Ji’Nh; 1(154 'I'lic U|j|j(‘r photograpli sliows llic view from al)ove an eyrie — a commandiiiff situation is usually a feature of it — while in the lower the while splashed rock marks the actual site: such an ,'iccumulalion of droppinjrs Ik'Iow llie iK'st, and ol lood rem.'dns around it, is typical of many (iyr’s evries, particularly those which have been used for vetirs (see page 311). P'l.ATE 38 Plate 39 o ■05 >,~0 C3 C — ^ c t- ^ tx V} (3J ”0 ■0/3.“ ^ c: ^ 10 r- ^ Cn C n (L> w c^’;= §.£^ Cj 2 ^ a ^ < C3 S u ^ ^ 0) X -C 0) Cw X c: 0) •— I •ojO - LTj z O 'ojj ^ CJ c C _CC D ~ o. D o X Cl !D : ^ ' E : "D ci i ' X ” tuO ^ .E C ’S) 5 •TC c n dinicult to determine. 'I'he I’ral incole has a stronf>ly contr.astin^' winfj-pal tern with pale inner |)rimarii's and si'condaries. .ind a \\hit(“ tiailinj' edf>e lo the latter. I hi' Rlack-winj^ed h;is more uniformlv dark Li|)per-parts which contrast more with the rump, while the whole hinl has a more hlack-and-white appe.'irance (see pa^e ti.?). VOL. XLix] PRATINCOLE RECOGNITION 313 secondaries are pale, forming a break in the dark areas of the wing. All secondaries have a white trailing edge which is emphasized by being seen against the dark inner secondaries. Under-parts : In flight, directly overhead, the under-sides of the wings look extremely dark, much more so than one would expect. If a bird is held in the hand and the wing viewed through half-closed eyes the red-brown colour of the axillaries and coverts will be seen to have almost the same tonal value as the grey-brown feathers surrounding it — hence the difficulty in picking out this feature in the held. Generally the red-brown under wing-coverts can only be picked out in the best light conditions, or especially when caught by a setting sun, when they are clearly visible over 300 yards away. [Also often on take-off. — P.A.D.H.]. The markings of the upper-parts are the best guide to this form (if the colour of the under wing-coverts is not visible) ; particular emphasis should be placed on the contrasting wing-pattern and, if it can be seen, the white trailing edge to the secondaries. Black-winged Pratincole When I first saw birds of this form, I was surprised at their “black-and-white” appearance which is enhanced in dull weather. Upper-parts : Upper-parts have a marked green tinge. At close range the darker primaries and secondaries show up fairly well against the rest of the wing, but this distinction is largely lost at longer range. There is no white trailing edge to the secondaries. The rump shows up very well and is much more obvious than in the Pratincole. Under-parts : The black of the under wing-coverts is striking, especially in bright weather and can easily be seen at a reasonable range. But if an observer is not familiar with relative under-wing shades of the tw’o forms, this feature as a sole means of identifi- cation (unless noted beyond reasonable doubt) should be used with caution. .Almost uniform upper-parts, jet black under wing-coverts, lack of a white trailing edge to the secondaries and pied appearance in the field distinguish this form from the Pratincole. On iith September 1954, I saw a mixed party of nine adult and juvenile birds (G. nordmamn), all in winter plumage, at Kabrit in the Suez Canal Zone. Most adults had streaked breasts and a few had marked pectoral bands ; one bird showing a distinct pink suffusion below the pectoral band. The leg colour of some birds was noted as grey-black, but I have an entry in my field note- book which states that ‘‘legs look pale yellowish and trail as the birds take off”. When approached, the birds stretched their wings above their backs for a few seconds and flicked their tails down suddenly when nervous. Photographs of Pratincoles at the nest in the Camargue (France) have been published in British Birds (vol. xli, plates 47-51). AUTUMN STARLING MOVEMENTS ON THE COAST OF S.E. IRELAND By P. W. P. Browne I SPENT the eight days from 30th October to 6th November 1954 on the S.E. coast of Co. Wexford, Ireland. Continuous watch for migrants was maintained from dawn till about 1300 hours G.M.T. The only species seen in large numbers was the Starling {Sturnus vulgaris), though also moving were Chaffinches [Fringilla coelebs), Skylarks [Alanda arvensis), Meadow