Natural History Museum Library 0196230 I r ► I / ii : k f s . ,1 ' ' No. 47 the Journal of the LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY Published : July 1968 Price : One pound * Post free Mar; THE LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY WHATEVER your interest in natural history — even if you are still a beginner — the Society will welcome you as a member. You are offered a wonderful oppor¬ tunity of extending your knowledge and increasing your enjoyment. The Society’s Area lies within a 20-mile radius of St. Paul’s and here most of its activities take place. Although so much of the area is covered with bricks and mortar it is a most exciting region with an astonishing variety of fauna and flora. The Society consists of Sections whose meetings are open to all members without formality. If you are interested in: archaeology, botany, ecology, ento¬ mology, GEOLOGY, MAMMAL STUDY, ORNITHOLOGY, RAMBLING, Or if yOU are a Young Naturalist there is a section ready to help you. We offer you . . . INDOOR MEETINGS Nearly every week throughout the vear with Films, Lectures and Discussions on all aspects of natural history. FIELD MEETINGS Led by experts, at week-ends and on summer evenings to visit “ good ” natural history places, often outside our Area. These excursions are very popular with beginners wishing to improve their knowledge. PUBLICATIONS The London Naturalist , published annually, a permanent record of the Society’s activities, including records of plants and animal life in the London Area. The London Bird Report, published annually, containing papers, facts and figures of special interest to bird watchers in London. Compiled bv the Ornithological Section which also issues a bi-monthly Bulletin (5s. Od. a year post free) . LIBRARY A large selection of books and periodicals, many with special reference to London, now housed at Ealing Central Library and available for the use of members. READING CIRCLES Many important natural history journals enabling members who subscribe to these circles to read any of the journals at a fraction of the cost of an individual subscription. UNIVERSITY LECTURES With the co-operation of the University of London, Department of Extra-Mural Studies, courses of evening lectures during the autumn and spring. They are designed to meet the needs of members for more knowledge of any particular aspect of natural history. MEMBERSHIP AND SUBSCRIPTIONS MEMBERS ...... JUNIOR MEMBERS ..... FAMILY MEMBERS ..... ENTRANCE FEE ..... All members except family members receive one and The London Bird Report. THIRTY SHILLINGS FIFTEEN SHILLINGS HALF THE APPROPRIATE RATE FIVE SHILLINGS free copy of The London Naturalist All details may be obtained from : — THE MEMBERSHIP SECRETARY, MR. A. J. BARRETT, 40 FRINTON ROAD, KIRBY CROSS, FRINTON-ON-SEA, ESSEX THE LONDON NATURALIST the Journal of the LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY No. 47 World List Abbreviation: Lona. Nat. Published July 1968 by the London Natural History Society and printed by F. J. Milner & Sons Ltd. Brentford and London CONTENTS PAGE Officers for 1967 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Editorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Report of the Society for 1967 . . . . . . . . . . 5 Botanical Records for 1967 — J. Edward Lousley . . . . . . 7 The Nature and Conservation of West Middlesex Chalk Grassland — Philip A. Stott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Reconnaissance Surveys of Vegetation— Herbert A. Sandford .. 19 Mammals in the London Area, 1966 — Ian R. Beames . . . . 25 Bats in the London Area— Ian R. Beames . . . . . . . . 38 Hemiptera-Heteroptera of the London Area: Part V — Eric W. Groves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 More Flies of the Cripplegate Bombed Site, City of London — i J* . Parmenter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Survey of Bookham Common: Twenty-Sixth Year Progress Report for 1967 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Twenty-Five Years of the Bookham Common Survey, including a Note on the Increase of Scrub on Grassland — Geoffrey Beven 95 A Bibliography of the N atural History of Bookham Common, Surrey 99 Working Party on Mapping: Progress Report for 1967 . . . . 103 Obituary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Survey of Ladybirds occurring in the London Area . . . . 104 Requests for Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Statement of Accounts . . .. .. .. .. .. .. 106 Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Instructions for Contributors . . .. .. .. .. .. 113 LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY Founded 1858 President: G. BEVEN, M.D., B.SC, F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. Honorary Vice-Presidents : J. FOSTER, B.A., R. C. HOMES, M.B.O.U., ERIC HOSKING, F.R.P.S., M.B.O.U., Rt. Hon. LORD HURCOMB, G.C.B., K.B.E., Miss C. E. LONG- FIELD, F.R.G.S., F.R.E.S., M.B.O.U., E. M. NICHOLSON, C.B., M.B.O.U., L. PARMENTER, F.R.E.S., R. M. PAYNE, F.R.E.S., J. H. G. PETERKEN, F.L.S., Mrs. L. M. P. SMALL, H. SPOONER. Honorary Librarian: Dr. F. A. TOUFAR Officers for 1967/68 Vice-Presidents: E. B. BANGERTER, B. L. J. BYERLEY, F.R.E.S., C. P. CASTELL, B.SC., S. CRAMP, B.A., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., R. W. HALE, V. F. HANCOCK, M.B.O.U., J. E. LOUSLEY Secretary : R. C. VERNON, M.B.E. Treasurer and Membership Secretary: A. J. BARRETT, 40 Frinton Road, Kirby Cross, Frinton-on-Sea, Essex Editor, London Naturalist: PAUL A. MOXEY, B.SC., F.L.S. Editor, London Bird Report: F. H. JONES Librarian: Miss H. BRITTON Programme Secretary : Mrs. B. F. BARRETT Administration: Assistant to Secretary: R. Allison; Film Hire: The Treasurer; General Meetings: Miss Joan Small, B.A.; Mapping Schemes: H. A. Sandford, B.Sc., A D.E., M.Phil.; Minuting: Mrs. P. Allison and Miss M. E. Kennedy; Publication Sales: Mrs. L. M. P. Small. Members of Council: Miss E. P. Brown, D. G. Hall, Miss D. C. Hersey, Dip. Geog., F.R..G.S., M.B.O.U., P. C. Holland, Miss M. E. Kennedy, T. R. Maynard, B.Sc., F.R.I.C., R. F. Moorman, F.G.S., P. E. Pickering, B.A., W. Plomer, B.A., B. L. Sage, F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., H. A. Sandford, B.Sc., A.D.E., M.Phil., C. F. Sayers, P. J. Sellar, B.Sc., M.B.O.U., Mrs. A. G. Side, F.L.S., Miss H. M. Smith. Information about the Society may be obtained from the Membership Secretary. 4 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Editorial MEMBERS will note the reduced size of this issue of the London Naturalist. Regrettable as this is, the Society should know that it is due to the necessity for economy, and not to any lack of material. Indeed, the Editor has had the sad and difficult task of excluding several papers, all of them of high standard and worthy of a place in our journal. Of course, it can be argued that it is better, from an Editorial point of view, to have too much material, rather than too little! Readers of the London Naturalist, however, may not wholeheartedly subscribe to this outlook. Whilst it is true that an abundance of material reflects an active Society, it is also obviously desirable that the results of research should be made available to members as soon as possible, and authors themselves naturally prefer that their work should reach the printed form at the earliest practicable stage. This is probably even more true at the present time, with increasing human pressure and rapid ecological change in our area, than it has been in the past. Provided the authors are themselves happy with the arrangement, it is intended that papers worthy of publication which have to be omitted from one London Naturalist should be given priority for the next issue : in this way no paper of merit is excluded. For this year, however, circumstances dictate a short London Naturalist. It is hoped that members will appre¬ ciate the reasons for this, and take comfort from the fact that it is not expected to be more than a temporary phenomenon. REPORT OF THE SOCIETY FOR 1 967 5 Report of the Society for 1967 THE membership of our Society at the end of October, 1967 numbered 1,709, which represents an increase of 26 over the corresponding figure for the previous year. This is the fourth successive year in which we have been able to report an increase of this order in our membership figures, but rapid rises in operational costs such as printing and hiring of halls have more than discounted the higher income from subscriptions. It is with deep regret that we record the deaths of the following members: R. B. Benson, L. H. Buckland, Garth Christian, Miss W. L. George, C. Hillyer, L. James, Mrs. E. Leighton, F. Metcalf, H. Munro Fox, E. M. Niblett and W. J. Rees. The new Rules were formally adopted at a Special General Meeting held on November 2, 1967. This important event in the history of our Society marked the fruition of the considerable labours over a period of three years, of a Working Party appointed by the Council. The Society is grateful to the members of this Working Party for their sustained efforts, and in particular to Mr. R. S. W. Pollard for his guidance on the various legal aspects involved in framing these rules and finally ensuring that they did comply with the requirements of the Charity Commissioners. After serving the Society for 15 consecutive years both as General Secretary and Assistant Treasurer, as well as in many other capacities, Mrs. L. M. P. Small has reluctantly decided that she can no longer con¬ tinue to perform these onerous duties. It was obvious to us that we would possibly never again find another member ready to give so much time in the service of the Society. Hence after considerable discussion, a new secretarial structure has been devised, including the institution of three additional officers, within which the present duties of the Society Officers have been redistributed. It is difficult to convey in a few words, the great debt that the Society owes to Mrs. Small for all these years of unstinted service and in fact she will stay in the Society administration for at least one year more, filling the new position of Publication Sales Officer. In connection with the Society’s project to resurvey the vegetation of Bookham Common, we are pleased to acknowledge that the Trustees of the Carnegie Trust have approved in principle a contribution of £180 towards the cost of equipment and £100 for the Director’s fees and expenses. This has been the first full year over which members of the Society could pay their Annual Subscription under the Covenant Scheme. We have now received a sum of £70 from the Inland Revenue Commissioners in respect of the subscriptions convenanted for last year, but this is only a start and every member is urged to consider whether he, or she, is ready to aid the Society in this manner. Several anonymous donations, including one for £100, have been received from members this year and we would like to record our thanks for these gifts. The Society’s film “London’s Birds” has been shown during this year to the “Friends of Richmond Park” in April and to the Bristol Orni¬ thological Club in September. Our Archaeological section has taken part in several investigations of Roman roads in London during recent years, and much of this . was illustrated with maps and photographs in an exhibition mounted by the 6 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Section at this year’s annual conference of the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society. Real progress was made in washing and marking material and par¬ ticularly pottery found during the excavations at 199 Borough High Street, but more helpers will always be welcome. Miss I. Darlington, a central figure in the activities of the Archaeologists for many years, has now retired to Berkshire and was made an Honorary Member in recognition of her services to the Society. We all wish her well. The Calystegia survey is now finished and hence the Botanists will now be concentrating their energies on their ambitious Plant Mapping Scheme. A progress map is being prepared which will indicate the under or non-recorded areas. Essex is particularly in need of workers, but help would be welcome almost anywhere in the Society area. The Sectional programme comprised five formal lectures, well attended informal meet¬ ings and a wide range of field meetings several of which were held jointly with other societies such as the Essex Field Club and the South London Entomological and Natural History Society. These joint meetings can be most profitable and helpful in promoting friendly relations between kindred societies. The Ecologists report an increase in attendance at the regular monthly meetings at Bookham Common, though one or two entomologists would be a welcome addition to the regular team. A field meeting in the Darent Valley was followed later by a symposium on the ecology of chalk down- land. Members should note that the Recorders will be pleased to receive any records of mammals, reptiles, amphibians or fishes observed in the Greater London Area. There have been many projects in the field of natural history for recording in the grid system technique and our entomologists are planning to carry out a survey on the Coccinellidae: this is a scheme to which all members could contribute. Generally however, Entomology has always tended to be a subject for the enthusiastic specialist, and anyone wishing to make a start in this fascinating field would do well to attend the Sec¬ tion’s informal meetings which are devoted to practical subjects like preservation and setting, use of keys and identification. The Easter field meeting of our Geology Section was held this year in Norfolk, visiting the Hunstanton Red Rock, Weyboume Crag and the Sandringham Beds. Among other field meetings in the programme were a visit to Lewes to examine quarry sections of the Upper and Middle Chalk, coach trips to the Isle of Ely, and to the Isle of Thanet, all of which were very well attended. A programme of monthly informal meetings arranged this year for discussion of such subjects as identification of speci¬ mens has proved to be very successful. In his sixth and last year as the Field Meetings Secretary for the Ornithological Section, Mr. R. Kettle set a very high standard for his successor. In addition to a full and varied programme of field meetings in and around London, as many as eleven Sunday coach trips were organised to enable our members to visit some of the best areas of orni¬ thological interest in S.E. England. For those members who were deter¬ mined not to allow other business to interfere with their bird watching there were weekend visits to Pembrokeshire in the Spring and to Dorset in October, and a wonderful whole week in Northumberland in June. There were two Junior weekends which were both well supported, in fact over-subscribed. It is difficult to keep the cost low enough nowadays REPORT OF THE SOCIETY FOR 1 967 7 but these weekends may certainly help to attract and retain a growing number of keen young ornithologists in our Society. The Section was very active indoors also, with nine formal lectures covering a wide range of places and races, and a regular and popular series of informal discussion meetings. On the social side, the Annual Dinner held at the Rembrandt Hotel was much enjoyed by all those present. Apart from the rambles, from which the Section takes its name, there are always a number of Ramblers’ visits which cover a range of facets of London life and history, and this year was no exception, starting with Strawberry Hill Gothic and finishing on a cool October evening in a bakery at Forest Gate. There is something for everyone in the Ramblers’ programme. The South West Middlesex Section reports an encouraging rise in average attendance figures particularly at indoor meetings. Certainly this year’s programme both in and out of doors was very attractive, cater¬ ing for a wide range of members’ interests. The Section is continuing its connection with the Hounslow Council for the Arts and is now exchanging details of meetings with other Societies in the Borough. Botanical Records for 1967 Compiled by J. Edward Lousley THE main effort of our botanical recorders is now concentrated on the scheme for mapping the flora of the London Area on the basis of the National Grid and a report of the progress will be found on page 6. With so much effort devoted to noting the common species it is perhaps not to be expected that new stations for rarities will be found at the same rate, but even so the contribution of records for 1967 is disappointing. For Kent and Middlesex we received important lists but for the parts of other counties falling within our Area there is very much less to report than in the past. There was only one record of outstanding interest and this was for a sedge, Carex strigosa, from Old Park Wood, Harefield, Middlesex. Twenty-six plants were found in August by Dr. F. Rose and P. A. Moxey. This sedge was last recorded from Middlesex about 1887 when John Benbow found it in the same wood and D. H. Kent and others have many times searched for it there in vain. This is yet another example of the difficulty of being sure that a species is really extinct even when the habitat remains unchanged. Very few members have failed to supply full National Grid references, or at least tetrad references, and these have been entered in the card index, but for this report it is sufficient to cite 10-kilometer squares in brackets following localities. As usual, the nomenclature is based on the List of British Vascular Plants (1958) prepared by J. E. Dandy and for species which appear in that List authors’ names are omitted to save space. 8 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 V.-c. 16, West Kent We are particularly grateful to R. M. Burton who provided a most valuable detailed list which not only added to our records, but also fully reported the present position of a number of important habitats including Keston Bog and Foots Cray Meadows. In view of the rapid changes taking place in the London Area this is just the sort of help we need. His records included Lily-of-the-Valley, Convallaria majalis , and Solomon's Seal, Polygoncitwn multiflorum, from a new locality, Rowhill Woods, Wilmington (57), Spearmint, Mentha spicata from Eynsford Station (56), and Seneeio x londinensis growing with both its parents at Lakewood (46). He reports that the garden Aubrietia, Aubrietia deltoidea DC., is established on the near vertical cliff of a chalkpit in Mount’s Road, Greenhithe (57) and that the very rare Catchfly, Silene italica , which grows near, was sprayed with a herbicide in June but has not suffered serious damage. On a refuse tip near Dartford, with E. J. Clement and J. R. Palmer, he found Sisymbrium loeselii which is strangely rare south of the Thames though frequent in South Essex and Middlesex. H. M. Pratt sent in his usual list which is always welcome, and J. R. Palmer made some useful contributions. Especially valuable are his records of willows from Ruxley Gravel Pits (47) found in company with E. J. Clement. These include Salix triandra , and two hybrids, 5. alba x fragilis and S. cinerea x viminalis named by R. D. Meikle. The willows of the London Area are inadequately recorded and it is encour¬ aging that several members are now taking an interest in the genus. J. R. Palmer also found Anthemis tinetoria in a field near Nash (36) and reports Petasites japonicus as established by a stream at Bickley (46). V.