Pipits [Anthus pratensis), and other species in very small numbers. Table I shows the observation points, and also the weather, both locally and over the whole St. George’s Channel area (data from localities listed at end). Places mentioned in this paper are shown on the map (Fig. 0- Table I — Observation points, WIND AND WEATHER DETAILS Date Observation Local Average over St. George’s Channel point wind wind weather 30 Oct. At sea W4 W 4 be 31 Oct. Carnsore Point W 4 SW 4 or-bcp I Nov. Carnsore Point E 2 ENE3 be 2 Nov. Carnsore Point NNW 2 ENE 2 bem 3 Nov. Carnsore Point W 2 WNW 3 be 4 Nov. Greenore Point W3 W3 be 5 Nov. Carnsore Point NNE 3 NNE 3 or 6 Nov. Carnsore Point NNE 6 NNE 6 op Notes: (i) Wind force on Beaufort scale. (ii) Weather symbols as used by H.M. Meteorological Office. (iii) On 30th October, I was on board .S.S. “Alexandra”, 5 to 10 miles off shore, between the Blackwater Light Vessel and Tuskar Rock. On two days of the eight, 31st October and 5th November, no Starlings were seen. Both days were associated with periods of continuous rain in the early morning. Table II summarizes the movements observed on each of the other six days. Table II — Details of observations on Starling {Sturnus vulgaris) MOVEMENTS BY THE AUTHOR Hours after sunrise Average Average Date Total number of peak direction of flight height 30 Oct. 297 2.6 W low I Nov. 912 I.O NW high 2 Nov. 394 1-3 N medium 3 Nov. 34 3-2 WNW low 4 Nov. 236 2-3 W medium 6 Nov. .S78 3-4 N low Notes: (i) Average height — low: less than ca. 50 feet above sea level. high: only just visible with naked eye. medium: between low and high. (ii) Sunrise 0711 hours to 0721 hours G.M.'l'. 314 VOL. XLix] STARLING MOVEMENTS: IRELAND 315 A pattern was revealed similar to that reported previously from the Irish coast near Dublin {antea, vol. xlvii, p. 348). After sun- rise there was a variable period with no observed movement. When the first Starlings appeared, the majority quickly followed and, for a short time, comparatively large numbers were seen. This “peak” lasted 20 to 40 minutes. It was usually followed by a trickle of birds, at least for the rest of the morning. Head Saltee A- MILES 10 20 30 40 50 N Fig. 1 — Localities referred to in the text While observing a similar migration of Starlings at the Kentish Knock Light Vessel off the S.E. coast of England, D. F. Owen [antea, vol. xlvi, p. 355) was unable to detect any effect of the wind on the time of passage. However, there were no following winds during his period of observation. It can be seen from Tables I and II that time of arrival on ist and 2nd November, with light winds blowing from Wales to Ireland, was an hour or two earlier than on 30th October, 3rd and 4th November, with winds in the opposite direction. The exceptional case of 6th November is discussed below. These results are what would be expected if Starlings departed from the Welsh coast about sunrise (shortest crossing 50 miles). Direction of flight was consistent with supposition that they did so, though mainly into the wind when possible. Most flocks were fairly low. The main exception was on ist November when Starlings arrived high with wind half following. On 6th November conditions were very bad. It seems unlikely that Starlings could have crossed from Wales to Ireland. Yet the second largest number of Starlings of the whole autumn was 316 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX recorded at Great Saltee Bird Observatory (R. F. Ruttledg'e and J. Weaving", Bull Fair Isle B.Obs., vol. II, p. 276). Details of this and other movements at Great Saltee are g"iven in Table III. At Carnsore Point (12 miles E.N.E. of Great Saltee), Starling's began to arrive from the south 35 to 40 minutes after the first at Great Saltee. Mr. J. Weaving has suggested {in litt.), and I agree, that those seen at Carnsore Point may well have come from Great Saltee to which, in turn, they may have flown from somewhere further west {e.g. Hook Head). Wind to the west of Saltee was less strong (force 4, N.W., at Tycor, W^aterford). Table III — Details of observations on Starling {Sturnus vulgaris) MOVEMENTS AT GrEAT SaLTEE Date Total number Direction Time (G.M.T.) I Nov. I arrived from S 1250 hrs. 2 Nov. 123 departed NE, W 1 100 hrs., 1620 hrs. 