-c. 17, Surrey The Cornflower, Centaurea cyanus , is seldom seen now in cornfields but G. H. Gush noted three plants at the edge of a barley field on Wey Manor Farm, Addlestone (06), and he also reported about 60 flowering spikes of Dactylorhiza praetermissa (Druce) Soo by a disused gravel pit near Thorpe (06). Numerous plants of an alien Foxglove, Digitalis lutea, were found by B. Wurzell on quarried chalk scree on the Downs near Betchworth (25) which is an extension from known localities. With it grew one plant of Campanula alliarii folia. From P. W. E. Currie came a report of June Berry, Amelanehier confusa from Limpsfield Common (45), including one bush in “Happy Valley” which was studied in great detail in our pre-war ecological survey. On waste ground at Barnard's Wharf, Surrey Commercial Docks, Rotherhithe (37), R. C. Palmer collected Rumex triangulivalvis. This is of special interest as this dock seems to be permanently established just across the Thames at Shadwell. From a garden at Greyswood Street, S.W.16 (27), H. M. Thomas sent a specimen of Bupleurum lancifolium Hornem, which was no doubt introduced with bird-seed. J. R. Palmer found a few interesting plants in the vicinity of Festival Hall (38) including Hen-bit, Lamium amplexicaule. V.-c. 18, South Essex We again received very few records from Essex. Mrs. L. M. P. Small found a rare alien clover, Tri folium lappaceum L., on waste ground at Little Ilford (48) which was last recorded from our Area from Finchley BOTANICAL RECORDS FOR 1 967 9 in 1910, and P. Holland and Miss M. E. Kennedy found Oenanthe aquatica in a pit in the middle of a cultivated field at Theydon Garnon (40) whence this decreasing species was recorded by C. S. Nicholson in 1907. V.-c. 20, Herts. Some of the Hertfordshire records additional to our own list are already covered by Dr. Dony’s new Flora of Hertfordshire but others appear to be new to both. Miss M. E. Kennedy found Cerastium semi- decandrum at Northaw (20), and Lithospermum arvense at Essendon (20), and with C. P. Castell, Callitriche platycarpa (det. D. H. Kent; at Cheshunt (30). Mrs. M. Trayner found Dyer’s Greenweed, Genista tinctoria, at High Barnet/Monken Hadley (29), and E. B. Bangerter records Hieracium brunneo-croceum from the edge of playing fields at East Barnet (29). V.-c. 21, Middlesex From the number of records of interest it might be thought that our members spent most of their time in Middlesex but much of this is in¬ spired by the great enthusiasm of D. H. Kent. As already mentioned above, the rediscovery of Carex strigosa in Old Park Wood (09) by Paul Moxey and Dr. F. Rose is outstanding-, and Mr. Kent’s own find of another sedge, Carex distieha , in a marsh north of Enfield Lock (39) is also important. From Inner London, D. McClintock continues to add to his list from Buckingham Palace Grounds (27) with Scleranthus annuus , Pastinaca sativa , Sisymbrium orientale , and Carex pendula , while G. H. Gush noted Cymbalaria mura/is in Dean’s Yard, Westminster (37). In a marsh at Northolt (18), growing with Rumex palustris , D. H. Kent found Sea Aster, Aster tripo/ium. Here this salt-marsh species is regarded as having been introduced. In noting Euphrasia nemorosa in a garden at West Ealing (48) he observes that this is now a rare species in Middlesex except on the chalk. This is now true of much of the London Area and Eyebrights have become strangely scarce in recent years. The explanation is probably destruction of habitats rather than a special threat to the species concerned, but accurately named records of Eyebrights are now particularly welcome. He also found Potamogeton lucens in the Regent’s Canal at Stepney (38), Fiddle Dock, Rumex pulcher on the village green at West Drayton (07), Erodium cicutarium on lawns at Brentford and Hanweli (17) and Oxalis incarnata as a garden weed at West Ealing (18). With Miss M. E. Kennedy he recorded Montia sibirica as well established in a wood at Enfield (39), Epilobium lanceolatum at South Tottenham (38) and Nicandra physalodes on a refuse tip at Harmondsworth (07), where they also found Chenopodium probstii Aellen in my company. Miss Kennedy reports Berula erecta and Viper’s Bugloss, Echium vulgare , from Tottenham (39). The visit of the Botany Section to a refuse tip at Yiewsley (08), pro¬ duced a number of uncommon aliens including Polygonum pulchellum Loisl., Trachyspermum ammi (L.) Sprague ex Turrill and Solanum rostratum Dunal. Another party, which included E. J. Clement and myself found Polygonum pennsylvanicum L. on a tip at New Year’s Green (08). Mrs. L. M. P. Small found several clumps of Bromus inermis , an increasing grass in the London Area, in The Highway, Shadwell (38) a locality known to D. H. Kent but new to our records. On waste ground near Gardiners’ 10 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Corner, Whitechapel (38) I saw several giant plants of Henbane, Hyoscyamus niger, and by London Bridge on the Fishmongers’ Hall side (38), a plant of Archangelica, Angelica archangelica. Also in the City, Soapwort, Saponaria officinalis is persistent by Route 11 having spread a little since it was first found in 1944, and Yellow Bedstraw, Galium verum now grows on a bombed site in Lower Thames Street (both 38). On a rubbish tip at Harefield (09), Dr. J. G. and Mrs. C. M. Dony found Yam, Ipomoea batatas L. (det. Dr. B. Verdcourt), and on the river-wall at Hampton Court (16) R. M. Burton found Lamium hybridum. At Northwood (09) J. Moore found Early Purple Orchis, Orchis mascula , which is now very rare in the county. In a garden at Chiswick (27), Mrs. M. A. G. Veal found Cyperus eragrostis Lam. in 1956 and 1967 — on the only previous occasion we have had this it grew on allotments near Croydon where it was believed to have been introduced with onion seed. In busy Chiswick High Street (27) E. C. Kite found a plant of Camelina sativa at the foot of a post, while Mrs. J. McLean found several interesting plants on the floor of a disused reservoir at Ealing (18) including Centaur ium erythraea. V.-c. 24, Bucks. At Wraysbury (07), Miss M. E. Kennedy and D. H. Kent found Solidago gigantea var. leiophylla (Fern.) Fern, and Veronica catenata in a gravel pit, and Calystegia pulchra Brummitt & Heywood on a hedge. We are grateful to the following who have contributed records during the year: E. B. Bangerter, R. M. Burton, C. P. Castell, E. J. Clement, P. W. E. Currie, Mrs. C. M. Dony, Dr. J. G. Dony, G. H. Gush, P. Holland, Miss M. E. Kennedy, D. H. Kent, E. C. Kite, J. E. Lousley, D. McClintock, Mrs. J. McLean, R. D. Meikle, J. Moore, P. A. Moxey, Miss B. M. C. Morgan, John R. Palmer, R. C. Palmer, H. M. Pratt, B. R. Radcliff, Dr. F. Rose, B. F. C. Sennitt, Mrs. L. M. P. Small, H. M. Thomas, Mrs. M. Trayner, Mrs. M. A. G. Veal, A. Warde, R. P. Widgery, Mrs. M. L. Wiseman, B. Wurzell. THE NATURE AND CONSERVATION OF W. MIDDX. CHALK GRASSLAND 1 1 The Nature and Conservation of West Middlesex Chalk Grassland By Philip A. Stott Department of Geography , King's College London BOTANICAL studies on a County or Watsonian Vice-County basis, while embodying many obvious limitations, still have much to com¬ mend them. The interest naturally aroused by the flora of one’s “home County” stimulates both amateur and professional botanist alike, pro¬ vides the initial impetus to many young botanists and maintains enthusiasm among a wide variety of people outside the strictly limited field of scientific research. Indeed, the amateur interested in the plants of his County has contributed significantly to our detailed knowledge of the British flora. In France, where the system of Departements has never aroused the same degree of local patriotism to be found in our ancient Counties, there have been few such amateurs, and, in consequence, the flora is pro¬ portionally less well-known. This enthusiasm however may be mis¬ directed, for example in the wanton collecting of rare species, and it must be admitted that County floras have been in many cases impover¬ ished by the labours of their botanists. On cursory glance, Middlesex (V.-c. 21) seems to offer little hope to even its most ardent local botanist, being dominated throughout by the urban sprawl of London. Yet, even in this unlikely County, Gilbert White’s dictum “all nature is so full that the district produces the greatest variety which is most examined” still holds true. This paper is a detailed examination of some of the remaining Chalk Grassland habitats in West Middlesex, and it is hoped that it will arouse an interest in areas rarely considered by most botanists. The question of conserving these habitats will also be raised, and discussed both in relation to urban-industrial advance and the botanist’s personal collection of the rarer species. DEFINITION AND DISTRIBUTION Chalk Grassland is a well-known and readily recognisable vegetation type. Yet one rarely finds in the literature any clear, comprehensive definition of precisely what is meant by “Chalk Grassland”. Since Tansley (1935) first crystallised the concept of the “ecosystem”, a vegetation unit has been regarded as a dynamic system of interactions between plants and environment. The logical outcome of this view has been well expressed by Lambert and Dale (1964), who state that in any vegetation system “There are . . . three elements to be distinguished: (1) the plants themselves; (2) the sites (defined by position in space); and (3) the environmental features associated with these sites”. This framework of plant/site/habitat provides a good basis on which to define Chalk Grassland. It also provides a satisfactory approach to the study of Middlesex Chalk Grassland. The plant element in Chalk Grassland is a complex one, consisting of varying combinations of grasses and sedges, herbaceous annuals and perennials, dwarf woody shrubs, tuberous plants, mosses and liverworts. 12 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 and more rarely lichens and fungi. The sites are governed by the dis¬ tribution of Upper Cretaceous Chalk, and the availability of factors to arrest the development of a site to scrubland, and then to woodland. Very steep slopes, rabbit grazing, sheep grazing, cattle grazing, burning, and constant trampling are all factors that maintain Chalk Grassland against invasion by scrub species. These factors prevent a given site developing the maximum vegetation possible in relation to the prevailing climate; they prevent Chalk Grassland developing to the “Climatic Climax” vegetation of woodland. If the Chalk Grassland is maintained by a physical factor, such as very steep slopes, the site is said to have a “Sub¬ climax” vegetation, but if it is maintained by a biotic factor, such as grazing or trampling, it is said to be a “Deflected” or “Plagioclimax”. At any given site, the arresting factor is an integral part of the habitat element, which also involves micro-climate and soils. Most Chalk Grassland is developed on what is termed an immature, grey rendzina soil. The typical rendzina is a very shallow soil (rarely more than 30 cm. thick), with its humus layers resting directly on parent rock. It is satur¬ ated with free calcium carbonate, and has a decidedly alkaline reaction (pH 7-8). A rendzina is usually a warm, well-drained soil, with virtually no leaching and a good humus content. There is great variation within the plant/site/habitat elements from area to area, and it is this variation which makes the study of Chalk Grassland so interesting. A grassland maintained by cattle grazing is very different to one maintained by rabbit grazing. Cattle break up the sward, create open habitats that are colonised by meadow plants and weeds, and increase soil Nitrogen. Rabbits create a very dense, closed, short sward very different from the above. The Middlesex Chalk Grass¬ lands show a number of variations, and these will be discussed later. The distribution of Chalk Grasslands in Middlesex is severely restricted owing to the limited exposure of the chalk, intensive quarrying activities, and urban development. They appear to be relatively recent in origin, being derived from a once generally wooded landscape. However, the grasslands around Harefield were certainly in existence by the early 18th Century (Blackstone 1737). Other sites are much more recent in origin. All the areas studied lie within Trimen and Dyer’s (1869) “Upper Colne Botanical District”, in the north-west of the County. There are two main areas of distribution: — i The grasslands west of Harefield. These are developed on the outcrop of Upper Chalk that forms the valley side escarpment of the left bank of the Colne. They are becoming very fragmentary through quarrying activity. ii The grasslands east of Harefield. These comprise a number of very local sites, developed either where the chalk outcrops for a short distance, or where an “artificial” site has been created by the dumping of Chalk debris. This study deals primarily with the small “Chalk Area” (600 square metres) in the Ruislip Local Nature Reserve. (See Moxey, 1964). THE PLANTS i The Grasslands West of Harefield The best developed Chalk Grassland lies to the west of Harefield (from TQ 046932 to TQ 048900), and, having little continental flavour in the range of species present, may be assigned to the sub-alliance. THE NATURE AND CONSERVATION OF W. MIDDX. CHALK GRASSLAND 13 Mesobromion erecti *. One of the remarkable features of this sub¬ alliance in Britain is the abundance of the grass, Bromus erectus, over large areas, for example, as Rose (1965) points out, on “Les pelouses aux expositions Sud des “North Downs” de l’interieur du Kent et du Surrey”. The Upright Brome-grass appears to be locally common on the Middlesex grasslands also. Trimen and Dyer ( 1 869) record the species as “abundant” in “Field above the chalkpit, Harefield”, and Rose (pers. comm.) records it as locally frequent near Garrett Wood (TQ 046932), though much of this site has now been quarried away. It is also to be found below Old Park Wood and on Copper Mill Down (TQ 0490). With it, one usually finds Festuca ovina on unstable quarry slopes and spoils, heavily grazed areas, and the lighter, drier soils, and Briza media spoils, heavily grazed areas, and the lighter, drier soils, Briza media and Carex flacea. The following relev or quadrat gives the basic structure of the com¬ munity. The phytosociological methods employed are those of Braun- Blanquet. The first figure given is an estimate of cover degree, the scale being: — 5 = over 75% of the area; 4=50-75%; 3 = 25-50%; 2 = 5-25%; l = less than 5%, but affecting community structure; += occasional, not affecting structure; o = one plant only. The second figure is an estimate of plant sociability (i.e. how a given species is distributed over the quadrat area): — 5 = pure populations; 4 = large colonies; 3 = small patches or cushions; 2 = small groups or tufts; l = no grouping. COPPER MILL DOWN Grid ref.: TQ 043907 Date: 30/8/67 Site : West of area of scrub Soil: pH 8-5 Aspect : 250° Slope: 11° 1 square metre Bromus erectus 2.2 Dactylis glomerata 1 .2 Briza media + . 1 Festuca ovina + . I Carex flacca 2.2 Thymus pulegioides 2.3 Hieracium pilosella 2.3 Ranunculus bulbosus 2.2 Pimpinella saxifrage 2.2 Prunella vulgaris 1.2 Senecio jacobaea 1.2 Ctenidium molluscum 1.1 Pseudoscleropodium purum 1.1 Eurynchium swartzii 1.1 Fissidens sp. 1 .2 In the past, the sites in the Garrett Wood/Springwell Down area have yielded many interesting records, and it is to be regretted that quarrying has destroyed so much of these grasslands. For example, Helianthemum chamaecistus, once known near Garrett Wood, could not be refound there by Kent and Rose (pers. comm.) as far back as 1946. One very interesting species recorded for these sites is Gentianeila germanica. The presence of this species shows that the Chalk Grassland of Middlesex can be regarded as an outlier of the Chiltern flora, for in Britain Gentianeila germanica is virtually restricted to the Chiltern area, and the widespread Chalk Grassland species is Gentianeila amarella, which also occurs in the Springwell area. In France, however, the position is reversed, the common Chalk Grassland species being Gentianeila germanica. Other *In the terminology of Continental Phytosociologists. This sub-alliance of the Mesobromion erecti embraces most of the normal chalk and limestone grasslands of the British Isles. Braun- Blanquet, J. and Moor, M., 1938, Verband der Bromion erecti. Prodomus der Pflanzengesell- schaften. Fasc. 5 — Leiden. 14 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 records for these sites include Euphrasia nemorosa, E. pseudokerneri, Ononis repens , Black stonia perfo/iata, Viola hirta , Primula veris, and Thymus pulegioides. With these occur the basic Chalk Grassland species, such as : Poterium sanguisorba, Pimpinella saxifraga, Daucus carota, Leontodon hispidus , and Knautia arvensis. On grassland from Springwell to Old Park Wood, Boniface (pers. comm.) records Lotus corniculatus, Poterium sanguisorba, Pimpinella saxifraga, Cirsium acaulon, Ononis repens, Centaurea scabiosa, C. nigra, Hypericum perforatum, H. hirsutum, Leontodon hispidus , Chrysanthemum leucanthemum and Geranium colum- binum among others. The disturbed nature of the ground, especially around quarries, is reflected in the nature of the grasslands. The Flora of Trimen and Dyer (1869) suggests that the Chalk of Middlesex was once quite rich in Orchids, and includes Blackstone’s (1737) records for Orchis ustulata (“In Harefield chalkpit, sparingly”), and for Orchis purpurea and Orchis militaris, though it is possible that “ purpurea ” records should be referred to “ militaris ”. O. militaris was refound in 1885 and last recorded in 1902, and in the heart of all botanists there must remain a faint hope that it will turn up again. This was perhaps the finest plant of both Hertfordshire and Middlesex, and some reasons as to why it became extinct will be given when the question of conserving the flora is discussed. Trimen and Dyer also record Ophrys insectifera (their “ muscifera ”) as “very rare” in “copses and bushy places on chalk”. Today Orchid records are few. Anacamptis pyramidalis and Ophrys apifera are locally important, 50 spikes of the former being recorded for Copper Mill Down in 1965 (Moxey, 1966). Dactylorchis incarnata, D. fuchsii , and D. praetermissa have all been recorded for various chalk pits, and in 1965, Pickess (Pickess, 1966) discovered an Orchid new to Middlesex in a chalk pit at Harefield. Growing in association with a ground layer of Hedera helix, and in deep shade, he records 70 or more plants of Epipactis phyllanthes var degenera. One Orchid which may be found to be more frequent than believed is Gymnadenia conopsea. One spike was recorded by Mrs. B. Welch in 1946, and a new locality found in 1965 (Moxey, 1966). The bryophytes are, in general terms, those typical of west facing Chalk Grassland, aspect being fundamental in determining the bryophyte flora of any area. In the sward one finds Acrocladium cuspidatum, Brachythecium rutabulum, Ctenidium molluscum, Camptothecium lutescens, Campylium chrysophyllum, Pseudoscleropodium purum , Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus, Dicranum scoparium, Eurynchium swartzii, and, where there is shade, E. praelongum. Two very interesting records are those for Thuidiwn philibertii, which has long been known at Springwell Chalk pit and Down, and which was recorded in 1967 by Coker (pers. comm.) for Copper Mill Down. Boniface (pers. comm.) records Brachythecium glareosum as “rare” on Springwell Down, and Brachythecium albicans, which is commonly found in grass on sandy soils, occurs where the Reading Beds are mixed with the Chalk. On bare soil areas, Dicranella varia is abundant at Springwell, and Barbula convoluta, B. fallax, Leiocolea turbinata, and Fissidens spp. are common. On the Chalk/Reading Beds spoil heaps below Old Park Wood, lichens come into their own, and include Cladonia chlorophaea, C. fimbriata, C. subrangiformis , and a Peltigera sp. THE NATURE AND CONSERVATION OF W. MIDDX. CHALK GRASSLAND 15 ii THE GRASSLANDS EAST OF HAREFIELD Groves (1965) records a similar lichen flora to the above near the swallow hole of the Chalk Area in the Ruislip Local Nature Reserve (TQ 089899), including Cladonia subrangiformis and C. chlorophaea. He comments that these are interesting records44 since there are not many surface chalk habitats in Middlesex where one could possibly expect them to be among the lichen colonisers”. This site, and the Old Park Wood site, are both disturbed Chalk habitats, the latter being spoil heaps often partially mixed with Reading Beds, and the former being an area “covered with chalk spoil from the well dug by the Colne Valley Water Company” (Moxey, 1964). The bryophyte flora of the Chalk Area in the Reserve is very rich, and very interesting. Around the swallow hole occur Fissidens taxifolius and Camptothecium lutescens (Moxey, 1965); Riccardia sinuata is in association with Dicranellci varia , and Dicranem bonjeani; while, Ceratodon purpureus, Acrocladium cusp ida turn , By achy the cium albicans, Hypnum cupressi forme, and Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus are recorded*. Higher plants typical of Chalk Grassland include Poterium sanguisorba, Linum catharticum. Origanum vulgare , and Briza media, but the dominant plant is Tussilago farfara, reflecting the disturbed nature of the site. From the above discussion, three general points may be made about the plant element in Middlesex Chalk Grassland : — (i) The flora is an outlier of the Chiltern Chalk Grassland flora. (ii) Within the last two hundred years, the flora has become greatly impoverished. (iii) The disturbed nature of certain sites is reflected by the flora present. THE SITES The Chalk Grasslands of Middlesex appear to be maintained both as a subclimax and a plagioclimax vegetation, steep, unstable slopes and animal grazing both being effective in halting scrub development. It seems paradoxical that the very destroyer of much Middlesex Chalk Grassland, quarrying, also produces ideal slopes for the development of Chalk Grassland. This is a common feature everywhere. In Pas- de-Calais, France, some 75 % of the Chalk Grassland sites are associated with old quarry workings. Unfortunately, in Middlesex, the quarries are still active and are eating into the grasslands. The evidence for grazing is widespread. Copper Mill Down is maintained as Chalk Grassland through the all-year grazing of 50 cows and 20 neifers. On this stretch of down, there are large mushroom-like clumps of Crataegus where the base of the shrubs has been grazed away. Pickess (1964) carried out some work on the evidence for rabbit grazing in the Chalk Area of Ruislip Local Nature Reserve during the severe winter of 1 963 . Describing the attack by rabbits to a Broom ( Sarothamnus scoparius ), he writes, “The only plant in the Reserve had by the end of this cold weather over half its shoots eaten down to the hard wood . . . shoots almost two feet above ground level were reached and eaten”. * Moxey F 1965) also records Neckera crispa. Should this be Neckera complanta? 