3 Nov. 10 departed NW 1420 hrs. 4 Nov. 5 Nov. 6 Nov. 0 0 ca. 1500 arrived from S-SW, departed NE 1000 hrs. -1500 hrs. By comparing Tables II and HI, it can be seen that, on two days (ist and 4th November), fairly large movements occurred at Carnsore Point and Greenore Point respectively, but little or nothing was recorded at Great Saltee. Such lack of agreement between points on the Irish coast only 12 to 15 miles apart makes less surprising the poor correlation in 1953 and 1954 between observed movements of Starlings and Chaffinches at the four Irish Sea Bird Observatories (P. Davis, antea, vol. xlvii, p. 419; Davis and Weaving, antea, vol. xlviii, p. 523). This does not imply that the migration is necessarily on a narrow front. On ist November the whole movement at Carnsore Point was over in 21 minutes. Because the majority of Starlings pass in a short time and sometimes fly high, it may be easy to miss them altogether at an Observatory where continuous watch is n©t practicable throughout the autumn. I would like to acknowledge with thanks the comments on this paper of Major R. F. Ruttledge, Mr. J. Weaving and the Editors of British Birds. I would also like to thank the following for information supplied : R. F. R. and J. W. (data from Great Saltee Bird Observatory), Mr. P. Davis (weather data, Skokholm and Dale, Pembrokeshire), Commissioners of Irish Lights (wind data, Tuskar Rock and permission to travel on S.S. “ Alexandra ” on 30th October), H.M. Meteorological Office (wind data, Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire) and the Irish Meteorological Service (wind data, Tycor, Waterford). FEMALE PIED WHEATEAR : THE PROBLEM OF IDENTIFICATION By J. S. Ash [Game Research Station, Fordingbridge, Hants.) and K. B. Rooke Difficulties encountered in identifying- the third British example of the Pied Wheatear [Oenanthe leucomela), trapped at Portland Bill, Dorset, in October 1954 (Ash, 1955), sugg-est the need for some clarification of the distinguishing features of Palaearctic wheatears, and particularly of the specific characters of female leucomela in the field and in the hand. The differences in the English and scientific names used by various authors are liable to cause considerable confusion for anyone referring to the literature (see Appendix II). Field-descriptions of most of the female -wheat- ears are scanty : a slight but misleading discrepancy in The Hand- book, between accounts of field-characters and plumage of the female Pied Wheatear in autumn, was ultimately explained by finding that the first British specimen had been wrongly sexed (see below). Other reference books available at Portland (including Dresser, 1902; Ramsay, 1923; Peterson et al., 1954) were insuffi- cient for the certain exclusion of all other Oenanthe species which might conceivably occur as stragglers in Britain. It is hoped that this account may help anyone confronted with a similar problem in the future. IDENTIFICATION Provisional identification of the Portland bird as a female Pied Wheatear was later amply confirmed by comparing its description and measurements, also sketches and a few sample feathers, with published accounts and illustrations (including Whitaker, 1905 ; Meinertzhagen, 1930) and where necessary with skins (British Museum collection) of all 14 Oenanthe species of the Palaearctic and Oriental regions, listed by Wynne (1954). Of the six species described in The Handbook, three [oenanthe, isabellina, leucura) were excluded by differences both in plumage and wing structure or measurements; deserti by plumage alone; leaving leucomela and hispanica for fuller consideration, particu- larly in the light of Witherby’s comment that “rarely some females of Pied Wheatear are very difficult to distinguish from some females of Oe. h. melanoleuca” , the Eastern Black-eared Wheat- ear [The Handbook, vol. II, p. 158). Reasons for excluding the remaining eight Palaearctic species are summarized in Appendix I, in which are included references to plates in the literature consulted. Measurements and structure. Portland bird: — Weight, 18.30 gm. (06.20 G.M.T., 19th 317 318 BRITISH BIRDS [\ OL. XLIX October). Bill from skull, 14 mm. Tarsi, 23 and 23.5 mm. (both approximate). For wing'-characters, see Tables I and II. Table I — Wing-formula: comparison with Pied and Black-eared Wheatears (Oe. leucomela and hispanica) Published data from The Handbook except as indicated by: (P) — \'aurie (1949); (M) — Meinertzhagen (1930); or (C) — Eagle Clarke (1916). {Note: (-E) longer; ( — ) shorter; ( = ) equal.) Primaries Portland bird Oe. leucomela Oe. hispanica (measured in mm.) (both wings) leucomela melanoleuca I St relative to primary coverts Longest 2nd shorter by ... 