16 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1968 He also records the nibbling of young twigs, the barking and the eating of young shoots of Crataegus, and the taking of shoots and a little bark from Briars ( Rosa sp.). Yet, despite this grazing, scrub rapidly en¬ croaches on the area. Burning seems to have been used to try to keep it back. The “artificial” nature of certain sites is another interesting feature, as already mentioned. The Chalk/Reading Beds spoil heaps and the Chalk spoil of the Ruislip Reserve being the obvious examples. They tend to differ from the Chalk Grassland norm, for example, in the Reserve dominant, Tussilago farfara. HABITAT VARIATION For an example of habitat variation, the soils of Copper Mill Down are useful. Sandy ant-hills are dominated by cushions of Thymus pulegioides. Dry, sandy terracettes carry a community of acrocarpous mosses, while hollows have a Clover community. But the most interesting variation occurs in a line south-east to north-west along the main stretch of the grassland from the farm gate through which the cattle enter the field to its other end. The Total Nitrogen content in the soil decreases steadily from the gate northwards. Table 1 compares two surface soils {2"), one near the farm, the other some distance away. TABLE I Copper Mill Down : Surface Soil (2") pH Available Ca Available Na Available K Total Nitrogen as NH4. Near Farm: 8-4 227 ppm. 4 ppm. 8 ppm. 264 ppm. Away from Farm: 8-6 247 ppm. 3 ppm. 5 ppm. 115 ppm. This variation is probably related to the pressure of grazing, the area nearest the farm being the most heavily grazed. The heavier grazing should increase Total Nitrogen in two ways. Firstly, cattle excreta will add to the Nitrogen in the soil, and secondly, as the cattle break up the turf, open habitats are created and meadow plants enter, such as Clover, which is Nitrogen fixing. Through this the Chalk Grassland vegetation is gradually destroyed and reduced to meadow pasture. Cause and effect are difficult to separate, so perhaps it is best to attribute this variation to bovine indolence! CONSERVATION The question of the conservation of Middlesex Chalk Grassland will be discussed under three headings; areas already protected, possible future areas, and personal responsibilities. THE NATURE AND CONSERVATION OF W. MIDDX. CHALK GRASSLAND 17 Areas already protected At the moment only two areas of interesting Chalk Grassland are officially protected, namely Copper Mill Down, which is a S.S.S.I., and the Chalk Area of the Ruislip Local Nature Reserve. The main threat to the latter is the invasion of scrub species, and a constant effort will be needed to maintain the area as grassland. The protection of Copper Mill Down seems rather ineffective, and the cattle grazing already discussed is breaking down the Chalk Grassland vegetation. The area would probably develop a much better Chalk Grassland sward if it was grazed by sheep. Possible future areas As pointed out earlier, the best Chalk Grassland lies to the west of Harefield, but is being quarried away at a rapid rate. Small areas have also been built on. It is very unlikely that the urban-industrial advance will be stopped for the sake of preserving a small area of vegetation, but one certainly hopes that the woodland areas, with Dentaria bulbifera, above the grasslands will be saved. Personal responsibilities The greatest danger, however, to any flora probably lies in botanists themselves. Dalby (1963) referring to “the private herbarium assembled by the private individual” comments “it is here that I believe the greatest threat to our flora lies”. The saga of Orchis militaris in Middlesex and Hertfordshire certainly justifies Dalby’s belief. In 1885, Benbow refound this plant in a wood near Harefield. He says, there were “several plants but some unfortunately taken up by the roots by my sons and nephews”. In 1889, the plant was still in this station, and on May 23, 1889, Benbow gave a specimen to a Miss Hazelhurst. In 1885, he had also found a similar station in Hertfordshire near the Middlesex boundary. In that year, there were some 20 plants at this site. In 1889, he gave one plant to the Rev. M. Reader. In 1890, there were 12 plants. In 1891, there were eight plants, and some were given to the Rev. W. R. Linton. In 1892, there were four plants, but in 1895, some were given to the Rev. E. Linton. In 1896, there were no plants. During the next few years one or two spikes appeared at the site, and one final spike was seen in 1 902. In Benbow’s herbarium there are no less than 13 specimens as well as numerous notes to the effect that various specimens had been presented to eminent botanists of the time. D. H. Kent, in a letter on this saga, concludes, “One can only feel that Benbow assisted greatly in eradicating from the two counties their finest plant!” The above is an extreme case, but it should emphasise to all botanists the need to exercise restraint in the collecting of rare species. In Middle¬ sex all plants could be regarded as rare, and surprisingly much of interest still remains despite urban expansion. Whilst hoping that this paper will create a new interest in part of the Middlesex flora, it is also necessary to stress the responsibility of botanists in preserving their local floras. 18 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 List of English Names of Vascular Plants Referred to in the Text It has not been thought possible to provide a list of English equivalents for the Bryophytes and Lichens mentioned. Anacamptis pyramidalis (Pyramidal Orchid) Blackstonia perfoliata (Yellow-wort) Briza media (Common Quaking Grass) Bromus erectus (Upright Brome-grass) Carex flacca (Carnation Grass) Centaurea nigra (Lesser Knapweed) C. scabiosa (Greater Knapweed) Chrysanthemum leucanthemum (Ox-eye E)aisy) Cirsium acaulon (Stemless Thistle) Crataegus monogyna (Hawthorn) Dactylis glomerata (Cock’s-foot) Dactylorchis fuchsii (Common Spotted Orchid) D. incarnata (Meadow Orchid) D. praetermissa (Fen Orchid) Daucus carota (Wild Carrot) Dentaria bulbifera (Coral-wort) Epipactis phyllanthes var. degenera (Green-flowered Helleborine) Euphrasia nemorosa (Eyebright) E. pseudokerneri (Eyebright) Festuca ovina (Sheep’s Fescue) Gentianella amarella (Felwort) G. germanica (Chiltern Gentian) Geranium columbinum (Long-stalked Cranesbill) Gymnadenia conopsea (Fragrant Orchid) Hedera helix (Ivy) Helianthemum chamaecistus (Common Rockrose) Hieracium pilosella (Mouse-ear Hawk- weed) Hypericum hirsutum (Hairy St. John's Wort) H. perforatum (Common St. John’s Wort) Knautia arvensis (Field Scabious) Leontodon hispidus (Rough Hawkbit) Linum catharticum (Fairy Flax, Purging Flax) Lotus corniculatus (Birdsfoot-trefoil) Ononis repens (Restharrow) Ophrys apifera (Bee Orchid) O. insectifera (Fly Orchid) Orchis militaris (Soldier Orchid) O. purpurea (Lady Orchid) O. ustu/ata (Burnt Orchid, Dark-winged Orchid) Origanum vulgara (Marjoram) Pimpinella saxifraga (Burnet Saxifrage) Poterium sanguisorba (Salad Burnet) Primula veris (Cowslip) Prunella vulgaris (Self-heal) Ranunculus bulbosus (Bulbous Buttercup) Sarothamnus scoparius (Broom) Senecio jacobaea (Ragwort) Thymus pulegioides (Larger Wild Thyme) Tussilago farfara (Coltsfoot) Viola hirta (Hairy Violet) Clapham, Tutin and Warburg (1962) and McClintock and Fitter (1956) have been referred to for the Scientific and the common names of vascular plants. Paton (1965) and Warburg (1963) have been referred to for the names of the Bryophytes and James (1965) has been referred to for the names of the Lichens. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I should like to thank Dr. F. Rose, Dr. P. D. Coker, and, in particular, Mr. R. A. Boniface for permitting me to use their records from this area. I should also like to thank Dr. Rose and Miss A. J. Davis for helpful criticism and advice, Mr. P. Moxey for introducing me to the sites, and Mr. P. A. Hardy for help when visiting them. REFERENCES BLACKSTONE, J., 1737. Fasciculus Plantarum circa Harefield sponte nascentium. London. CLAPHAM, A. R., TUTIN, T. G. and WARBURG, E. F., 1962. Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. DALBY, D. H., 1963. The Herbarium Botanist and Conservation. The Conservation of the British Flora, ed. E. Milne-Redhead. London. THE NATURE AND CONSERVATION OF W. MIDDX. CHALK GRASSLAND 19 GROVES, E. W., 1965. Three new Vice-County Records for Middlesex from the Ruislip Local Nature Reserve. The Journal of the Ruislip and District Natural History Society, 14, 45-46. JAMES, P. W., 1965. A New Check List of British Lichens. The Lichenologist. 3, 97-153. LAMBERT, J. M. and DALE, M. B., 1964. The Use of Statistics in Phytosociology. Advances in Ecological Research , 2, ed. J. B. Cragg. London. McCLINTOCK, D. and FITTER, R. S. R., 1956. The Pocket Guide to Wild Flowers. London. MOXEY, P., 1964. The Plant Communities of Ruislip Local Nature Reserve. The Journal of the Ruislip and District Natural History Society, 13, 14-17. - , 1965. The Bryophytes of the Ruislip Local Nature Reserve. The Journal of the Ruislip and District Natural History Society, 14, 33-41. ■ - , 1966. Botanical Report 1965. The Journal of the Ruislip and District Natural History Society , 15, 13-17. PATON, J. A., 1965. Census Catalogue of British Hepatics, 4. British Bryological Society. PICKESS, B. P., 1964. Some notes on the Food of the Rabbit during the Severe Weather of 1963 in Ruislip Local Nature Reserve. The Journal of the Ruislip and District Natural History Society, 13, 10-13. - , 1966. A new Crchid to Middlesex. The Journal of the Ruislip and District Natural History Society , 15, 18. ROSE, F., 1965. Comparaison phytogeographique entre les pelouses crayeuses du Meso- xerobromion des Vallees de La Basse-Seine, de La Somme, de L' Authie, de La Canche, de La Cuesta Boulonnaise du Pas-de-Calais et du Sud-Est de L’Angleterre, Revues Societes Savantes de Haute-N ormandie , Sciences, 37, 105-109. TANSLEY, A. G., 1935. The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology, 16, 284-307. TRIMEN, H. and THISELTON DYER, W. T„ 1869. Flora of Middlesex. London. WARBURG, E. F., 1963. Census Catalogue of British Mosses, 3. British Bryological Society. Reconnaisance Surveys of Vegetation By Herbert A. Sandford BOTANICAL surveys by members of the Society fall under four fairly well-defined headings. Intensive studies of particular species and habitats include the Calystegia (Bindweed) Survey (Bangerter, 1967) and D. H. Kent’s earlier study of the plants growing on walls in Middlesex (Kent, 1960). Larger projects involving many sections of the Society, such as the Bookham Common Survey, represent another major aspect of the Society’s work and in 1965 the Botany Section launched its Plant Mapping Scheme which involves recording the species present in each tetrad within the Society’s area. Studies of these kinds have contributed much to the reputation of the Society, a reputation which extends beyond the metropolis, but there is an unfortunate tendency to overlook the value of the reconnaissance survey of areas of modest size, generally accompanied by species lists and notes of habitat and frequency. The results of this work are seldom published and, unfortunately, not always recorded. Nevertheless, in toto, it represents a very considerable proportion of the work done by members. The importance of this work is great, not only in its own right ( vide Welch, 1961) and as a valuable training in botany, but as an essential preliminary to major studies, revealing problems that merit investigation and providing the context within which the investigation is to proceed. 20 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Before adopting a method for surveying the vegetation we must decide whether it is sufficiently reliable in its use and valid in its results for its purpose. What is the purpose of a reconnaissance survey? There are two main aims. One is to provide a body of information about the distribution of species in an area that might never be selected for more detailed study; the other is to show whether such detailed study is needed. The immediate objective in each case is a formal description of the vegeta¬ tion, species present, their frequency, pattern of distribution and so forth. The species list as such requires no defence while a worthwhile des¬ cription of the pattern of distribution is impossible in any reconnaissance. The life form of the plants (Raunkiaer, 1934) and the structure of the vegetation ( vide inter alia Kiichler, 1949), so necessary to describe in regions being “worked” for the very first time, may within our area be assumed to be “normal” unless special note is made to the contrary, e.g. Carpinus betula (coppiced), common; Fagus sylvatica (seedlings), frequent. I make no apology however for discussing at length the fre¬ quency list, for only a thorough understanding of the idea of plant fre¬ quency and of the difficulties in applying this concept to the description of a vegetation can enable a much needed improvement in its effective use. The reconnaissance survey, relying as it does upon the species list with notes on habitat and relative abundance, has been criticised as not em¬ ploying the elaborate and time-consuming quadrats, traverses and so forth, appropriate to the detailed study. This is not a valid criticism. Reconnaissance surveys are necessary and for their purpose a quick method is more appropriate. The use of frequency symbols has come under particularly heavy criticism and the method needs justification. It must be shown to be both reliable and valid enough for reconnaissance purposes. Frequency symbols have long been in use and will be familiar to members of the Society. A species is recorded as being abundant, common, frequent, occasional or rare, generally by using the letters a , c, f o and r. Sometimes the scale is either expanded or extended by the use of the adjective “very”, v, particularly in the categories va and vr. Use can be made of “very” to qualify all five primary classes of frequency and so yield a ten-point scale but this is undesirable as the more divisions there are on a scale the more difficult it is to distinguish between them (Vernon, 1953). The use of the term “dominant” in frequency lists has been repeatedly condemned (Greig-Smith, 1964) as its meaning in this context is am¬ biguous. Foresters call dominant a tree species that rises above the forest canopy while plant sociologists and others may use the term for the plant species that exerts most influence of some kind over the other species in the community. In the frequency list the word should imply “physio¬ logically dominant” or “most abundant species”; it has been so used instead of “very abundant” but appears often to have overtones of domi¬ nance in its other senses. Not only does this reduce the value of the fre¬ quency scale by introducing another factor, but any dominance in the sense of influence, itself a controversial concept, can be ascertained only after a detailed study and not during reconnaissance. Cases are known, for instance, when the regeneration of a tree species (the apparent domi¬ nant) is prevented by a herb species (the true dominant) “crowding out” the tree seedlings. Many cyclic changes in vegetation appear to involve similar factors (Watt, 1947) and it has been suggested that in frequency lists the term “dominant (ecol.)” be used to avoid ambiguity (Richards et al., 1940). RECONNAISANCE SURVEYS OF VEGETATION 21 The additional term “local'’ is similarly ambiguous, being used to mean very rare, relatively rare and discontinuous in distribution or simply discontinuous whatever the frequency. Thus the word introduces the idea of pattern of distribution and logically cannot be part of the frequency scale. It would seem preferable to use primarily the symbols va, a, c, f o, r and vr, reserving the letters d (dominant) and / (local) for additional information, the former to be employed only when there is some evidence of influence and the latter when there is marked discontinuity for whatever reason. It is generally accepted that the reliability of the frequency scale is very low, i.e. not only do two recorders often obtain different results but the same recorder might get a different result when he repeats his observations. This was investigated by Hope-Simpson who found that two independent judges disagreed over the abundance of a species in 56% of their assess¬ ments (Hope-Simpson, 1940). There is evidence however that, despite wide divergencies of opinion over particular species, the average dis¬ agreement can be very small (Greig-Smith, 1964) and most experienced botanists would seem to have a fairly good idea as to what is meant by common, rare, abundant and so on. Some disagreements are due to random errors. These are errors not known to be “biased” in any way, plants being noticed or passed over for reasons that will not affect the results in any determinable direction. Some plants will not be present in the observer’s field of view and the observer himself blinks at intervals when scanning the vegetation and appears to observe only when his eye comes to rest. Truly random errors cancel out one another and may be tolerated in the frequency list for the commoner plants; rarities however will be under-recorded and this will seriously affect the compilation of the species list. Non-random errors are often personal, observers not recording or even not noticing plants belonging to groups with which they are un¬ familiar. Quite a number of botanists, for instance, confess to being “weak” on grasses and sedges, and a number of groups, such as the eye- brights and the brambles, need a specialist for their identification. Tired recorders tend to ignore inconspicuous and infrequent plants while some species tend to be under-recorded because of a superficial resemblance to another but commoner one, the black currant ( Ribes nigrum L.) being taken for the red currant ( Ribes sylvestre (Lam.) Mert. & Koch) for instance. Other non-random errors depend upon the plants themselves, such as the ready apparence of mistletoe in winter and the inconspicuous¬ ness of the wavy hair-grass ( Deschampsia flexuosa (L.) Trin.) when not in flower. It is clearly necessary to mention the season of observation and highly desirable to make at least one subsequent visit. Despite the unreliability of the frequency scale it is certainly the best we have at our disposal for reconnaissance work and its long use suggests that it has proved at least sufficiently reliable for its purpose. The method has been attacked on other grounds however. It has been criticised as being invalid, that is, for not doing what is expected of it — for not measuring frequency. Hope-Simpson and others have shown that frequency estimates take as much if not more account of conspicuousness, cover, density and pattern as of frequency itself. This criticism is based essentially upon confused nomenclature. The word “frequency” is being used in two quite different ways. In the narrow or statistical sense frequency is the 22 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 chance of finding a particular plant in a unit sample area, such as a quadrat, selected at random. This is best referred to as a frequency percentage, the percentage of such quadrats in which the plant would be found, and there are appropriate techniques for assessing this quanti¬ tatively. Now the numerical calculation of frequency percentages was developed after the subjective assessment of frequencies in its wider meaning which embraces conspicuousness, density and so forth. Indeed, it was the failure to express numerically this complex concept that led to quantitative methods of describing separately its several included elements. We could therefore argue that the prior and therefore the true meaning of “frequency” is that of the term in its original wider sense. It is no argu¬ ment to say that the frequency estimate sensu lato cannot be valid because it does not measure frequency sensu stricto. On the contrary, we can prove the validity of the method all too easily — the word “frequency” grew up describing what was measured by the method and so the method must necessarily measure frequency ! Paradoxically, this weakness in the concept of frequency, that it con¬ tains a number of more or less independent elements, is also its strength and gives it its value in reconnaissance surveys. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts; a vegetation is not just a number of plant species with particular densities, covers, frequencies sensu stricto and patterns of distribution, each of which can be separately assessed. In reality one of these four elements will generally predominate and only the subjective concept of frequency, frequency sensu lato, appears able to give expression to this pre-eminence and thus to describe the character of the vegetation as a whole. It has come increasingly to be realised that one of a group of elements may override the others, exerting a kind of halo effect that must necessarily be incorporated into any description. Personality testing affords some excellent examples of this problem and how it may be overcome (Vernon, 1953), This does not imply an organistic view of a plant community but merely recognises that some weighting should be given to the several factors involved and that the particular weighting will depend upon the species being assessed in one place at one time. Numerous attempts have been made to construct scales that allow for several of the elements involved in the description of a vegetation, notably those of Braun-Blanquet (Braun-Blanquet, 1964) and his followers. The most accessible account is to be found in the work of Poore (Poore, 1955- 56). Poore was very critical of the theoretical basis of the Braun-Blanquet system because it was built around certain concepts that appeared to imply a community of plants to be an organised entity, concepts which however seem no longer to be held with these implications by its current practitioners (Moore, 1962). In any case it remains an extremely useful tool for the ecologist (Poore, 1955-56) but one which may be used profit¬ ably only by the very experienced (Webb, 1954). Thus it seems that the concept of frequency is valid and has sufficient reliability for reconnaissance work. Its continued use appears to be justified but it might be well to refer to it as frequency (ecol.) to distinguish it from frequency (stat.), the frequency percentage. Despite this reassurance we should endeavour to improve the reliability of assessments of frequency (ecol.). A mere awareness of the difficulties should help in achieving this but a conscious endeavour to do so is also RECONN AISANCE SURVEYS OF VEGETATION 23 necessary. The random errors to which the observer is subjected prob¬ ably cannot be much reduced, though it might help if he proceeded very slowly at first until he “gets his eye in” and also near the end of the survey when he may be feeling tired. Not all plants present in an area will necessarily be growing on the route taken by the recorder and such random errors due to the distribu¬ tion of plants cannot be avoided. On the other hand, the observer can introduce considerable bias according to the path he takes. Any recon¬ naissance survey may be considered as a type of traverse even if it occasion¬ ally crosses itself or if different portions of it overlap. As the eye is repeatedly falling upon different plants along the “traverse” one could consider the latter as being continuously sampled, though each sample will contain only a few plants. Any traverse has a certain width and if the area to be covered by the survey is small enough it may be possible to cover the whole area by contiguous “traverses”. To traverse an area in a wandering manner is likely to leave some parts unscanned and to duplicate others as there is a distinct tendency to move from one conspicuous or interesting feature to another. This allows considerable bias to enter into the assessment of frequencies. This bias can be avoided by patrolling the area in the manner in which a field is ploughed, provided that there are sufficient landmarks to make this possible. Reconnaissance surveys however do not generally attempt to cover the whole ground but rely upon making a sample traverse. There is a very strong tendency, often deliberate, to follow ridges, rides in woods, paths across meadows, watercourses and so forth. Generally this is done for ease of progress but it favours the recording of certain species at the expense of others. This can be avoided by making a series of parallel traverses at a convenient distance apart. An interval of 100 metres is useful as then the traverses can be worked out from the O.S. 2\ ins. map before starting, using the “eastings” and “northings” already printed on it. A compass will generally be necessary in the field; the fact that grid north and magnetic north do not coincide would be of no consequence in small areas as one would only be making a series of parallel traverses set at a small angle to the ones planned on the map. This method of selecting a traverse is often called random though in fact it is not : it is difficult how¬ ever to conceive of any way in which the results could be influenced by having selected lines dependent upon the earth’s magnetic field. Purists may make the necessary compass adjustments and follow grid lines selected by random numbers! A more difficult question concerns the deliberate choice of a traverse that will take the observer into each habitat appearing different on the map or in the field, with a relatively brief period of observation in each that is not in proportion to its area. This of course could be legitimate if the purpose is to establish the presence of a particular species or to draw up a species list. It is however meaningless to attach frequency estimates to the list; it becomes a proper method in reconnaissance survey only if separate frequency estimates are made for each portion of the total area thus sampled, if these samples are long enough and if no attempt is made to assess the overall frequency. An arbitrary decision may be made such as that if in the last quarter of the traverse so far made in a particular habitat no new species have been found then the traverse will not be prolonged. 24 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 In all cases it is important not only to state in which month the work was carried out but also the type of traverse and any personal bias known to the recorder. For example: “5 sq. mis. May. Samples: Woodland; f of area, traverse 900 yds. Meadow; \ of area, traverse 300 yds. Traverses along grid northings. Sedges not recorded”. It is also helpful for observers to spend some time working together in a variety of habitats in order to develop a standard use of words like “common” and “rare”. The frequency scale has had a long history in reconnaissance surveys of the vegetation. The built-in validity of the method should ensure its continued use but a conscious effort is needed to improve its reliability and in interpreting its results. It is hoped that this article will help to bring about these improvements, to encourage more members to record what they find on their weekend walks and to persuade them of the personal satisfaction and great value in a well-planned excursion. REFERENCES BANGERTER, E. B., 1967. A survey of Calystegia in the London Area. Lond. Nat., 46, 15-23. BRAUN-BLANQUET, J., 1964. Pflanzensoziologie, 3rd edn., Vienna and London. GREIG-SMITH, P., 1964. Quantitative Plant Ecology, 2nd edn., London. HOPE-SIMPSON, J. F., 1940. On the errors in the ordinary use of subjective frequency estima¬ tions in grassland. J. Ecol., 28, 193-209. KENT, D. H., 1960. Flora of Middlesex walls. Lond. Nat., 40, 29-43. KUCHLER, A. W., 1949. A physiognomic classification of vegetation. Annals of the Associa¬ tion of American Geographers, 39, 201-210. MOORE, J. J., 1962. The Braun-Blanquet system: a reassessment. J. Ecol., 50, 761-769. POORE, M. E. D., 1955-6. The use of phytosociological methods in ecological investigations. J. Ecol.. 43, 226-244; 245-269; 606-651: 44, 28-50. RAUNKIAER, C., 1934. The Life Forms of Plants and Statistical Plant Geography. Oxford. RICHARDS, P. W., TANSLEY, A. G. and WATT, A. S., 1940. The recording of structure, life form and flora of tropical forest communities as a basis for their classification. J. Ecol., 28, 224-239. VERNON, P. E., 1953. Personality Tests and Assessments. London. WATT, A. S., 1947. Pattern and process in the plant community. J. Ecol., 35, 1-22. WEBB, D. A., 1954. Is the classification of plant communities either possible or desirable? Bot. Tidsskr., 51, 362-370. WELCH, B., 1961. Some plants of Ham Common, Surrey, 1941-61. Lond. Nat., 41, 23-27. MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 25 Mammals in the London Area, 1966 By Ian R. Beames THE information accumulating in the Society’s files about the mammals to be found in the London Area increases from year to year. As more precise, detailed information is received the picture of the distribution and habits of mammals living in and around the rapidly expanding metropolis becomes a little clearer. In the London Area there is an unrivalled opportunity to study both the immediate short-term and the long-term effects of urbanisation. It is to be sincerely hoped that this opportunity will be grasped firmly in the future. Detailed records in reasonable quantity come from only few observers: it would be very encouraging to see several more people making mammals their principal subject. It is also hoped that every member who sees a British wild mammal in the London Area will send in the details to the Recorder. There is this year, an enormous bias of records from Surrey and a deplorable lack of them from Essex: indeed there appears to be only one person in Essex regularly submitting records. By far the most important information in the studies of mammals concern the common species: it is frequently not realised how little is really known about even the commonest animals. Some species are easy to record, either by their traces (molehills, squirrel dreys, rabbit droppings, etc.) or by sight of the animals them¬ selves. Some are also fairly common in the London Area : these are the Hedgehog, Mole, Fox, Hare, Rabbit and Grey Squirrel. The Rabbit illustrates our lack of information on these common animals. Rabbits reached an enormous peak in numbers some years ago. With the onset of myxomatosis, they were almost exterminated in much of Britain, but for some years now have been increasing in numbers. Past records refer to the animal as common, but no actual figures are given. Fifty in a five mile walk or fifty in a hundred yards may be described as common by different people. Despite the magnificent opportunity for some worthwhile research, which in this instance is easily undertaken by amateurs, the London Natural History Society is quite unable to give any precise information about the distribution and numbers of the Rabbit, either before or after myxomatosis. Many observers ignore the mundane Rabbit as not worth recording, and yet it is an animal of vast economic importance. This is thus an appeal for all records of all the common mammals and, in particular, those of the Rabbit. Details of numbers seen and of warren location are needed. Rabbit droppings are also an indication of the presence of the animal and should be recorded where no animals are seen. Precise information is required to ensure accurate mapping of dis¬ tribution. At least four-figure grid references or sufficient descriptive information should be given so that the Recorder may obtain a grid- reference. In the built-up area the name of the road should be given if a grid-reference is unobtainable. 26 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Small mammals may be recorded in several ways, all varying in efficiency. Bearing in mind that most mammals are mainly nocturnal, these methods are (a) see the animal alive, ( b ) find it dead, (c) trap in Longworth traps, or break-back traps, (d) identify remains in owl pellets and ( e ) remains from discarded bottles (Morris and Harper, 1965). Despite some duplication of localities in the systematic lists which follow, all records of small mammals are given, on this occasion, to demonstrate the relative efficiency of the various methods. This present paper follows the standard procedure adopted in past, issues of the London Naturalist; the letters B, E, H, K, M and S stand for the counties of Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Middle¬ sex and Surrey. Other abbreviations used are G.C. — Golf Course, G.P. — Gravel Pit, L.N.R. — Local Nature Reserve, M.O. — many observers, R. — River, Res.— Reservoir and S.F. — Sewage Farm. The check list numbers and scientific names are from Corbet (1964). I should like to thank all those people who sent in records. My thanks go, in particular, to those who made concentrated searches for mammals and sent in detailed notes of these. My thanks go to John Burton, my predecessor as Recorder, whose attempts to persuade people to concentrate on mammals are now bearing fruit. Pat Morris, who is a frequent companion in my own field work, and who is individually responsible for over 35% of all the records, has my sincere thanks for his help, advice and scathing criticism of anything which is not scientifically accurate. The following is a full list of contributors. My apologies go to anyone inadvertently omitted. LIST OF OBSERVERS E. F. Anderson, E. B. Bangerter, I. R. Beames, Mrs. L. A. Beames> Dr. G. Beven, A. F. Blakeley, Miss E. P. Brown, J. T. Burrell, J. A. Burton, J. Cooper, Mrs. P. Crawford, Maureen L. Currie, Miss R. Davis, R. Dixon, P. A. Dukes, P. J. Edwards, H. Evans, M. Evans, T. G. Ferguson A. V. Fisher, B. H. Fletcher, E. M. Forsyth, Mrs. P. A. Freshwater, Mrs. M. Frost, A. J. Gaston, K. A. J. Gold, Mrs. P. A. Goldsmith, M. Green, V. Green, G. Grimsey, G. H. Gush, R. Hanks, Miss J. E. Hornby, J. Houston, A. M. Hutson, K. H. Hyatt, P. C. Jerrard, I. G. Johnson, Miss M. Kennedy, R. M. Kettle, Dr. W. Killpack, H. King, P. Kinnear, G. Kinns, Dr. L. P. E. Laurent, J. Levy, Lewisham N.H.S., D. F. Matheson, A. Mellenfield, E. Milne-Redhead, D. J. Montier, P. A. Morris, P. A. Moxey (PAMy.), A. F. Mussellwhite, Mrs. B, S. Mussellwhite, P. Newman, W. Newman, M. Oldham, J. Quinlan, A. Paine, Mrs. J. Parr, J. F. Perrin, F. C. Reeves, Ruislip & District N.H.S., J. Sankey, D. L. Sealy, A. C. Slater, T. R. Smeeton, Miss K. E. Springett, Dr. S. D. G. Stephens, W. G. Teagle, J. Tinker, E. Venis, R. B. Warren, D. Washington, R. V. White, J. P. Widgery, R. P. Widgery, P. J. Wilson, Dr. D. W. Yalden. SYSTEMATIC LIST 1966 INSECTIVORA 1 . Hedgehog. Erinaceus europaeus L. The Hedgehog must rank as one of the most familiar of the common British mammals. One does not have to be an expert mammalogist to MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 27 find Hedgehogs in London. It seems that in the London Area, at least, the optimum habitat, for Hedgehogs, is Suburbia (Morris 1966). By far the largest number of records come from very near human habitation. In gardens and parks throughout the London Area, compost heaps, sheds and wood piles provide excellent places for nests and hibernation; while the gardens themselves are good feeding grounds. Many people put out bread and milk for their semi-tame Hedgehogs. Some who put meat scraps and table scraps (a better) diet on the lawn find their Hedgehogs return daily throughout the summer. There are, again, very few records from Essex, and not very many from Hertfordshire. There are several records of Hedgehogs found dead on the road during the winter months. The three months from January to March provided several records of active Hedgehogs, presumably looking urgently for food before hibernating again. A very large number of records in the last week in April and the first two weeks in May seem to indicate the general awakening period for most London hedgehogs. At the other end of the year there were 26 records in November and nine in December. At Esher, Dr. G. Beven saw hedgehogs throughout the season, in his garden. The first w'as noted on April'22 and the last on November7. Hedgehogs usually emerge quite late in the evening in suburban gardens. By far the best way of finding one is to wait, silently, in the garden and listen for the animals’ noisy progress through the flower beds and hedges. Hedgehogs are the most frequent animal found run over on London’s roads. This high mortality rate is caused by their habit of curling up in the road when startled. 199 were reported killed on the area’s roads during the year. A hedgehog seen in a public house beer garden at Bedfont on May 15, presumably knew where to get food and drink, as did the one seen late one evening in Hampton, swimming in a goldfish pond, carrying a large goldfish in its mouth. An animal found freshly dead on the road, on July 19, half-a-mile inside Richmond Park north of Kingston Gate is one of the first records from there for some years. Hedgehogs were reported from the following localities: B Datchet (pam). Iver (ap). E Great Warley and Harold Wood (rbw). H Barnet (pam), Brookmans Park (jp, rpw, Colney Heath (mk), East Barnet (epb), Northaw (mk), Potters Bar (jp, rpw), Whetstone (am per gb). K Beckenham, Blackheath, Brockley, Bromley, Catford, Crofton Park, Dartford, Eltham, Greenwich, Hayes, Hither Green, Kidbrooke, Lee, Lewisham, New Cross, Sevenoaks, Sidcup, Sydenham, Welling, West Wickham (m.o.). M Bedfont, Bushy Park, Chiswick, Enfield, Feltham, Fulham, Hamp¬ stead, Harefield, Harrow, Harrow Weald, Hayes, Holland Park, Hounslow, Isleworth, Kempton Park, Laleham, Neasden, Pinner, Queen Mary Reservoir, Regents Park, Ruislip, Shepperton, Staines, Stanmore, Upper Halliford (m.o.). S Banstead, Battersea, Bookham, Bookham Common, Bletchingley, Camberwell, Carshalton, Caterham, Chertsey, Chessington, Claygate, 28 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Croydon, Dulwich, Epsom, Esher, Ewell Village, Godstone, Hampton, Herne Hill, Hersham, Hinchley Wood, Kew Gardens, Kingston, Kingswood, Leatherhead, Merstham, Mitcham, Molesey, Mortlake, Motspur Park, New Malden, Norbury, Norwood, Oxshott, Petersham, Pixham, Purley, Redhill, Richmond, Richmond Park, St. Helier, Staines, Stoneleigh, Streatham, Surbiton, Thorpe, Tolworth, Tooting, Tulse Hill, Wallington, Walton, West Ewell, Weybridge, Wimbledon (m.o.). 2. Mole. Talpa europaea L. Moles themselves are rarely recorded, being very much subterranean animals. Their presence in an area is usually betrayed by the appearance of fresh mole-hills: these little heaps of fresh earth may be found in many types of habitat. Although they are most noticeable on a smooth expanse of grass, they may be found in enormous numbers in suitable places in woodland. Animals were found dead on the surface in several places. 785 fresh hills in one field in Osterley Park, Middlesex, on February 12 and 1,500 in a small part of Staines Moor, Middlesex, were both counted by PJE. Four “fortresses” — the mole breeding nest — were dug out at Esher, Surrey, on April 18. Two of these contained litters of three young each. From the records there appears to have been only one mole in Essex in 1966 and it lived in Weald Park! It is to be assumed that there are more and records would be of much value. Moles were reported in 1966 from the following localities: B Rush Green (igj). E Weald Park (rbw). H Croxley Moor, Leggatts Wood, London Colney, Moor Park, North Mimms, Otterspool and Water Hill (m.o.). K Badgers Mount, Brasted Chart, Chevening, Eynsford, Keston, Lulling- stone Park, Oxted Green, St. Pauls Cray, Shoreham, Sundridge Park, West Wickham (m.o.). M Stated as very common in the river valleys between Uxbridge and Rickmansworth. Full details (i.e. each 1 km. grid square occupied) would be welcome for all river valleys in the London Area. Bayhurst Wood, Bentley Priory, Breakspear House, Copse Wood Ruislip, East Bedfont, Harefield, Hilly Fields Park Enfield, Maple Lodge, Northaw, Northolt, Old Park Wood, Osterley Park, Queen Mary Res., Shepperton, Staines Moor, Whitewebbs Park (m.o.). S Addington, Addlestone, Ashtead, Ashtead Park, Banstead, Bookham Common, Buckland, Carshalton, Caterham, Chelsham, Chertsey, Cobham, Coulsdon, Downside, Egham, Epsom Common, Esher, Esher Common, Farleigh, Godstone, Headley, Hersham, Mickleham, Nutfield, Oxshott, Pebblecombe, Princes Coverts, Selsdon, Silvermere, Sixty Acre Wood Chessington, Tilburstow Hill, Titsey, Walton Res., West Humble, Weybridge, Worms Heath (m.o.). 3. Common Shrew. Sorex araneus L. B, E & H — No records. K Badgers Mount, one lying dead on a path May 14 (pk). Beckenham Place Park, one found dead in a bottle on May 25 (pk). Sundridge MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 29 Park, two dead in bottles Feb. 20 (pk). Nr. West Wickham, 11 found dead in bottles Feb. 27 (pk). M Harefield Grove, one seen on Sept. 17 (igj). Harlington, one brought in by a cat July 19 (ap). N. Finchley, one brought in by a cat Sept. 27 (jtb). S Once again this county has been given extensive coverage. Animals seen alive: one running about in a field at Oxshott on Apr. 10 (hk). Three under metal sheets at Weybridge on Sept. 22 (ghg). Animals found dead: Bookham Common, one on June 12 (gb). Caterham, one on June 11 (pjw). Oxshott, 1 dead on the road Sept. 27 (mk). Pebblecombe, one on June 19 (irb, lab). Trapped in Longworth traps: Bookham Common, four in Aug. (kajg). Oxshott, two on Mar. 31, three on May 11, and one on Aug. 20 (hk). Princes Coverts, one on May 30, 5 on Sept. 24(irb, lab). From Owl Pellets: Caterham, 17 on June 4 (pk). Holmethorpe, two on Sept. 24 and one on Oct. 22 (gb, dw). Oxshott, one on May 16 (hk). Richmond Park, five on Jan. 24 (mg). Found dead in bottles: Chelsham, five on Feb. 26 (pk). Chessington, five on Jan. 9 (irb, lab). Claygate, one on Mar 18 (hk). Cobham, six in Jan. and Mar. (irb, hk, pam). Egham, five in Feb. and Mar. (pam). Esher, one on Jan. 23 (pam). Fairmile Common, ten on Apr. 3 (hk). Godstone, two on Jan. 1 (irb, pam). Hersham, two on Sept. 8 (pam). Leatherhead, three on Apr. 12 (hk). Mickleham, one on July 23 (irb, lab). Nutfield, one on Nov. 13 (irb, lab, pam). Oxshott, total of ten on several dates (irb, hk, pam). Richmond Park, one on Apr. 11 and June 14 (pam). Surbiton, four on Jan. 7 (pam). Thorpe, one on Mar. 16 and May 30 (ghg, pam). 4. Pygmy Shrew. Sorex minatus L. B, H, K & M — No records. E Brentwood, one found dead on July 15 (rbw). South Weald, one found dead on Sept. 17 (rbw). S Esher Common, one caught by hand on July 10 (hk). Chaldon, one found dead on a path Apr. 9 (pk). St. George's Hill, Weybridge, one caught in a Longworth trap in a garden rockery on Sept. 10 (ghg). From Owl Pellets: Caterham, one on June 4 (pk). Holmethorpe, one on Sept. 24 (gb, dw). Richmond Park, one on Jan. 24 (mg) and May 1 (hk). Found dead in bottles: Egham, one on Mar. 16 (pam). Mickleham, one on July 19 (irb). Oxshott, one on Feb. 13 (irb). 5. Water Shrew. Neomys fodiens (Schreber). K Near West Wickham, one dead in a bottle on Feb. 27 (pk). S Princes Coverts, one caught in a Longworth trap on May 15 (irb, lab). From Owl Pellets: Caterham, two on June 4 (pk). Holmethorpe, one on Aug. 6 (gb, dw). Thorpe, one dead in a bottle on Mar. 16 (pam). 30 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 CHIROPTERA A paper on the Bats of the London Area appears elsewhere in this issue. For the sake of completeness of the Mammal Report, records for 1966 are also included here. 11. Whiskered Bat. Myotis mystacinus. (Kuhl). S Godstone, found hibernating as follows: two on Jan. 1, seven on Mar. 13, six on Dec. 10 (irb, lab, pam, dwy). 12. Natterer's Bat. Myotis nattereri (Kuhl). S Godstone, two hibernating on Jan. 1 (irb, pam, dwy). 14. Daubenton's Bat. Myotis daubentoni (Kuhl). S Godstone, five hibernating on Jan. 1 and four on Mar. 13 (irb, lab, pam, dwy). 16. Serotine. Eptesicus serotinus (Schreber). S Hersham, a colony of 15 or 16 in a loft of an occupied house during the summer (irb, pam). 19. Pipistrelle. PipistreHus pipistrelhis (Schreber). S Esher, caught in mist nets as follows: one on June 17, June 29 and July 10, three on June 30 (hk, pam). 21. Long-Eared Bat. Plecotus auritus (L.) S Godstone, three hibernating on Jan. 1 and one on Dec. 10 (irb, lab, pam, dwy). CARNIVORA 24. Fox. Valpes vulpes (L.) Following the publication in 1966 of the survey of the Fox in the London Area (Teagle 1967), it is to be hoped that London Natural History Society members and anyone else interested in the London Area will be stimulated to send details of every fox they see to the Mammal Recorder. In this way it should be possible a few years from now to make a useful comparison with the situation as it is known to-day. Apart from sight records of the animals themselves, foxes may be traced fairly easily. The earth, a hole often rather bigger than a large rabbit hole, is found usually in a hedge or wood, bank, etc. More unusual sites are quite frequent in the London Area, as the fox adapts itself well to suburbia. If the earth has been recently occupied remains of the fox’s meals are strewn about. Feathers and bones are most often found. The pungent scent of a fox, once recognised, is quite unmistake- able. It is invariably present at an occupied earth. Fox hairs, which are brown and white, often with black tips, may be found in the diggings thrown out of the earth. Foxes were recorded from the following localities: B No records. E Harold Wood (rbw). Woodford Green (bhf). H Potters Bar Area. Over 40 sightings, in several different places, of up to five including cubs (jrw, rpw). Whetstone, one on Oct. 2 (am per gb). MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 31 K Beckenham Place Park, Bellingham, Bexley, Blackheath, Bromley, Chislehurst, Danson Park, Dartford Heath, Eden Park, Elmers End Sewage Farm, Eltham Park, Eynsford, Forest Hill, Lee, New Eltham, Oxleas Wood, Shooters Hill, Welling, West Wickham, Woolwich (m.o.). M Bayhurst Wood, Bedfont, Bush Hill Park, Bushy Park, Cranford, Hampstead, Harrow, Osterley Park, Rickmansworth, Ruislip, Ruislip Local Nature Reserve, Wembley Park (m.o.). S Bookham Common, Chessington, Dulwich, Esher, Godstone, Kenley, Mickleham, Oxshott, Princes Coverts, Sutton, Thorpe, Wallington, Walton, Wimbledon, Wimbledon Common (m.o.). 27. Stoat. Mustelci enninea L. K Southend Pond, one seen on Oct. 26 (jh). S Buckland, two dead on a gamekeeper's gibbet in Dec. (ajg). Headley Heath, one on Apr. 12 (pjw). 28. Weasel. Mustelci nivalis L. H Hawkshead, near Brookman's Park, singles seen on Jan. 10, Mar. 7, Apr. 30, May 17 (jpw, rpw). West Hyde, one crossing on road on Feb. 15 (igj). K Eynsford, The Birches, one seen in June (pk). Ruxley G.P., one on Apr. 23. Another on Apr. 30 was seen to climb out of a Blackbird's nest which contained three broken eggs (djm). M Bedfont, May 14, one dead on Stanwell Road (pje). Heathrow, one crossing the Airport perimeter road on Aug. 4 (ap). Poor's Field Ruislipf one watched for several minutes on July 10 (afb). S Bookham Common, one on Aug. 7 (emf). Buckland, six dead on a gibbet in Dec. (ajg). Coulsdon, one seen in a garden on Oct. 27 (pjw). Epsom Common, one found dead on B280 on May 30 (irb, lab). Petersham Common, one seen (em-r). Thorpe, singles at the same spot on Aug. 21 and Sept. 10 (ghg). 31. Badger. Meles meles ( L.) Badgers are almost invariably fully nocturnal in the London Area, usually owing to disturbance. They are probably more common than most people would think. Badgers, quite unmistakable when seen, are, like the Fox, quite easy to find by their traces. Setts are most common in sandy soil and chalk downland: active setts are usually obvious by the out-pourings of sand or chalk from the entraces. These are often set into a slope. There is no smell in comparison with an active fox earth. Badger hairs may be found in the earth outside the holes. These hairs are quite coarse and usually alternately coloured black and white along the length of the hair. A paper will shortly be published on the result of the Society's enquiry into the distribution of the Badger in the London Area. Even now, in the London Area Badgers are still molested and in view of the presence of active Badger digging teams on the outskirts of the area it is not proposed to publish any details of occupied setts. Much information on the Badger and its distribution is still needed by the Society, especially for the Essex sector of the area. 32 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 ARTIODACTYLA There are three species of deer at present living wild in the London Area. These are the Fallow, Roe and Muntjac. Deer Spp. S Tracks of unidentified deer have been found on several occasions in mud in Princes Coverts and 60-Acre Wood. Large tracks seen are presumed to have been made by some Red Deer which escaped from Chessington Zoo recently. The smaller tracks seen were believed to be those of Fallow Deer. Some of these have escaped from Chessington Zoo in the past and are probably established in very small numbers in the area. 45. Roe Deer. Capreolus ccipreolus (L.) The Roe appears to be spreading slowly into the southern counties of the area (Burton 1966). There are now two or three definite records on the eastern and northern side of the R. Mole. Observers on the Surrey North Downs and Com¬ mons in particular are asked to report all traces of Roe Deer at once to the Mammal Recorder who lives in the area and will gladly visit any locality discovered. S Barrow Green, one seen in Dec. (ajg). 47. Muntjac. Muntiacus sp. Two species of this small deer were introduced into Britain. One is now believed extinct but records are still probably best allocated simply to the genus. The Muntjac is spreading quite rapidly in suitable areas of Britain. It has recently been recorded in several woodland areas around Potters Bar, Herts. It may be reasoned that it is quite probably present in some woodland areas east of the R. Colne and in the Enfield area. Observers in this area are asked to keep a special watch for this attractive little deer as it is showing definite signs of spreading into the North and West suburbs. H 16 dated sightings in woods around Potters Bar (jpw, rpw.) S Barnes, Putney and Castlenau, one reported from these localities was finally caught on Jan. 6 on Barnes Common. It was kept at Richmond Park until its release elsewhere (pam, dwy). LAGOMORPHA 53. Hare. Lepus capensis L. (L. europaeus Pallas). Hares are typically animals of open grassland and most of the records tend to come from the more rural outskirts of the area. More records would be welcome. E Childerditch, one on May 14 (rbw). H Leggetts Park, two at 05.00 hours on May 14 (jpw, rpw). Northaw, one crossing the road July 9 (mek). West Hyde, one on Feb. 19 (igj). K Brasted, one on Apr. 3. Clement St. two in May. Horton Kirby, eight, seven together fighting in a field, Apr. 1 1 (rvw). M Little Britain Lake, one on Apr. 10 (AP). London Airport, up to 40 regularly (ap, he). Northolt Airfield, two on June 30 (igj). MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 33 S Addington, two on May 1 (trs). Caterham, one dead on the road June 1 1 (trs). Egham, one dead on the road Sept. 29 (pam). Rich¬ mond Park, the Gamekeeper reported to pam that Hares were still present but scarcer than before. Thorpe, three on Sept. 3 (ghg). 55. Rabbit. Oryctolagus cuniculus (L.) There is an appeal for records of this species, along with other com¬ mon species, in the general introduction at the beginning of this report. Rabbits were recorded from: B Colnbrook (pam), Datchet (pam), and Denham (igj). E Brook Street (rbw), Epping and Tilbury (af, bsm). H Hadley Woods (jp, rpw), Leggatts Park (jp, rpw), Little Berkhamsted (mk), London Colney (wgt), Maple Cross (igj), Northaw Woods (jp, rpw), North Mimms Park (mk), St. Albans (wgt), Wells Y/oods (jp, rpw). K Beckenham Place Park, Bromley, Elmstead Woods, Layham’s Farm, Sundridge, Sundridge Park G.C. (pk), St. Paul’s Cray (vg). M Bayhurst Wood, Bedfont, Bentley Priory, Bushy Park, Cranford Park, Harefield, Harefield Place, Harlington, Hayes End, Little Britain Lake, London Airport, Longford, Old Park Wood, Perry Oaks S.F., Queen Mary Reservoir, Ruislip, Southall G.C., Staines, Staines Moor, v' Trent Park, Wraysbury (m.o.). S Ashtead Park, Betchworth, Bookham Common, Caterham, Chelsham, Cobham, Egham, Esher, Ewell, Fairmile Common, Farleigh, God- stone, Headley, Island Barn Reservoir, Kempton Park Reservoir, Kew Gardens, Leatherhead, Mickleham, Oxshott, Oxted, Pebble- combe, Princes Coverts, Richmond Park, Selsdon Woods, Thorpe, Thorpe G.P., Tilburstow Hill, Tolworth, Wimbledon Common (m.o.). RODENTIA 57. Grey Squirrel. Sciurus carolinensis Gmelin Every record of Grey Squirrel is required. It is a frequent inhabitant of small parks, clumps of trees, gardens, woods and hedgerows. There must be thousands of localities in the London Area which might hold a squirrel or two. In the suburban parks they are often incredibly tame, climbing onto people’s laps to be fed. A litter was raised in a house roof in New Malden, Surrey; and one in East Finchley, Middx., one was to be heard frequently at 2.00 a.m. scam¬ pering round the loft of the observer’s house. Squirrels appear to have been entering houses for food in the Esher area for some time. It is apparently not unusual to find squirrels squat¬ ting in the kitchens, waiting for food, in this area. No doubt such habits occur elsewhere. The Recorder would be interested in any notes on the adaptability of squirrels to suburban life. Squirrels are frequent road casualties. 91 were recorded in this way in 1966. B No records. E Harold Wood, Holden’s Wood, Thorndon Park, Warley, and Weald Park (rpw). H London Colney (wg-t), Potters Bar (mk), St. Albans (pam, wgt), Whetstone (am per gbj). 34 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 K Beckenham, Biggin Hill, Blackheath, Bromley, Chislehurst, Eden Park, Elmers End, Elmstead Woods, Greenwich Park, Keston, Kidbrooke, Ladywell, Layham’s Farm, Lee, Lullingstone Park, Mayo Park, Mottingham, Orpington, Sidcup, Southill Park, Sundridge, Sundridge Park, Sydenham, Westerham (m.o.). M Bayhurst Wood, Broomfield Park, Bush Hill Park, Bushey Park, Camden, Ealing, Eastcote, East Finchley, Enfield, Enfield Chase, Gladstone Park, Hampstead, Harefield Place, Harrow Weald, Hatch End, Hayes, Hendon G.C., Laleham, Lavender Hill, Moor Park, North Harrow, Northolt, Old Redding, Osterley Park, Pinner Park, Regents Park, Ruislip, Ruislip Park and Lido, Stanmore Common, Turner’s Wood, West Ruislip G.C., Winchmore Hill, World’s End G.C. (m.o.). S Addington, Arbrook Common, Ashburton Park, Ashtead, Ashtead Park, Banstead, Barnes Common, Beddington Park, Bookham, Boxhill, Brixton, Brockwell Park, Burgh Heath, Carshalton, Chaldon, Chertsey, Chessington, Chipstead Woods, Cobham, Coulsdon, Dulwich, Egham, Epsom, Epsom Common, Ewell Village, Ewell Court Park, Esher Common, Fairmile Common, Farthing Downs, Godstone, Grange Park, Hersham, Hinchley Wood, Kew Gardens, Kingston, Langley Bottom, Leatherhead, Limpsfield, Littleheath. Woods, Malden, May’s Green, Motspur Park, Oxshott, Princes Coverts, Putney, Petersham, Redhill, Richmond Park, Roehampton, Selsdon Woods, Stoneleigh, Surbiton, Sutton, Thames Ditton, Thorpe, Tolworth, Tulse Hill, West Ewell, Wey bridge, Whyteleaf, Wimbledon, Wimbledon Common, Worcester Park (m.o.). 61. Harvest Mouse. Micro mys minutus (Pallas) Since the publication of The Harvest Mouse in the London Area (Teagle 1964), there has been an increase in the localities from which this animal has been recorded. This is probably because more people are becoming aware of the localities at which it might be found. K West Wickham, three found dead in bottles on Feb. 27 (pk). S Esher, nests found in long grass on three dates (hk, pam). Oxshott, one found dead in a bottle, Jan. 30 (irb, lab, pam). Thorpe, one caught Sept. 18 (ghg). 62. Wood Mouse (Long-Tailed Field Mouse) Apodemus sylvaticus (L.) B Colnbrook, one caught by hand, May 24 (pam). M Bedfont, singles found dead on road on Nov. 8 and 25, Dec. 12 (pje). Laleham, two in a nest under a metal sheet, Apr. 24 (ghg). S Animals found alive, not trapped: Chessington, one caught by hand in a ditch on Jan. 8 (irb). Egham, six caught on Apr. 16 (pam). Park Estate, Petersham, a flourishing diurnal colony (em-r). West Ewell, one eating bread on a garden lawn, among the sparrows on Aug. 10 (irb, lab). One on Dec. 31 sitting on bicycle handlebars in a garage (irb, lab). Animals found dead: Beddington S.F., one on Apr. 11 (pjw). Cob- ham, one dead on road May 12 (hk). Hinchley Wood, one dead on the cycle track of the A3, May 4 (irb). Trapped in Longworths: Chessington, 60- Acre Wood, two on Nov. 28 (irb). Esher, one at West End on Apr. 3 (hk). Oxshott, 21 between May 13-24 (hk). Princes Coverts, 39 during the year (irb, MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 35 lab). West Ewell, one in a garden on May 29 (irb, lab). Weybridge, five caught in one trap in an old garden, in four days (ghg). Owl Pellets: Nil. Found dead in bottles: Mickleham, two on July 23 (irb, lab). Ox- shott, one on Jan. 30 (irb, lab, pam) and one on Nov 28 (hk). Princes Coverts, one on Apr. 24 (irb). 