5th shorter by ... 6th shorter by ... Relation of 2nd to 5th ... Emarginated ... 2(-) ... ... 3rd ... 4th, o.5-i(-) ... 4 ... ... 4 ... ... 10 3( + )t0 3(-) (E) 6( + ) to 3(-)* 3rd & 4th ... 4-6 ... ... 1-4 8-12 ... 5(-f)to(=) (F) 8(+) to ( = )t ... 3rd & 4th 4-7 1-3 6-10 2nd = 5 th 3rd to 5th (M) 2nd <5th (.1/) 2nd <5th (C) 2nd = 5th§ ... 3rd to 5th 3rd to 5th * In 57 skins, 1-6 {+), av. 2.2; in 27, ( = ); in 20, 1-3 (-), av. 1.5. I In 42 skins, 1-8 (-f), av. 3.1; in ii, ( = ). § In the Orkney specimen (first winter female). Table II — Wing-length: co.mparison with Pied and Black-eared \\'heatears (Oe. leucomela and hispanica) References as in Table I. Portland bird Wing length (mm.) 92 Oe. 1. leucomela 9 • ••• 87-95 ,, ,, ,, 9 ad . ... 88-96 (av. 92.6) i» M d 9 . ... 88-98 ,, ,, ,, 9(istw.) .. • ••• 92.5 Oe. 1. cypriaca d 9 . ... 82, 84-90 (S ad . ... 83-90 (av. 86.4) Oe. hispanica 9 . ... 85-90 Oe. h. melanoleuca 9 ad. .. .. M .. 6 9 •• 85.5-95.0 (av. 89.5) 85-93 Authority and Remarks Both wings measured Handbook (F) 15 specimens in fresh plumage (M) Egypt (C) Orkney specimen (M) Cyprus, etc. (F) 16 in worn plumage (Cyprus, spring) (H) both races the same (F) 14 in worn plumage (Persia) (M) 24 specimens, Egypt The tables show a close ag^reement in wingf-structure between the Portland bird and Oe. 1. leucomela, and that it had a long-er wing- than the Cyprus race (Oe. 1. cypriaca) ; also that it differed from most female Oe. hispanica melanoleuca in having" a long-er wing- (with the odd exception of some from Persia cited by \'aurie. VOL. XLIX] FEMALE PIED WHEATEAR 319 1949), shorter ist and 5th primaries, and 2nd = 5th. Its 6th primary was at the centre of the range given for 1. leucomela, but at the shortest extreme for h. melanoleuca. It showed no sign of incom- plete wing-moult. Though not large, these differences seem diag- nostic of 1. leucomela as opposed to h. melanoleuca, quite apart from plumage characters. Plumage. Portland bird: — Certain points noted in the hand amplify the previous field description (Ash, loc. cit.). Upper-parts — crown to back, including scapulars, drab brownish-grey, rather greyer than in Meinertzhagen’s PI. XI, fig. 3, of 9 leucomela (though it was found in the field that upper-parts looked greyer in some lights and browner in others) ; crown and nape slightly paler and greyer than rest; distinct pale creamy-buff fringes to feathers of mantle, back and scapulars (giving a scalloped or mottled effect). Side of head — pale buff supercilium above and behind eye, continued forwards as a barely perceptible pale line above light brownish-grey lores to indistinct pale patch on forehead ; ear-coverts browner than crown, and slighty darker, but not as dark as in Meinertz- hagen’s PI. XI, fig. 3. Under-parts — chin and upper throat whitish-buff, tinged grey, only slig'htly paler in tone than pectoral band* (lower throat and upper breast), which was light tawny- brown (almost orange-buff in some lights) becoming darker greyish- brown towards flanks, into which it merged ; lower breast and rest of under-parts creamy-white with a very faint warm buff tinge, fairly sharply demarcated from pectoral band ; axillaries and under wing-coverts blackish-grey with brownish tips. Rectrices — extent of black (measured) very similar to that of leucomela figured by Meinertzhagen (Fig. 33, 5). Comparison with Oe. 1. leucomela and hispanica melanoleuca. With only slight differences, indicated above, the Portland bird was very similar to Meinertzhagen’s coloured figure (PI. XI, fig. 3) of 9 I- leucomela (Kenya, 15th November 1915). Skins of 9 leucomela in the British Museum resembled it closely, particularly one from India (30th August 1931) which was almost identical in colouring and well-marked pale fringes to feathers of upper-parts. Our account of the Portland