63. Yellow-Necked Mouse. Apodemus flavicollis (Melchior). K Near West Wickham, one dead in a bottle Feb. 27 (pk). S Cobham, two found dead in a garden, Mar. 31. One dead in a house cellar Dec. 1 1 and one caught in a Longworth trap in an apple store in the same house on Dec. 23 (hk). Oxshott, one very freshly dead in a bottle, Jan. 30 (irb, lab, pam). Princes Coverts, one caught in a Longworth trap on Sept. 25 (irb, lab). 62/63. Apodemus sp. The following are records of mice found dead in bottles in which the remains were not critically examined. It is very difficult to distinguish the skulls of A.sylvaticus and A. flavicollis with certainty. K Elmers End two, Grove Park Station three, Ravensbourne Station one, West Wickham, six (pk). M Hampstead, one in Nov. (pam). Queen Mary Res., one (hk). S Chertsey, three (pam), Claygate, one (hk), Cobham, 11 (hk), Esher, one (pam). Fairmile Common, four (hk), Hersham, one (pam). Oxshott, four (hk, pam), Surbiton, two (pam), Walton Res., one (hk). From Owl pellets: Beddington, two (pjw), Caterham, two (pk). Selsdon, three (pk). 67. Bank Vole. Clethrionomys g/areolus (Schreber). As with almost all the other species of small mammals, the records for the Bank Vole show a great bias towards Surrey. This is, of course, caused by the distribution of observers and in no way can be related to the distribution of the animal itself. It is worth noting that all but one or two of these records are the work of three people. A series of “live trapping” experiments were conducted in Princes Coverts during the year. The Bank Vole proved to be by far the commonest animal I caught. It was trapped more frequently, in the newly planted conifer plantations, than any other animal and was deemed responsible for the wholesale destruction of conifer seedlings a foot high, by “stripping” the bark from the main stem of each plant. B and E — no records. H London Colney, one caught in a Longworth trap Oct. 2 (wgt). K Ravensbourne Station, four found dead in bottles May (pk). West Wickham, nine dead in bottles on Feb. 27 (pk). M East Bedfont, one seen Feb. 6 (pje). S Animals, seen alive, not trapped: Oxshott, one under tin Mar. 27 (hk). Animals found dead: Esher, one extracted from the stomach of a dead Tawny Owl, Jan. 2 (hk). Trapped in Longworth traps: Bookham Common, three in August (kajg). Oxshott, a total of 12 on several dates from Mar. 30 to May 24 (hk). Princes Coverts. A total of 54 on ten dates from February to October (irb, lab). Sixty-Acre Wood, Chessington, nine on Nov. 28 (irb). 36 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 From Owl Pellets: Caterham, four on June 4 (pk). Princes Coverts, 11 on Feb. 20 and ten on Apr. 8 (irb). Richmond Park, two on May 1 (hk) and one on Dec. 30 (gb). Selsdon four in Feb. (pk). Dead in bottles: Chelsham, four on Feb. 26 (pk). Chessington, eight in Jan. (irb). Claygate, one on Mar. 18 (hk). Cobham, one on Jan. 30 (irb) and four on Mar. 14 (hk). Egham, three on Feb. 18 and one on Mar. 16 (pam). Esher, two on Feb. 15 (pam), Fairmile Common, live on Apr. 3 (hk). Hersham, one on Sept’ 8 (pam), Leatherhead, three on Apr. 12 (hk). Nutfield, one on Mar. 13 (irb, pam), Oxshott, one on Feb. 13 (pam). 68. Water Vole. Arvicola terrestris (L.) This is the only small mammal which does not show a bias towards Surrey in the number of records received. A considerable number of records were received from Middlesex. The reasons for this appear to be that Middlesex has a large number of suitable localities (lakes, rivers, canals, G.P.s, etc.) and these localities attract a fair proportion of London’s Ornithologists, from whom some of these records come. B Colnbrook, two on Apr. 30 (pam). E Epping, one on May 7 (afm). H Maple Cross, c. 10 on Oct. 15 (igj). West Hyde, three on Apr. 18 (ap) and three on Oct. 15 (igj). M Described as common between Uxbridge and Rickmansworth on the R. Colne and the Grand Union Canal (igj). Bayhurst Wood, one on Oct. 29 (ap). Cuffley Brook, Whitewebbs Park: Several on Dec. 22 (pAMy). Harefield Moor, one on Mar. 13 (ap). Little Britain Lake, two on July 18 (ap). Perry Oaks S.F., one in the R. Colne on Aug. 21 (paf). Ruislip L.N.R., one on June 14 (PAMy). Shepperton, one dead on road Mar. 16 (pam). Staines Moor, up to four on several dates throughout the year (ap). Yeading Brook, Northolt, seven on June 30 (igj). S Bookham Common, one on May 22 (fcr). Chertsey, much activity on the R. Bourne during the summer (ghg). Esher, hundreds of tracks in mud, R. Mole (irb, pam). Godstone, four at Godstone Ponds in Apr. (pk, pjw). Holmethorpe, 1 1 from Tawny Owl pellets, during the summer (gb, dw). 69. Field Vole ( (Short-tailed Vole). Microtus agrestis (L.) B, E and H — No records (although one or two were received from just outside the 20 mile boundary). K Ravensbourne Station, one dead in a bottle May 25 (pk). West Wickham, four dead in bottle on Feb. 27 (pk). M Bushey Park, one caught and released on Feb. 12 (pam), three in a fox dropping on Mar. 22 (irb, pam). Cranford Woods, one under “tin” Apr. 17 (ap). Hampstead Heath, five in Tawny Owl pellets in Mar. (kes). Harlington, one found dead in a garden (ap). Little Britain Lake, several, including young in nests, found (ap). Southall, two nests on a railway bank Mar. 20 (ap). S Animals seen alive: Beddington S.F., one on Oct. 9 (kajg). Chertsey, two caught and released Feb. 28 (pam). Kew, seen occasionally (em-r). Oxshott, caught and released on several dates in Jan. and Feb. (irb, lab, hk, pam). Surbiton, S.F., two seen plus 12 nests found Jan. 7 (pam). Thames Ditton, four caught and released (pam). MAMMALS IN THE LONDON AREA, 1 966 37 Animals found dead: Bookham Common, one on May 8 (for). Mitcham Common, one recovered from a Kestrel, Mar. (pam). Princes Coverts, three in a fox dropping Jan. 8 (irb). Trapped in Longworth traps: Bookham Common, three in Aug. (kajg). Esher, two on Apr. 3 and Apr. 6 (hk). Oxshott, a total of 18 between Mar. and May (hk). Princes Coverts, a total of 10 between Mar. and May (irb, lab). Sixty-Acre Wood, Chessington, one on Nov. 28 (irb). From Owl Pellets: Beddington S.F., seven on May 1 (pk). Caterham, 37 on June 4 (pk). Ham, 56 during the first half of the year (gb). Holmethorpe, three Aug. to Oct. (gb, dw). Princes Coverts, six on Feb. 20 (irb). Richmond Park, 118 on Jan. 24 (mg), eight on May 1 (hk), and one on Dec. 17 (gb). Selsdon, one in Feb. (pk). Dead in bottles: Chessington, two on Jan. 9 (irb). Cobham, one on Mar. 14 (hk), Fairmile Common, five on Apr. 3 (hk). Oxshott, one on Feb. 13 (pam) and five on 7ar. 16 (hk). Surbiton S.F., two on Jan. 7 (pam). references BURTON, J. A., 1966b. The Distribution of Weasel,, Stoat, Roe Deer, Water Shrew and Mole in the London Area. Lond. Nat., 45, 35-42. CORBET, G. B., 1964. The Identification of British Mammals. British Museum (N.H.) London. HARPER, J. F. and MORRIS, P. A., 1965. The Occurrence of Small Mammals in discarded bottles. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., Vol. 145, Pt. 1, 148-153. MORRIS, P. A., 1966. The Hedgehog in London. Lond. Nat., 45, 43-49. SOUTHERN, H. N. (Ed.), 1964. The Handbook of British Mammals. Oxford. TEAGLE, W. G., 1964. The Harvest Mouse in the London Area. Lond. Nat., 43, 136-149. - , 1967. The Fox in the London Suburbs. Lond. Nat., 46, 44-68. CORRECTION TO LONDON NATURALIST , No. 46. Page 43. — Harvest Mouse. The record given as Brentford should read Brentwood S.F. A nest was found there on Sept. 5, 1964 by rbw. 38 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Bats in the London Area By Ian R. Beames THE purpose of this paper is to discuss briefly what is known of the general habits of the various species of bats with particular reference to the London Area, and to present all the records of bats in the London Area for the five years 1962-1966 inclusive. Much of the section on general habits is based on general observation and impressions which are not positively confirmed. The information given should thus be taken as a guide rather than a statement of fact. No attempt is made to give very full physical descriptions of the various species, although their diagnostic points are mentioned. Detailed des¬ criptions may be found in the Handbook of British Mammals (Southern 1964), British Mammals (Harrison-Matthews 1952) and Identification of British Mammals (Corbet 1964). Bats are usually very difficult creatures to observe. Most species only fly when it is already too dark to see them very well and hence the time available, on any one day, for studying them in flight is limited to short periods around dusk and dawn. Bats can be caught in flight or at rest. Catching a bat in flight is often quite difficult. Small bats may be caught by using a small area of mist- netting strung between two long canes; the whole being used like a large butterfly net. Bats are best caught, like butterflies, with a following stroke of the net. They are very adept at avoiding the lunging net of a “wicket-keeping” batter. Large bats can occasionally be caught in flight by using a large station¬ ary mist-net. Small pebbles are used as “bait”. These are thrown in front of the oncoming bat, persuading it to stoop after the pebbles, which it believes are insects, and thus dive into the net. It should be noted that bats are much more difficult to extract from mist-nets than are birds. These methods of catching bats are fully described in Hancock (1963) and Cranbrook and Barrett (1965). Obtaining bats at rest is easier than catching them in flight. Finding summer roosts or winter hibernacula is usually a matter of pure chance, although Hancock (1963) describes a feasible way of finding summer roosts. Bats may be seen entering or leaving holes in roofs or trees. When bats are located in this way some may be caught easily, although a little ingenuity and planning may be needed at the outset. Bats are seen more easily where they occur in some numbers. The solitary bat flitting down a hedgerow in the half-light of dawn or dusk is easily missed; whereas even a small group of bats is much more obvious. There is thus usually a bias in the number of records towards localities at which bats congregate. Bats will gather in larger numbers where there are concentrations of insects. Large bats, such as Serotines and Noctules may frequently be seen over sewage farms where there are large numbers of insects. Lakes and ponds, even reservoirs, attract large swarms of insects especially in late summer. Small, and occasionally, large bats occur in some number over and around many of these waters. In the London Area, as elsewhere, places which provide a bat with a good hunting “beat” are well worth observation. Besides the ponds BATS IN THE LONDON AREA 39 and sewage farms already mentioned, rivers and canals which abound in the west and north-east parts of the London Area in particular, provide ideal hunting grounds for hungry bats. Small bats frequently hunt along tall hedgerows and paths which are fringed with bushes and trees. A two poled mist-net or a large butterfly net may be used to considerable advan¬ tage in such places. Bats which have been caught in this way often prove to be a species other than the ubiquitous Pipistrelle. During the winter bats in the British Isles hibernate. Some species are found predominately in caves, whilst others hibernate in trees and buildings. There are few natural caves in the London Area but in the south there are some extensive mines in the Greensand. There are also a few holes and mine tunnels in the chalk of the North Downs, many of which often contain hibernating bats. These mines and tunnels are undoubtedly unsafe, and many have now collapsed, effectively barring access to bats and humans alike. GENERAL HABITS Eleven of the fifteen species of bats recorded in Britain are known to have occurred in the London Area. Of these, only the Lesser Horseshoe Bat has not been recorded in the five years under review. Of the ten species which have been recorded during this period, three species, the Greater Horseshoe Bat, Leisler’s Bat and the Barbastelle, have one or two records only. The other seven species are recorded regularly. From information collected over the country as a whole, it is reason¬ ably clear that individual species of bats may have very different habits. The Greater Horseshoe Bat is a large bat with a wingspan of about 13 or 14 inches. It is predominantly light grey brown in colour. Its most unusual feature is the “nose-leaf*’ which makes it quite unmistake- able. It has a fluttering flight, often very near the ground. Its wings are markedly rounded. During the summer it usually lives in house roofs and cellars. It hibernates during the winter in caves and disused mines. It is a gre¬ garious animal and is sometimes found in large numbers. This species is found principally in the south and west of Britain, and there are few past records for the London Area. It was seen in the early part of this century in Chislehurst caves, at Godstone caves in 1951 (D. L. Harrison, pers. comm.) and at Oxleas Wood, Kent in 1953 (R. G. Rigden, 1955). It would appear that its status has not changed and it seems to be very unusual in the London Area. The Lesser Horseshoe Bat is similar in appearance and habits to its larger relative. It is quite a small bat with a wingspan of eight or nine inches. It was last recorded in the London Area in 1939 when one was caught in a butterfly net near the Serpentine in Hyde Park (M. Blackmore). Prior to this two were taken from the porch of H. G. Wells’s house in Regents Park in 1926 (B. Vesey-Fitzgerald). There are even older records from Godstone and Chislehurst caves. The Whiskered Bat is a small species, being just a little larger than a Pipistrelle. The fur of its upper parts is very dark. The under-surface is usually lighter in colour as in most bats. The Whiskered Bat has a black face, black ears and a thin pointed black tragus. It flies rather like a Pipistrelle but is said to be erratic and slower. It is believed to fly often 40 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 by day, as does the Pipistrelle. No information is available in the London Area on the sites of its summer roosts, but in the country as a whole it uses buildings quite often and occasionally holes in trees. In the winter it commonly hibernates in caves and mines. Natterer’s Bat and Daubenton’s Bat are both medium-sized species having a wingspan of about 10 or 11 inches. Natterer’s Bat is brov/n above and has very white fur on its underside. It has a very pink face and large ears which extend beyond the tip ofits nose when laid forward. Daubenton’s Bat is rather similar but its under¬ side fur is a grey-white. Its ears are much shorter and it has a less pink face. Its feet are considerably larger than those of the preceding two species. In common with the Whiskered Bat, nothing is known of their summer roosting places in the London Area. Both species are gregarious and colonies are believed to use buildings and holes in trees for their roost. They are both found regularly in caves and mines during their winter hibernation. The Long-Eared Bat* is the last of the four London species regularly found hibernating in caves during the winter. This bat is a medium¬ sized species with a wingspan of about 10 inches. It possesses enormous ears, over half the length of its body in size. At rest it tucks these away under its wings. When half awake the ears are curled outwards but with the tips still tucked under the wings. The folded ears may give rise to some doubt as to the bat’s identity if it is seen at rest. Colonies occupy roof spaces in houses and churches during the summer, although no such colony has yet been found in the London Area. Its flight is punctuated with some glides and it often hovers near bushes and trees in order to pick insects from the foliage. The Daubenton’s Bat is also known as the “Water” Bat from its habit of skimming an inch or so above the water surface. In the London Area most of the Daubenton’s Bats caught in flight have been taken over or near water. However, all bats seen flying over water should not be auto¬ matically regarded as Daubenton’s Bat as in the London Area the bat most frequently caught over or near water is the Pipistrelle. Besides the Pipistrelle and Daubenton’s Bat, Whiskered and Long-Eared Bats have both been caught beside ponds and it is to be assumed that they also fly over the water. It has often been thought that hibernation among such animals as Hedgehogs and Bats is a continuous process lasting unbroken from late autumn until about Easter. The records of hibernating bats in the London Area show that this is not always so and that there is considerable move¬ ment among the populations of hibernating bats. These never appear to be static for any length of time, even given the absolute minimum of disturbance. Many individuals awake and change their hibernating site several times during the winter, and may occasionally be seen flying on a cold winter’s day. Records for the past 20 years for Whiskered, Natterer’s, Daubenton’s and Long-Eared Bats are mainly confined to the southermost fringe of the area. *There are actually two species of Long-Eared Bat in Britain — the Common Long-Eared ( Plecotu auritus ) and the Grey Long-Eared ( Plecotus austriacus). They are virtually identical in the field. The presence of the Grey Long-Eared Bat in Britain has only recently been described (Corbet 1964a) and (Stebbings 1967). All the Long-Eared Bats critically examined in the London area seem to be Plecotus auritus. BATS IN THE LONDON AREA 41 The Noctule, Serotine and Leister's Bat are all very similar in appear¬ ance and are here dealt with together. All have a wing-span of from 12 to 15 inches. The wings of the Noctule and Leister’s Bat are long and quite narrow. The Noctule is covered with silky golden-brown fur, white Leister’s Bat is usually very much darker in colour, although its overall shape is very similar. It is indistinguishable in flight from a small Noctule. Both have broad heads, blunt faces and rounded ears. The tragus is short, not pointed and broader than it is long. The Serotine is about as large as a Noctule but its fur is conspicuously darker. It has a much more fox-like face. Its ears are longer and more pointed, as is the tragus. The last two joints of the Serotine’s tail project about a quarter of an inch beyond the surrounding membrane. This is unique amongst British bats. The broader wings of the Serotine may help to distinguish it from the Noctule in flight but this may be apparent only when the two species are flying together as they do over some sewage farms and large ponds in the London Area. The Noctule is one of the first bats to appear in the evening, usually some half an hour before the Serotine. Its flight is rapid and powerful, with swift dashing movements, often at considerable height, white the Serotine’s flight is regarded as heavier and less agile than the Noctule (Blackmore, 1963). Both the Noctule and Leister’s Bat usually roost in trees in summer. From the scanty information in the British Isles generally, Leister’s Bat more readily inhabits the edges of the built-up area (Blackmore, 1963); the two recent London records of Leister's Bat are from suburban loca¬ tions. The only other for the area is of one at Abbey Wood, Kent in 1953 (Rigden, 1955). This bat is regarded as rare throughout Britain, with the exception of Ireland. The Noctule prefers large woods and well-timbered parks. Its summer roosts are usually in holes in trees, such as old Woodpecker holes, or in hollow trunks of trees. In the London Area all recorded roosts are from such places. In particular it seems to favour holes in beech trees, al¬ though this may purely be that occupied holes in beech trees are easier to locate than in other trees. It also lives in house roofs occasionally but has not been found like this in the London Area. In large woods colonies may move from one tree to another during the summer. In one locality on the beech covered slopes of the North Downs this is known to occur quite frequently. Noctules are very gregarious and noisy animals. It is sometimes possible to locate summer dens in trees, by standing still in a quiet wood where large bats occur, and listening for the squeaks coming from the den. These noises may be heard at a distance of 20 or 30 yards. Another useful sign of a hole used by Noctules is the stain down the outside of the tree below the hole, caused by the bats’ droppings. This must be dis¬ tinguished from a rain-fllled hole spilling water down the trunk. Blackmore (1963) believes that Noctules favour the roofs of buildings in winter. Dutch workers mention seven hibernacula containing about four hundred bats, all in trees, although they also mention mid-European workers who report it hibernating in buildings. So far only one record of hibernating Noctules has occurred in the London Area. This was of two bats in a beech tree in Weybridge and is mentioned in the systematic list in this paper. 