bird also agrees very well with that by Eagle Clarke (1916) of the second British specimen (Orkney, ist November 1916), obtained by Bain (1916) — probably both were first winter females. The Cyprus race (1. cypriaca) is less white, more sandy below, and darker brown above in winter than the typical form (Handbook, Meinertzhagen), to which the Portland example evidently belonged. Ten skins of 9 hispanica melanoleuca examined all had pectoral bands less distinctly demarcated than in the Portland bird. The * Though distinct in colour, the pectoral band did not look much paler in tone than upper-parts in the field, presumably due to counter-shading. 320 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX one most nearly resembling' it in general colour of upper-parts (Egypt, 8th November 1906) had only the faintest trace of pale tips to these feathers. The prominence of contrasting pale fringes on feathers of mantle, etc., in $ 1. leucomela is the best character by which to distinguish it in the field or in the hand in unworn plumage from 9 melanoleuca, in which they are virtually absent. In worn plumage when these pale tips are abraded, the two may be very difficult to distinguish, as pointed out in The Handbook and by Vaurie. Typically, 9 leucomela are then more earth-brown (greyer)f above and have better demarcated pectoral bands (darker and richer) than 9 rnelanoleuca, but are not always distinct in these respects. SEX OF THE FIRST BRITISH SPECIMEN As previously indicated, a reference in The Handbook, under field-characters of female Pied Wheatear in autumn, to the Isle of May example (19th October 1909) which appeared darker than a common Wheatear, was at first rather misleading. Subsequent reference to the original description and coloured plate of this specimen (Baxter and Rintoul, 1910), to Witherby’s (1910) account of it, and the coloured plate in Thorburn (1925), strongly suggested that it was not a female, particularly because it had: “mantle black, each feather broadly margined with greyish-brown, lighter at the tips’’ (Baxter and Rintoul). Apart from wings and tail, there was no black on the upper-parts of the Portland bird, nor was there any in skins of female leucomela examined later, nor is it mentioned in detailed plumage descriptions (e.g. Handbook, Meinertzhagen). Our suspicions were later confirmed by Kenneth Williamson {in litt.), who kindly examined the mounted specimen in the Royal Scottish Museum and reported that it was undoubt- edly a male, probably first winter. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are due to those who contributed to the description and trapping of the Portland bird ; to W. B. Alexander and O. E. Wynne for the loan of several relevant items of literature; to J. D. Macdonald and Derek Goodwin for their help in arranging for us to examine skins in the British Museum ; and to Kenneth Williamson for examining the Scottish specimens. SUMMARY Difficulties in identifying female Pied Wheatears [Oe. I. leuco- mela), and the features distinguishing them from other Palaearctic + In Meinertzhagen’s key (1930, p. 262) the typical colours of upper-parts of 9 leucomela and 9 hispanica are attributed to the wrong species in each case (c/. his Pis. X and XI, and text). VOL. XLIX] FEMALE PIED WHEATEAR 321 wheatears are discussed in relation to the occurrence of the third British example of the species, at Portland Bill, lyth-igth October 1954. The first British specimen is shown to have been a male, not a female, as was previously thought. Reference is also made in an appendix to the confusion in the English names of the various species discussed. REFERENCES Ash, J. S. (1955): “Pied Wheatear in Dorset.” Brit. Birds, xlviii : 130-132. Bain, J. (1916): “Pied Wheatear and other rare birds in Orkney.” Scot. Nat., 1916.: 293. Baker, E.C.S. (1924); The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma, Birds. — II. London, pp. 38-54. Baxter, E. V. and Rintoul, L. J. (1910); “On the occurrence of the Eastern Pied Chat (Saxicola pleschanka) in Scotland. A new British bird.” Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist., 1910: 2-4. Clarke, W. E. (1916): “On the first winter plumage of the female Pied Wheat- ear, CE. leucomela.” Scot. Nat., 1916: 293-294. Dresser, H. E. (1902): A Manual of Palaearctic Birds, I. London, pp. 29-43. Meinertzhagen, R. (1930); Nicoll’s Birds of Egypt, I. London, pp. 258-281. Peterso.n, R. et al. (1954); A Field Guide to the Birds of Britain and Europe. London, pp. 223, 225-227, 299-300. Ramsay, R. G. W. (1923): Guide to the Birds of Europe and North Africa. London and Edinburgh, pp. 123-129. Thorburn, a. (1925): British Birds, I. London. PI. 6, p. 21. Ticehurst, C. B. (1926): “The Birds of British Baluchistan, Pt. I.” J. Bombay N.H. Soc., xxxi : 687-711. VAurie, C. (1949): “Notes on the bird genus Oenanthe in Persia, Afghanistan and India.” American Mus. Nov., No. 1425, 47 pages. Whitaker, J. I. S. (1905): The Birds of Tunisia, I. London, pp. 20-58. Witherby, H. F. (1910): “The Eastern Pied Wheatear (Saxicola pleschanka (Lepech.)) in Scotland.” Brit. Birds, iii: 296-297. et al. (1938): The Handbook of British Birds, II. London, pp. 144-168. Wynne, O. (1954): “ Key-list of the Palaearctic and Oriental passerine birds, iv.” North Western Natitralist, 1954: 436-459. APPENDIX I : DISTINCTION OF PIED WHEATEAR {Oenanthe leucomela) FROM PALAEARCTIC WHEATEARS NOT ON THE BRITISH LIST The eight species of Palaearctic wheatears not on the British List were excluded owing to differences from the Portland bird { = Oe. 1. leucomela 9) summarized below. English and scientific names listed are those used by Wynne (1954) ; names used by some other authors are mentioned in Appendix II. The length of the first primary relative to the primary coverts is indicated as in Table I (q.v.). Meinertzhagen (1930) and Vaurie (1949) each give very useful keys and tables of wing formulae of 12 species of Palaearctic wheatears, and should be consulted for other information. Together these cover all 14 species, Meinertzhagen excluding picata and albomger, and Vaurie excluding leucura and moesta. Red-tailed Wheatear (Oe. xanthoprymna). — Distinctive plumage (see Mein- ertzhagen: PI. XII (d), text pp. 276-7). ist primary longer: 4-9 mm. (-}-) (Meinertzhagen); 1-8 mm. ( + ), av. 4.0 mm. (\'^aurie). 322 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX Finsch’s Chat (Oe. finschii). — Upper-parts of 9 too pale sandy-grey and pectoral band absent (skins, and see also Meinertzhagen : PI. XI (9))- ist primary longer: 4-7 mm. (-P) (Meinertzhagen); 1-7 mm. { + ), av. 4.0 (Vaurie). 6th slightly emarginated in 80% (Vaurie). White-under-winged Chat (Oe. lugens). — 9 F halophila has much paler sandy-grey upper-parts and mainly whitish under-parts lacking pectoral band (skins; see also Whitaker PI. p. 48, c? 9 1 ^nd \'aurie pp. 29 and 32). Plumage of other races distinctive, 9 hke c? (see Meinertzhagen: PI. XII, c?). ist primary longer: 1-5 mm. (-}-) in Meinertzhagen; 1-6 mm. (-h), av. 4.0 mm. in Vaurie. Pied Chat {Oe. picata). — ist primary longer: 3-8 mm. (-f)> av. 5.4 mm.; 2nd shorter than 6th, and latter slightly emarginated in 94% (Vaurie). Hooded Chat (Oe. monacha). — Plumage distinctive, 9 lacks white rump (Meinertzhagen: PI. XII, (5'9)> also longer wing (100-107 mm.); ist primary longer: 1-4 mm. (-4-). Hume’s Wheatear (Oe. alboniger). — Black and white plumage distinctive, 9 like c? (Dresser). Longer wing (c5', 100-107; 9> 95-104): ist primary longer: 4-10 mm. (-h), av. 6.7; 6th slightly emarginated in 48% (Vaurie). White-rumped Wheatear (Oe. leucopyga). — Black or blackish plumage dis- tinctive, sexes alike (Meinertzhagen: PI. X). 1st primary: 6-12 mm. (-f) in Meinertzhagen; 2-9 mm. (-|-), av. 5.5, in Vaurie. 6th slightly emarginated in 56% (Vaurie). Mourning W'heatear (Oe. moesta). — Lacks white in tail; rump and tail often rufous in both sexes (see Whitaker: PI. p. 42, c? 9 : Meinertzhagen: PI. XII, cJ). 1st primary longer: 4-9 mm. { + ); 6th emarginated (Meinertzhagen). APPENDIX II : NOTES ON THE SYNONYMY OF THE PIED WHEATEAR {Oenanthe leucomela) and some other palaearctic wheatears NOT DESCRIBED IN The Handbook Pied Wheatear (Oe. 1. leucomela) in Haudboofe = “Siberian Chot” (sic) in Ticehurst (ig26) = “Eastern Pied Wheatear”, Saxicola ntorio in Dresser (1902) = “Pied or Pleschanka’s Chat”, Oe. pleschanka in Meinertzhagen (1930) = “Pied Chat”, Oe. leucomela in Baker (1924). (Cf. also lugens and picata). Red-tailed Wheatear (Oe. xanthoprymna) = “Red-ta\\ed Chat” in Baker and in Meinertzhagen = “Red-rumped W’heatear” in Dresser {cf. also moesta). Subsp. x.chrysopygia=“ Red-tailed Wheatear” in Dresser and Ticehurst. Finsch's Chat (Oe. fi.nschii) = “ Arabian Chat” in Meinertzhagen = “Arabian Wheatear ” in Dresser. Subsp. f. barnesi — " Barnes’ Chat ” in Baker and in Ticehurst. White-under-winged Chat (Oe. lugens) = “Mourning Chat” in Meinertz- hagen {cf. rnoesfa) = “ Pied Wheatear” in Dresser {cf. leucomela). Subsp. 1. haZo^/u7a = “ Western Pied Chat” in Whitaker {cf. picata and leucomela). Pied Chat (Oe. ^icato) = “Indian Pied Wheatear” in Dresser = “Pied Chat” in Baker and Ticehurst. Oe. capistraia and opistholeuca are now regarded as colour phases (Vaurie, 1949), respectively named “White-headed Wheatear” and “Strickland’s Wheatear” in Dresser, and “Gould’s Chat” and “Strickland’s Chat” in Ticehurst. Hooded Chat {Oe. rnonac/»a) = “Hooded Wheatear” in Dresser = “ Hooded Chat” in Baker and in Ticehurst. Hume’s Wheatear {Oe. albonigcr) = “B\ack and White Wheatear”, Saxicola albinigra Hume 1873, in Dresser = “Hume’s Chat” in Baker and in Ticehurst. White-rumped Wheatear (Oe. Zeuco/)yga) = “White-rumped Black Wheat- ear” in Peterson et al. (1954) = “White-rumped Black Chat” in Meinertzhagen = “ W’hite-rumped Chat” in Whitaker. Mourning Chat {Oe. moesta) {cf. /ugcn.?) = “Red-rumped Chat” in Meinertz- hagen {cf. xanthoprymna) = “Tristram's Chat” in Whitaker. NOTES Song-flight of Wood Sandpiper on passage. — In the Wood Sand- piper [Tringa glareola) song-flig-ht on passage may sometimes be observed in places which are frequented by groups of them for days and even for weeks. Such a place is the Ismaninger Teichgebiet, 9 miles east of Munich, Germany. Here, on nth May 1939 I saw a party of Wood Sandpipers flying in pairs over a swampy area in exactly the same manner as that described by G. H. Rees [aniea, vol. xlviii, p. 415). Their song-flight reminded me very much of that of the Redshank (T. totanus). In May 1939 display- flights were repeatedly watched by several observers. W. Wiist {Anz. Orn. Ges. Bayern, vol. iv, p. 236), reporting on the birds of this area, writes that the song-flight of this species is more often seen than that of the Greenshank (T. nebularia) or the Spotted Redshank (T. erythropus). In some years a number of Wood Sandpipers remain in the Ismaning area throughout the summer, but they never make any attempt to breed there. G. Diesselhorst Song-flight of Green Sandpiper on passage. — The 8th of October 1955 was at Cambridge a day remarkable for stillness and warmth after the -S.W gales of the three previous days. I spent the afternoon on the Cambridge Sewage Farm, and from 14.50 to 15.05 hours G.M.T. I was able to watch and listen to a Green Sandpiper [Tringa ochropus) in song-flight over the gravel-pits near-by. The first phrases may have been given from the ground (the bird being at the outset hidden from me by a hedge) but the remainder were uttered in the air in an erratic and undulating flight at about sixty feet. The series consisted mainly of a phrase approximating to “weet-weet-klooi-klooi-eet-eet” with a strong final accent. Other shorter phrases included a “kit-klu-ee-tit” and a “kit-klu-aa-eet”. I am sure the performance was completely natural, the bird being unaware of my presence. The general effect was melodious and impressive. D. I. M. Wallace [Green Sandpipers on passage not infrequently produce snatches of song, but it seems rare for this to be sustained for any length of time and the bird watched by Mr. Wallace was in full flight for 15 minutes. From the remarks made above by Dr. Diesselhorst it seems likely that display-flights while on passage are no more uncommon in the Wood Sandpiper than they are in the Green (see also antea, vol. xlviii, pp. 315-316 and vol. xlix, p. 39). — Eds.] Marsh Sandpiper in Northumberland. — From 20th to 25th August 1955, on a flooded colliery subsidence known as Wallsend Swallow, about two miles north of Wallsend in the Tyne Valley, a small, slim, pale wader was seen by M. B. On the 24th he showed it to A. F. and J. F. who, being unable to identify it, 323 324 BRITISH BIRDS [vOL. XLIX \ wrote out a detailed description and made a sketch on the spot. Dr. H. M. S. Blair was consulted and sugg^ested that the bird might be a Marsh Sandpiper [Tringa stagnatilis) and so it proved | to be. On 29th .August it was seen by B. L. under excellent | conditions at a distance of ca. 15 yards. In general it resembled a very small Greenshank (7’. nebularia) ; but, as two Greenshanks were present on the marsh at the same time, it was easy to compare the two species and note the points of difference. The Marsh Sandpiper was distinctly smaller and slimmer, its stance when feeding was more horizontal, its movements much more rapid. The bill was very dark, slender and needle-like and, proportionately, not so long as that of a Greenshank. The legs were very dark (not green), long in proportion to its body and | extending ca. 1^-2 inches beyond the tail in flight. The head appeared greyish, as it was flecked with brown, like the back of | the neck, but the forehead was distinctly white. In flight a large | area of white was shown on the rump and tail and only the central tail-feathers were lightly flecked with brown. The breast and under-parts were very pure white. It did not associate with the Greenshanks, though it frequently passed close to them, when its smaller size, nimbler actions and more rapid gait were very noticeable. It did not rise with the Greenshanks and appeared to be less easily alarmed ; but, when flushed, it flew low, calling as it did so. On the ground its note was — “tu-lee, tu-lee” ; in the air a series of notes — “tu-lee, tu-tu-tu-tu, tu-u-lee, tu-tu-tu’’. It was not seen after 29th .August. This is the first record of this species for Northumberland. Michael Bell, .Alan Frizzell, Joseph Frizzell and Brian Little Bonaparte’s Gull in Northumberland. — On nth July 1955, at Seaton Sluice Point, 4 miles north of Tynemouth, Northumber- land, a small gull was seen beating up and down the coast at about 50 to 100 yards off shore, where it was feeding with large numbers of adult and juvenile Black-headed Gulls {Tairus ridihuadus), Common Gulls (7>. cauiis) and Kittiwakes (fv’N.ta iridactyln). It was quite noticeablv smaller than the other gulls in its company; but not so small as a Little Gull (7.. miutiiii.s) seen there a few weeks previously. The head, nape, neck, under- parts and under-wings were pure white. There was a conspicuous and quite large dark smudge behind the eye. I'he mantle was like that of a Black-headed Gull, but the inner wing had very fine bars crossing to the carpal joints, as in the juvenile Kittiwakes ; but not so conspicuous or broad as in the latter. The wings were more pointed and longer than those of a T.ittle Gull. The primaries showed black when the bird was at rest on the water, but when it alighted on the sea, as it did to feed, the wings were brought up high above the head and the primaries were fanned, so that their pattern could be clearly seen, showing pure white primaries with j black leading edges. The tail was pure white, slightly rounded V VOL. XLIX] NOTES 325 at the tip with a very narrow terminal band, much narrower than that of a juvenile Black-head or Kittiwake. This band was broken slightly by one or two white feathers in the centre. The bill was small, much smaller than that of a Black-head and completely black. The legs were dark, the exact colour being indistinguishable. The bird’s flight was a very conspicuous character, being much more like that of a tern than a gull. The wing-beats were noticeably faster than those of a Black-head. It sometimes hovered, then neatly side-slipped on to the water to pick up food, rising again immediately with rapid wing-beats in the manner of a Black Tern [ChUdonias niger). Its usual height above the sea was from 15 to 20 feet; but once it was seen to dive like a Common Tern [Sterna hirundo) from ca. 5 feet. On the water it was buoyant; in this respect resembling a phalarope [Phalaropus sp.). It was under observation for two hours (ig.20 to 21.20), but was not seen subsequently. I have no doubt that this was a Bonaparte’s Gull (L. Philadelphia) assuming its first adult plumage. Brian Little Black-bellied Dipper in Kent. — A Black-bellied Dipper (Cinclus c. cinclus) was first identified at Sandwich, Kent, on 20th November 1955, and it was seen thereafter many times until 6th IDecember. I was shown the bird on 20th November by ost. Tliough a very skull