42 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 The Serotine usually lives in buildings during the summer. This is borne out by the fact that four roosts so far found in the London Area have been in buildings and one was found using a hollow tree in a garden. (G. H. Gush in Hancock, 1963). Hancock has described (1963) in great detail his observations of a Serotine roost in a house near Bletchingly, Surrey. This roost is still in existence. The most recently recorded roost was found in 1965 in Her- sham, Surrey. This colony of some 12 or 15 bats were breeding in the loft of an ordinary semi-detached house. They emerged from holes under the eaves at both ends of the house. These bats were likely to be destroyed by the residents who had recently cut a trap door into the loft. The loft had previously been sealed and the colony had apparently been undisturbed for some years. While the residents here had no objections to the bats themselves, they objected to the considerable squeaking, especially that caused by the young bats. In addition the bats emerged exactly over the front door of the house, thereby bombarding callers and members of the household alike with droppings. With the co-operation of the householders these bats were removed to another site in 1966. No winter hibernacula of the Serotine have been found in the London Area. Indeed, very little information seems to be available on the hiber¬ nation of the Serotine in Great Britain as a whole. Neither Blackmore (1963) nor Southern (1964) mention the subject, although Southern (1964) states that it is rarely found hibernating in caves. It has not been found in any caves in the London Area. Presumably it hibernates in trees, or buildings or perhaps both. In view of its frequency in the London Area, especially in the south, this seems to be worth further study. The Pipistrelle is generally regarded as the commonest bat in the British Isles. From the records this statement appears to apply equally well to the London Area. It is the smallest British bat, having a wing¬ span of about eight inches, just a little smaller than a Whiskered Bat. It has a very dark, almost black, back and its underparts are dark brown. It has a small rounded tragus. It also has a post-calcarial lobe which is not present in the Myotis species. Pipistrelles may form considerable colonies using all sorts of nooks and crannies for shelter. In the London Area they have been found singly behind loose bark and overhanging ivy on a wall or in colonies in holes in trees and in buildings. Past records show a wide distribution. The flight is very fluttering and often quite low, usually along a regular beat round trees, a pond or down a lane. The Barbastelle is a medium-sized bat with a wing-span of about 10 inches. The fur is black. The inner edges of its ears join just above the eyes, giving it a most distinctive appearance. In the past 50 years it has been recorded from Acton (1939), Richmond Park (1946) and Sidcup (1952) and twice during the five years under review. Little is known of this rare bat in the London Area. Records elsewhere suggest that it enters caves to hibernate only in extremely severe conditions, and other¬ wise presumably hibernates in trees. BATS IN THE LONDON AREA 43 INNER LONDON The number of records of bats in Inner London has dropped sharply in the years after the Second World War. Apart from a Pipistrelle found dead in Holland Park in 1962 the last positively identified bat in Inner London was the Lesser Horseshoe Bat caught at the Serpentine in 1939. A Long-Eared Bat was killed by a cat in Regents Park in 1925 and Daubenton’s Bat has been recorded as having been taken on Blackfriars Bridge. There are no later records of bats identified in the hand from Inner London. BATS AND MEN Bats in the London Area and elsewhere are suffering, to a certain degree, at the hands of man. Many people will not tolerate the presence of a colony in their roof. Older houses with good roosting sites make way for more modern ones with none. Trees are felled and hedges cut down in the London suburbs. Tree-dwelling bats lose their homes and often their feeding grounds. This has happened recently in the Epsom area where a large number of hedgerows have been removed. Besides the destruction of many other forms of wildlife, two species of small bats have vanished, no doubt forced to move to less disturbed ground. Owing to increased disturbance by children and vandals some of the best cave localities for hibernating bats now usually have fewer species and individuals than formerly. For example, Chislehurst Caves, once a location where hibernating bats occurred in some numbers, is now much used by humans and thus suffers considerable disturbance. Many tunnels and mines in the Chalk and Greensand have been completely or partially destroyed by quarry extensions and tunnel collapse. Some have even been used for mush¬ room cultivation. The Godstone hearthstone mines are being syste¬ matically sealed by the local council and it is to be assumed that the intention is to close them all. It is to be hoped that the entrances to those remaining are firmly sealed with suitable locked gates to allow access for the small bats using the caves as well as naturalists. SYSTEMATIC LIST Records based upon identification in flight are a useful guide, but are not wholly reliable. Therefore all records given in the following detailed account are of animals positively identified in the hand. Nevertheless, flight records of unidentified bats are still of much interest as they frequently indicate what species might be present and it is then easier to decide how to go about the problem of catching one for positive identification. Details of previous records of bats for the years 1900 to 1965 have appeared in earlier volumes of the London Naturalist (Fitter, 1949, 1950 and 1960; Rigden, 1955) and for the period 1957 to 1961 in London Naturalist No. 42 (Hancock, 1963). 44 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Some records for individual years may be found in more recent volumes of the London Naturalist (Teagle, 1963, 1964 and 1965; Burton, 1966 and 1967). The initials B, E, H, K, M and S are used to indicate the counties Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Middlesex and Surrey respectively as in the usual convention. All the records are those of P. A. Morris and D. W. Yalden accom¬ panied recently by I. R. Beames, unless otherwise stated. Other in¬ dividual observers’ initials are quoted against their records. INDIVIDUAL SPECIES Greater Horseshoe Bat. Rhinolophus ferrum-equinum (Schreber). S The sole record during the period is of one found hibernating in a chalk cave near Boxhill on Jan. 18, 1964. The cave itself was very unsafe and is now blocked. Whiskered Bat. Myotis mystacinus (Kuhl). This species is more frequently recorded in hibernation during the winter months than at any other time. It is found regularly in small numbers in the Greensand mines at Godstone, Surrey and at Westerham, Kent from October to March. It has occasionally been found in a Chalk cave near Boxhill. Detailed records are as follows : — K Westerham Caves: Animals hibernating, 2 on Jan. 1, 1962; 1 on Jan. 13; 1 on Feb. 10 and 1 on Nov. 4, 1962; 1 on Jan. 26, 1964; 1 on Feb. 23, 1964 and 2 on Jan. 23, 1965. (JAB, GBC, WGT et al.). S Godstone Caves: Animals all found hibernating, 5 on Dec. 22, 1963; 9 on Jan. 2, 1964; 10 on Jan. 18; 4 on Feb. 9, 4 on March 7; 6 on Nov. 28 and 7 on Dec. 28, 1964. 7 on Jan. 9, 1965; 7 on Feb. 6; 7 on Nov. 29; 2 on Oct. 30, 1965. 2 on Jan. 1, 1966; 7 on March 13 and 5 on Dec. 10, 1966. Chalk cave near Box Hill: 1 on Dec. 8, 1963; 1 on Nov. 7 1964 and 2 on Nov. 28, 1964. Bookham Common: 1 skull from a Tawny Owl Pellet (Beven, 1965). Natterer’s Bat. Myotis nattereri (Kuhl). In common with the Whiskered Bat, this animal is recorded most frequently in hibernation at Godstone and Westerham. H One caught by a cat at Wadesmill in Feb. 1964 (JJW). K Westerham Caves: Animals in hibernation. 1 on Feb. 10, 1962; 5 on Jan. 26, 1964; 3 on Feb. 23, 1964 and 2 on Jan. 23, 1965. (JAB, GBC, WGT et al.). S Godstone Caves: Animals hibernating. 4 on Dec. 22, 1963; 1 on Jan. 2, 1964; 5 on Jan. 18; 6 on Feb. 9; 4 on Nov. 7, and 2 on Dec. 28, 1 964 ; 3 on Jan. 9 and 3 on Feb. 6, 1 965 ; 2 on Jan. 1 , 1 966. Cave near Box Hill: 1 on Jan. 9 and Jan. 30, 1963. Reigate Cave: 1 on March 7, 1964. Brockham Quarry: 1 behind loose Chalk in March 1964. (JS). Daubenton’s Bat. Myotis daubentoni (Kuhl). This bat, the third of the Myotis species regularly recorded in the London Area, is similarly a “cave” bat, being most easily located in caves during the winter. BATS IN THE LONDON AREA 45 Detailed records: — K Westerham Caves: Animals hibernating. 2 on Jan. 13 and 2 on Nov. 18, 1962. 4 on Jan. 26 and again on Feb. 23, 1964. (JAB, GBC, WGT et al). S Godstone Caves: Animals hibernating. 3 on Jan. 18, 1964; 2 on Feb. 9; 1 on Nov. 7; 4 on Nov. 28 and 3 on Dec. 28, 1964; 3 on Jan. 9, 1965; 3 on Feb. 6; 1 on Mar. 29 and 1 on Oct. 30, 1965; 5 on Jan. 1 , 1966; 4 on Mar. 13 and 1 on Dec. 10, 1 966. Godstone Ponds: Caught in flight (PJW et al.). 2 on May 20; 1 on May 28 and 1 on June 4, 1964 (BDH). Chalk cave near Box Hill: Animals hibernating. 2 on Dec. 8, 1963; 1 on Jan. 2, 1964; 1 on Jan. 1 8 and 1 on Nov. 28, 1 964. Reigate cave: Animals hibernating. 2 on Mar. 7, 1964 and 2 on Jan. 9, 1965. Serotine. Eptesicus serotinus (Schreber). This bat is normally described as uncommon in Britain, being most frequently found in the Home Counties south of the Thames (Southern, 1964). In the London Area from the existing records it appears at first sight that this bat is more common than the Noctule. In particular in the Esher-Hersham-Oxshott area of Surrey, whjch is intensively watched, the Serotine is, at present, more frequently recorded. This is probably because of the Serotine’s preference for roosting in buildings whilst the Noctule usually prefers holes in trees. The Serotine is thus both easier to find and easier to catch. Detailed records : — H 3 caught in flight during May 1963 at Rye Meads S.F. and mist- netted on several dates in 1964 at the same locality (JJW, RMRGj. S A breeding colony using an old house near Bletchingley has been in existence for at least ten years. The maximum recorded so far being 42 on July 12, 1964. This colony has been described by Hancock (1963). 3 were shot at Godstone on Sep. 27, 1964 and 1 at Caterham on Oct. 4, 1964 (RMcC). 1 found in Juniper Hall, Mickleham in July 1965 (JS). Hersham: A colony using a house throughout the summer of 1965 had left by September. The same house was recolonized in 1966. 15 adults and 4 young were removed from the roof space July 4-6, 1966 to save them from destruction threatened by the residents. Leisler’s Bat. Nyctalus leisleri (Kuhl). This species is generally regarded as rare throughout England (Southern, 1964), but it may well be overlooked in view of its great similarity to the Noctule. There are two recent records, both in Surrey. 1 found on the pavement in Walton-on-Thames on July 21, 1964, apparently damaged by a cat. 1 found hibernating in a branch of a tree which had just been cut down in Kew Gardens on Dec. 20, 1965 (EM-R). Noctule. Nyctalus noctula (Schreber). As a result of the Noctule's tree-dwelling habits and its ability to fly high and strongly, it is very difficult to find its roosts and, in normal circumstances, even more difficult to catch. Hence, despite the fact that 46 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 this bat is regarded as one of the commonest bats in the British Isles (Southern, 1964), the detailed records are few. H Rye Meads S.F. : 1 caught in a mist-net on June 2, 1962 (RMRG). Approximately 20 caught in mist-nets during May 1963 (JJW). Broxbourne: 1 shot on Nov. 14, 1964 (RMcC). S Esher: 10 caught emerging from a hole in an oak tree Sept. 3, 1962 (JA, PAM). Weybridge: Singles found in a hollow beech tree, flooded out by melting snow, Mar. 4 and 7, 1963 (JA, PAM). Beddington S.F. : Singles caught in flight on June 30, 1964 and July 2, 1964 (JAB, AMH). Juniper Hall, Mickleham: 1 dead in the garden summer 1965 (JS). Pipistrelle. Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Schreber). This is regarded as the commonest British bat (Southern, 1964). There seems little doubt that many records of little bats seen flitting along hedges and over park ponds refer to this species. However, it has a great simi¬ larity to the Whiskered Bat in flight. Indeed, a few years ago a noted naturalist stated that the Whiskered Bat was the predominant bat on Esher Common, but in the five years under review here, despite frequent evening mist-netting sessions, the only bats caught there have been 17 Pipistrelles. This is an indication of the difficulty of flight identification of these creatures. The Pipistrelle uses a large variety of roosts. It also flies at head height. It is thus one of the easier bats to find and catch. E Epping Forest : 1 found behind loose bark of an oak in Monks Wood Aug. 25, 1962 (AL). Ilford: 1 found dead on Feb. 6, 1964 (BTB). H Rye Meads S.F. : Caught in mist-nets on the following dates, 3 on July 16, 4 on Aug. 2 and 1 on Sept. 23, 1962; 5 on Aug. 21, 1964 (RMRG). K Lodge Farm: 1 found dead May 16, 1965 (PCT). M Holland Park, Inner London: 1 found dead Mar. 27, 1962 (EPB, WGT). Bushy Park: 3 caught in flight Aug. 2, 1963. S Esher: Caught in flight as follows: 2 on July 25, 1963 and singles on Aug. 2 and 5, 1963. 2 on May 9, 1964; 2 on May 18, 1964; 1 on May 30, 1964; 2 on June 13, 1964 (PAM, DWY). 6 in June-July 1966 (HK). Walton-on-Thames: 1 found by the Thames on Aug. 25, 1962. 1 on a wall Mar. 12, 1963. 2 caught in flight May 19, 1964. Ewell: 1 flew in through an open bedroom window on Aug. 30, 1965 (IRB, LAB). Beddington S.F. : 1 caught in flight June 30, 1964 (JAB, AMH). Juniper Hall, Mickleham: several times in the house during the five years (JS). Caterham Singles shot on Oct. 2 and 5, 1964 (RMcC). Godstone Ponds: 4 caught in flight on May 22, 1964; 3 on May 28; 9 between June 1 and June 4 and 2 on June 24, 1964 (BDH, PJW et al.) Barbastelle. Barbastella barbastellus (Schreber). The two records of this rare bat are both from Surrey. 1 found in Juniper Hall, Mickleham in the summer of 1962 (JS) and 1 found hibernating near Cobham on Dec. 30, 1965. BATS IN THE LONDON AREA 47 Long-Eared Bat. Plecotus auritus (L.). This bat, perhaps the most striking of all the species found in the London Area, is the last of the four species recorded regularly hibernating in caves. This species is generally regarded as common in the British Isles (Southern, 1964), but this is not borne out by the London records, although they show a wide distribution. The total number of animals found hibernating in the caves in the London Area is far lower for this species than for the three Myotis species also found in these caves. H Rye Meads S.F. : 1 caught in flight in May 1963 (JJW). K Swanley: 1 found hibernating in a dene hole on Jan. 3, 1963 and 2 in the same place on Feb. 6, 1965 (JAB, Lew. NHS). Plumstead: 1 found clinging to the front of a police car on Oct. 14, 1963 (RGR). M Bushy Park: 1 caught in flight on Aug. 8, 1963. S Godstone caves: 5 hibernating on Dec. 22, 1963. 2 on Jan. 18, 1964; 1 on Nov. 28 and 3 on Dec. 28, 1964. 3 on Jan. 1, 1966 and 1 on Dec. 10, 1966. Chalk cave near Box Hill : 2 hibernating on Jan. 18, 1964. Egham: 1 in a porch on Aug. 18, 1964 (DWY). Juniper Hall, Mickleham: Found occasionally (JS). DISCUSSION Bats are probably the most difficult to identify of all the groups of British mammals and it is now generally recognised that sight identifica¬ tion in flight is well nigh impossible. This is not meant to discourage observers sending in records of unidentified bats. Indeed, the more of these that are received, the better, as it enables plans to be formulated for tackling the identity of these unknown bats. Records of roost, hibernacula and breeding colonies are of the utmost value even when the species concerned has not been identified. Such records should be sent to the Mammal Recorder at once. Delay may prevent any useful action being taken. It is clear from the records that much more remains to be discovered about the distribution of bats in the London Area. It should be em¬ phasized that these records are those obtained over five years. Distribu¬ tion maps for, say, the Whiskered Bat would currently show only three or four 1 km. grid squares occupied. There are over 3,000 1 km. grid squares in the London Area, of which half would probably be capable of supporting bats. This is, perhaps, a measure of the challenge involved in the future study of London’s bats. It is interesting to speculate on the large number of records from the Esher area, which is intensively covered by P. A. Morris and D. W. Yalden, and the Godstone area, previously well watched by B. D. Hancock and latterly by P. A. Morris and D. W. Yalden. Rye Meads, the home of a dedicated band of bird ringers produces as a by-product a considerable number of bat records. How useful it would be to have a few more people willing to look for bats scattered around the area, in particular, say, in Essex, Kent and West Middlesex. 48 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 SUMMARY 1 . This paper gives an account of the bats recorded in the London Area for the period 1962-1966 inclusive. 2. The habits of the various species are discussed, with particular reference to the related problems of finding, catching and identifying them. 3. The various types of roosting localities are commented on and dis¬ cussed with respect to the number of records. 4. Brief comment is made on the bats recorded in Inner London. 5. The relationship between bats and men is mentioned. 6. Detailed records of each species are given. 7. Brief comment is made on the comparative paucity of the number of records and on the possibilities for the future, given a few more observers covering one area thoroughly. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I must express my gratitude to all those people who have sent in records. I would particularly thank Pat Morris and Derek Yalden who have been responsible for developing my own interest in London’s mammals, and who have given much constructive criticism for this paper. Together they have provided 60% of the records used here. John Burton has kindly given me full use of all records received by him as Mammal Recorder. John Sankey, Warden of Juniper Hall Field Studies Centre kindly gave me permission to use his records. I would finally like to thank Terry Smeeton who typed the manus- script for me, thus saving me many anguished hours at a most unfamiliar keyboard. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS FOR PERIOD 1962-1966 J. Aylott, Miss B. T. Bayliss, I. R. Beames, Mrs. L. A. Beames, Miss E. P. Brown, J. A. Burton, Dr. G. B. Corbet, Dr. B. D. Hancock, A. M. Hutson, H. King, A. Leutscher, Lewisham N.H.S., N. A. Martin, E. Milne-Redhead, P. A. Morris, R. McCleane, R. G. Rigden, Rye Meads Ringing Group (per J. Crudass), J. Sankey, W. G. Teagle, P. C. Tinning, Dr. J. J. Walling, R. Warwick, P. J. Wilson, Dr. D. W. Yalden. REFERENCES BEVEN, G. B., 1965. Food of Tawny Owls in London. London Bird Report, 29, 56-72. BLACKMORE, M., 1963. Bats. Sunday Times Publications. Animals of Britain Series, No. 18. BURTON, J. A., 1966. Notes on Mammals of the London Area during 1963 and 1964. Lond. Nat., 45, 35-42. - , 1967. Notes on Mammals in the London Area for 1965. Lond. Nat., 46, 40-43. CORBET, G. B., 1964a. The Grey Long-Eared Bat Plecotus austriacus in England and the Channel Isles. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. , 143, 511-515. CRANBROOK, The Earl of and BARRETT, H. G., 1965. Observations on Noctule Bats ( Nyctalus noctula) captured while feeding. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., Vol. 144, Part 1, 1-24. FITTER, R. S. R., 1949. A check List of the Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibia of the London Area 1900-1949. Lond. Nat., 28, 98-115. - - , 1950. Some Additional Records of Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibia in the London Area. Lond. Nat., 29, 133-136. - , 1960. Further Records of Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibia in the London Area. Lond. Nat., 39, 18-21. BATS IN THE LONDON AREA 49 HANCOCK, B. D., 1963. Some Observations on Bats in East Surrey and Recent Records for the London Area. Lond. Nat., 42, 26-41. RIGDEN, R. G., 1955. The Fishes, Amphibians, Reptiles and Mammals of Woolwich and surrounding localities. Lond. Nat., 34, 48-53. SOUTHERN, H. N. ed., 1964. The Handbook of British Mammals — Oxford. STEBBINGS, R. E., 1967. Identification and Distribution of bats of the genus Plecotus in England. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 153, 291-310. TEAGLE, W. G., 1963. Mammals in the London Area. A Report for 1960. Lond. Nat., 42, 42-58. - , 1964. Mammals in the London Area 1961. Lond. Nat., 43, 119-133. - , 1965. Mammals in the London Area 1962. Lond. Nat., 44, 43-57. VAN HEERDT, P. F. and SLUITER. J. W., 1965. Notes on the Distribution and Behaviour of the Noctule Bat ( Nyctalus Noctula) in the Netherlands. Mammalia, 29, 463-477. 50 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Hemiptera-Heteroptera of the London Area PART V By Eric W. Groves, F.R.E.S. Sources of Records The following are new sources of records : — 31. The Entomologists' Monthly Magazine , l->, 1833-> (Abbreviated to EMM in text for incidental references). (g) Andrewes, C. H., 1945, Hemiptera-Heteroptera in Middlesex and Hertfordshire , 81, 163-164. 61. Richards, O. W., 1926. Studies on the ecology of English Heaths, HI. Animal communities of the felling and burn successions at Oxshott Heath, Surrey. J. Ecol. 14, 244-281. 62. Coulson, F. J., The Hemiptera of Surrey. A manuscript distribution list (compiled from the author’s records and those of others) now deposited in the library of the South London Entomological & Natural History Society*. Index to Recorders’ Names The following should be added to the index of recorders’ names already given in Parts I-IV : — E. E. Austen ( EEA ) A. Piffard {AP) O. G. Heath ( OGH ) O. W. Richards (OWR) Hugh Main (. HM ) MIRIDAE (Capsid bugs) Subfamily: Bryocorinae Only two members of this mainly tropical and sub-tropical subfamily are native in Britain, both of which are found in the London Area. In addition, three alien species have occasionally been accidentally intro¬ duced from S. America, two of which have been reported in London. Monalocoris filicis (Linn.) Sp. 225 p. 203 D&S p. 279 S p. 229 B p. 449 (Sp. 321) Common and widely distributed throughout the London Area wherever its host plant bracken occurs. Adults are found from July onwards, flying freely in early autumn just before they go into hibernation. Middx. Buckingham Palace grounds, 1962, on bracken, TRES (52); Cripplegate, City of London, 23.vii.55, on bracken growing in one derelict bombed basement-site only, EWG (25); 24.ix.55, DGH (57); Hampstead Heath, 12.vi.43, CHA (17); 1949, “on ferns everywhere”, DL (1/1949-50, 36-38); 8.vi.50, in clearing on Sandy Heath, DL (HD); Ruislip L.N.R., 1955-58, especially in bracken in the N.E. heath area where adults have been taken from late May to mid-Sept., EWG (49); Hounslow Heath, 21.viii. and 5.ix.49, 8.vi.50, and 19.vii.52, DL (54); 26.vii.52 and 26.V.53, common on Pteridium, GEW (33b). Herts. Wormley Wood, 4.viii.41, HWJ (43); Hatfield, 7.vi.64, PLJR (MM); Bricket Wood Common, 3.vii.56, EWG (24); and on the boundary at Chorley Wood, n.d., EAB (11) and (12); Chorley Wood Common, 27.V.63, PSB (16) and Kings Langley, x.18, n.c. (HD). Essex. Woodford, ll.viii.25, EAB (BM); Epping Forest (Loughton), 3.ix.09, EAB (BM); on bracken, common, CN (35a); (High Beach), ♦now to be styled the British Entomological & Natural History Society. 115 HEMIPTERA-HETEROPTERA OF THE LONDON AREA 51 common, CN (35a); (Chingford), 1 8.vi. 10, EAB (BM). Kent. Lee, JAP (BM); Plumstead (Wickham Lane), 7.ix.l895, WW (60) (4) (39) (22); Blackheath, AAA (22); Abbey Wood, WW ( 39); Dart- ford Heath, 26.iv.62, KCS (14) (22); Darenth Wood, 20.V.05, ECB (NM); Joydens Wood, Bexley, 10.ix.60, KCS (14); Chislehurst (St. Paul’s Cray Common). 16.ix.05, HM (1/1905-6, 52); Bromley ES (4) (22); Hayes Common, 23.xi.63, KCS (14) (48); Farningham Common, 23.ix.51, SL (1/1951-52, 81); Fawkham, ll.ix.54, GGES HD; Shoreham, l.ix.61, KCS (14) (22); and Westerham (Hosey Common), 17.vi.51, DL (1/1951-52, 72). Surrey. Dulwich JAP (BM); Richmond Park, 24.ix.02, HStJKD (HD); Shirley, FPP (HD); Shirley Common, ix.1893, IV VJ (60); Wimble¬ don Common, 14.vi.55, HDS (60); 25.vi.55, EWG (24); Banstead Heath, 3.ix.62, PSB (16); Reigate district, by sweeping J&TL (32); near Godstone, 22.vi.63, EL (48); Epsom Common, 6.ix.53, EWG (24); Ashtead Woods, FJC (62); Headley Lane, 27.V.1900, AJC (HD); Boxhill, v.18, n.c. (HD); Ranmore Common, FJC (62); Bookham Common, 4.V.52, DL (54); 13.V.56, 12.viii.56 o, 16.viii.55, 13.ix.53 $ $ $ $, 4.x. 53 and 9.X.56, EWG (24); West End Common, FJC (62); Oxshott Heath, 30.vi.51, FJC (1/1951-52, 73); 4.viii.55., EWG (24); AAA (51); Esher Common, FJC (62); and Weybridge ,30.vi.63, PSB (16). Bucks. Slough (ICBFS), 25.viii.32, WHG (41); (PILG), 14.vi.54, GEW (40); and just beyond the boundary in Hodgemoor Wood, w. of Chalfont St. Giles, 30.viii.52, WJLeQ (21). Bryocoris pteridos (Eall.) Sp. 226 p. 203 D&S p. 277 S p. 228 B p. 450 (Sp. 322) Local. Associated with the Male Fern (Dryopteris filix-mas), the Lady Fern (Anthyrium filix-femina) and other ferns in woods and damp shady lanes. Occasionally found in those gardens where clumps of ferns have been long established. The adults which may be either macropterous or brachypterous, are found in July and August. Middx. Uxbridge (Colne Valley), 12.ix.35, a few on ferns, DCT (33a). Herts. Beyond the boundary at Harpenden (Rothamsted Expt. Station grounds), 28.V.53, larvae probably III and IV instars on Anthyrium filix-femina growing in Manor Wood; 9.vii.53 and 23.vii.53, numerous adults mostly brachypterous $ $ taken on same ferns; both records, TRES (EMM 90, 75) and (1/1953-54, 43); 23.vii.53 TRES, presented by DL (HD); 2.vii.55, 13.vii.54, 17.vii.54 and 1.x. 54, GGES (HD); vii.54, A MM (BM). Kent. Lee, JAP (BM). Surrey. Boxhill, 20.viii.52, on ferns but not on bracken, AMM (BM) and (MM). Bucks. Just outside the boundary at Hedgerley, 28.ix.57 on ferns, GEW (40); and beyond at Hyde Heath, 19.vii.53, on fern, WJLeQ (21). Tenthecoris orchidearum (Reut.) Foreign species p. 313 T. bicolor Scott T. colombiensis Hsiao & Sailer These three S. American species have in the past occasionally been reported in this country on orchid plants (particularly of the Cattleya group) imported for cultivation in hot-houses. Conspiciously coloured bright orange-red or blue and yellow, these bugs breed freely in the 116 52 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 warmth and cause damage to the leaves by the blistering at the feeding puncture sites. Orchid culture in heated conservatories and glasshouses is not as widespread a practice nowadays as it was during the period of most of the known records (i.e. late 19th-early 20th Century). As Leston (EMM 88, 24Qff) points out the restriction and guarantee currently in force on the importation of foreign orchid plants has now reduced the likelihood of these injurious capsids being again introduced. Two of the above species have been recorded from the London Area. Middx (?). T. bicolor — London, viii.28, in orchids imported from Brazil (see Gimmingham, C. T., EMM 64, 272, 1928). Surrey. T. orchidecirum — Kew Gardens (BM) (see Carvalho, JCM., Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (12) 4, 294-304 (1951). Subfamily : Deraeocorinae There are six species belonging to this subfamily of mirids occurring in Britain, 5 of which have been recorded in the London Area. Deraeocoris Intescens (Schill.) Sp. 228 p. 205 D&S p. 448 ( Camptobrochis punctulatus) S p. 258 (C. lutescens ) B p. 439 (Sp. 314, C. lutescens) Commonly and widely distributed. A predaceous feeder occurring on various trees and shrubs particularly scrub oak, hazel and apple. Unlike other British species of this genus it hibernates as an adult. The larvae develop throughout the summer and early autumn, but the majority reach the adult stage by late August or early September. Ob¬ viously more widely spread in Herts, Essex and Bucks, than records available would suggest. Middx. Buckingham Palace grounds, 1962, “exceptionally abundant on many trees (alder, beech, buckthorn, birch, hawthorn, hazel, holly, lime, oak, poplar (white and another), rhododendron and wych elm)”, TRES (52); Finchley, 23.V.43, on oak, CHA (17); St. John’s Wood (Finchley Road), N.W.8, 13.vii.52, 3.viii.51 and 16.vii.60. III-V instar larvae taken on Sycamore, field maple and lime DL (EMM 97, 65), (HD) and (54); Hampstead, 23.V.43, on oak, CHA (17); Hampstead Heath, 19.iii.49, 6.vi.49, 14.viii.49, 5.ix.49 and 8.vi.50, “very common on oaks in summer and found on sunny days in February on trunks of various trees”. “A cluster of about 50 found under oak bark in mid-October”, DL (HD) (54) and (1/1949-50, 36-38); (Quarry Spaniards), 31.V.50, DL (HD); Highgate ii.1894, EAB (BM); Palmer’s Green, 29.x. 18, EAB (BM) ; Mill Hill, 23.ix.16, EAB (BM); Edgeware (Scratch Wood), 26.vii.60, adults and V and IV instar larvae, DL (EMM 97, 65); Northwood, 21.viii.16, EAB (BM); l.vii.29, EEA (BM); Ruislip L.N.R., 18.vi.57 9, on wild apple EWG (49); 9.viii.64, adults and larvae on oak, RAP M (49) ; Harefield, 26.viii.51, on willow and poplar, WJLeQ (21); Hounslow Heath, 22.ix.52, occasional on trees, GEW (33b) and (40). Herts. Cheshunt, 8.ix.ll and 14.ix.12, EAB (BM); Whetstone, 23.ix.60, a single $ taken in light trap, PHW (47); Bushey JAP (BM); Oxhey, 24.viii.16, EAB (BM). Essex. Woodford, 7.viii.25, 14.viii.25 and 28.viii.25 EAB (BM); Buckhurst Hill, 18.viii.25, EAB (BM); Epping Forest, 30.xii.1900 and 14.ix.19, ECB (NM); 22.ix.17, on aspen, EAB (BM); 13.ii.16, HM in EAB coll. (BM); (Chingford) 18.ix.15 and ix.07, EAB (BM); CA(35a); (Hale End), 26.ix.16, on oak, CN (35a); (Loughton) 3.ix.l5, EAB (BM). 117 HEMIPTERA-HETEROPTERA OF THE LONDON AREA 53 Kent. Lee (Hither Green Lane), l.viii. and 5.ix.l896, on oak WW (60) (4) and (39); Plumstead (Wickham Lane), 7.ix. 1 895, by beating oaks, WW (60) (4) and (39); Blackheath, 9.vi.l891, AB in AJC coll. (MD); 24.ix.97, AJC (HD); WW (4) (39); AAA (22); Abbey Wood, WW (39); Darenth, 28.V.1893, AJC (HD); 14.V.22 PH (BM); Fawkham, 11 and 12.ix.54, GGES (HD); Lewisham, 6.viii.l893, AJC (HD); WW in PH coll. (BM); Catford, 7.viii.l893 AJC (HD); Bromley, ES (37) (4) and (22); Chislehurst (St. Paul’s Cray Common), 16.ix.05, HM (1/1905-06, 52); West Wickham Wood, 13. vi. 1896, WW (60) (4) (39); Orpington xi.35 E. Gowing-Scopes (HD); Shoreham, l.ix.61, KCS (14); and Westerham, 3.ii.23, PH (BM). Surrey. Kew (grounds of Royal Botanic Gardens), 6.viii.60, on Acer and Qnercus spp. near Temperate House, HKAS and L . Watson (7/xxiv, 1961: 169-191); Richmond, JAP (BM); Richmond Park, 15.iii.03, AJC (HD); 19.iii.05, ECB (NM); Wimbledon (grounds of Margin House, Marryatt Road), 28.ii.53, a single 3 hibernating beneath bark of fallen elm trunk, EWG (24); Wimbledon Common, 3.V.1893, AJC (HD); 6.X.40, under bark, FJC (SL); Coombe Wood, EAN (3); Shirley Common, 25.ix.1897, on oak, WW (60) (62); Purley Downs, 25.viii.1896, WW (60) (62); Chipstead, l.v.60, KCS (14); Reigate, ES (37) (3); Earls wood, l.iv.29, JLH { SL); Godstone (Tilburstow Hill), 7.xi.59, KCS (14); Cheam (Nonsuch Park), 22.vii.55, EWG (24); Ewell, 10.ix.20, EAB (BM); Epsom Common, 6.ix.53, EWG (24); Ashtead Wood, 25.ix.60, abundant on various trees, MGM (1/1960, 94); Headley Lane, 8.x. 1897, on maple, WW (SL) (60); Boxhill, 29.viii.1896, WW(6 0) (62); 7.X.09, HStJKD (HD); 29.viii.37, ECB (NM); ll.v.35, FJC (SL) (62); Bookham Common, 16.viii and 9.x. 55, EWG (24); vii, viii, ix. and x., DL (34); Claygate, JAP (BM); Surbiton, TAM (37) (3); Esher, JAP (BM); EAN { 3); Oxshott, 12.x. 1900, AB in AJC coll. (HD); Weybridge, JAP (BM); on the boundary at Byfleet, 5.ix.l3, EAB (BM); and just beyond at Woking, x.1890, viii. 1900, and ix.02, ES (HD) (37) (3); and Chobham, viii. 1876, ES (HD) (37) (3); 1 2.viii. 1 899, AJC (HD); 2.vii.33, ECB (NM). Bucks. On the boundary at Datchet, 3.iii.53, GEW (40); Slough (ICBFS), various dates from v.-vii.33 and v.-vi.34, found on Scots Pine, hawthorn, hazel and oak, WHG (41); (PILG), 26. vii. 55, beaten from apple, GEW (EMM 92, 35); and beyond at Amersham, 19. vii. 57, WJLeQ (21); and Burnham Beeches, 22.vi.12, EAB (BM). Deraeocoris ruber (Linn.) Sp. 229 p. 205 D&S p. 442 ( Capsus capillaris ) S p. 260 (C. laniarius ) B p. 440 (Sp. 315, C. ruber ) Common. Although occurring in many different trees, shrubs and herbs, it is perhaps more often found on aspen and on nettle in the wild; and on apple and various flower heads in gardens. The female is light- brown in colour while the male much darker, sometimes almost black. Both have the base of the cuneus bright red. It overwinters in the egg state and adults are found from June to September. Middx. Cripplegate, City of London, 23.vii.55, 3 swept from vegetation colonising a derelict bombed site, EWG (25); St. Johns Wood (Finchley Road), N.W.8, l.vii, 19.vii and 24.vii.50, DL (54); Hampstead Heath, 29.vii.48, DL (HD) (54); 1949, in grass in August, DL (1/1949-50, 36-38); 26.vii.50, DL (HD) (54); 3 .viii and 26.viii.50, DL (54); Hornsey (Crouch End), ix.09, 3, EAB (BM); in garden at Weston Park, vii. 03, 9 118 54 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 JAC (1/1903, 54); Finchley, 12.vii.43, on Vida , Carduus and Cytisus , CHA (17); Edmonton, 4.viii.42, HWJ (43); Brentford, JAP (BM); Ruislip L.N.R., 24.V.52, 24.vii.56 and 29.vii.55 (all adults) and 24.V.52 (V instar larva), EWG (49); 9.viii.64, adults, RAPM (49); Pinner, vii.22, $ £ $ 2, OGH (BM); Uxbridge, 23.viii.64, PL JR (BM); and Hounslow Heath, 19.vii.52 and 8.viii.53, a few adults taken by sweeping rank vegetation on a rubble tip, GEW (33b) (40). Herts. Waltham Cross (Goff’s Oaks), 15.vii.60, in garden of a house in The Drive, FB (18); Hoddesdon (Rye Meads), 5.viii.65, BSN (58); Radlett, 10.viii.58, adult, DL (SL); 26.vi.60, V instar larva, DL (54); Brickett Wood Common, 3.vii.56, IV instar larva, EWG (24); and beyond the boundary at Redbourn, 23.vii.60, DL (HD). Essex. Buckhurst Hill, 15.viii.25, <$, EAB (BM); Epping Forest (Warren Pond), 20.viii,60, on Cirsium arvense, FB (18); (Hale End), n.c. on nettles and other plants, rather common, CN (35a); Theydon Bois, vii.22, V, IV and III instar larvae, EAB (BM); and Woodford, 5. viii. 25 EAB (BM). Kent. Forest Hill, JAP (BM); Lee, WW (4) (39) (22); Kidbrook, 1893, WW (SL); Plumstead, 14.vii.52 £ $ and $ $, RGR (WBM); Blackheath, 23.vii.1900, AJC (HD); viii., very local on brambles, AAA (51); Lewisham, 24.vii. 1 891 , AJC (HD) ; WW (4) (39) (22) ; Darenth Wood, 10.vii.06, $ $ and $ $, ECB (NM) (22); 12.ix.48, by sweeping AMM (BM); 1. viii. 49, on oak, AMM (BM); Swanscombe Park, 30. viii. 07 J, ECB (NM); Wilmington, 10.viii.55, KCS (14) (22); Horton Kirby, 2.vii.61, KCS (14) (22); Longfield, 30.vii.50 and 22.vii.52, GGES (HD; Gravesend (Milton), 21. viii. 51, very abundant on Lamium album, TRES (13); West Wickham Wood, 21 .vii. 1 894, WW (60); and Westerham, 12.ix.51, AMM (BM) (22). Surrey. Wandsworth, $, JAP (BM); Streatham, 18. viii. 62, in garden of house in Mount Nod Road, PSB (16); Merton, FJC (62); Merton Park, FJC (62) ; Coombe Wood, viii. 07 <£, EAB (BM) ; Wimbledon Common, 31. vii. 56, HDS (60); FJC (62); Putney, 1923 $, HStJKD in EAB coll. (BM); Carshalton, vii. 39, in garden of house in Carshalton Park Road, $ and $ the latter on flowerhead of Achillea filipendulina “Gold Plate”; 7.viii.56 on foliage of plum; both records EWG (24); Purley (Smitham Downs), 4. viii. 07 <$, ECB (NM); Warlington (Halliloo Valley), 29. viii. 64, KCS (14); Cheam (Nonsuch Park), 22. vii. 55, EWG (24); Claygate, $, JAP (BM); Ashtead Common, 20.vii.46, SL (1/1946-47, 74); FJC (62); Reigate, GBR (62); Redhill, n.d., by sweeping nettles, J&TL (32); Headley Lane, 29. vii. 33 $ and 25. viii. 35 $, ECB (NM); Mickleham, FJC (62); Boxhill, 18.vii.37 $, ECB (NM); 27.viii.50, DL (HD); WW (62); Bookham Common, vii. 19, n.c. per DL (54); vii and viii, DL (34); 29.vii.50, DL (1/1950-51, 76); Oxshott, 17.vii.60, on Scots Pine, DL (HD); WW (62); Esher Common, JAP (BM); 12.vii.52, SL (1/1952-53, 84); 4.viii.55 and 21. viii. 54, EWG (24); on Rubus and various other herbs in deciduous woodland, OWR (61); West End Common, FJC (62); Weybridge, 21.vi.13, II instar larva, EAB (BM); and just beyond the boundary at Woking, ix. 1 888, ES (HD); Chobham, viii. 1872 and vii. 1892, ES (HD); 22.vii.33 $ and $ and 22.vii.34 $ ECB (NM); viii.54, GEW (40); and Outwood, 29.vii.51, from hedgerow herbage beneath oaks, GBR (45). Bucks. “Many localities in Bucks”, GEW (40); on the boundary at Slough (ICBFS), 4. vii., 6.vii and 10.vii.33, on oak, birch, hazel and HEMIPTERA-HETEROPTERA OF THE LONDON AREA 55 thistle, WHG (41); (PILG), 3.vii.53, GEW (40); Stoke Common, 12.vii.64, WJLeQ (21); and beyond at Chesham (Cowcroft Wood), 4.ix.65, sweeping nettle, WJLeQ (21); Latimer, 21.viii.54, on nettle, WJLeQ (21); and Burnham Beeches, 22.vi.12, II instar larva, EAB (BM); 16.vii.55, on hawthorn, WJLeQ (21). Devaeocoris scutellaris (Fab.) Sp. 230 p. 206 D&S p. 443 (C. scutellaris) Sp.261 (C. scutellaris) B p. 443 (Sp. 316, C. scutellaris) Very local. The adults which are predaceous feeders are associated with heather and hazel. They occur from mid-June until the end of July. Like the previous species this probably overwinters in the egg stage. Middlesex and Bucks records wanting. Herts. Beyond the boundary at Harpenden (Rothamsted Expt. Station), thirteen specimens taken in light traps (all adult £) on the following dates:— 26. vi. 47, l.vii.47, 2.vii.47, 18.vi.48, 21.vi.48, 25.vi.48, 18.vii.48, 27.vi.49, 28.vi.49 and 6.vii.49, TRES (EMM 86, 78); Harpenden, 28.vi.49, TRES in AMM coll. (BM); and at Royston, swept from Calluna , MGM (1/1959, 13). Essex. Epping Forest (Monk Wood), on heath, rare, CN (35a); (Chingford), 8.vii.ll, EAB (BM). Kent. Dartford Heath, vii., a single specimen beaten from bramble flowers, D&S (28) (4) (37); Trottiscliffe, 9.vii.58, a single example (of the form with the red thorax) swept from a chalk-scrub vegetation area (including hazel) on the N. Downs, KCS (EMM 98, 12) (22); KCS in AMM coll. (BM); and Shoreham, 13.vi.59, MGM (1/1959, 13) (22). Surrey. Reigate, ES (37) (3); Mickleham. 9. vii. 05, ECB (NM); Boxhill, 8.vii.l6, in the field sweeping, WW (60) (62); 30.vi.18, ECB ( NM); Bookham Common, 25.vii.64, Central Plain, in long grass, PMB (BM) (16); 21.vi.55, EWG (24); 15. vii. 49, a single $ beaten from hazel, FJC (62) and (quoted by TRES in EMM 86, 78); Oxshott, TRB (37) (3); and just beyond the boundary at Chobham, vi. 1 888 and vii. 1892, ES (HD) (37) (3); vi.1880, EAB (BM); and Horsell, JAP (BM). Deraecoris olivaceus (Fab.) Sp. 231 p. 206 Very local though perhaps spreading. First found in Britain in 1951 in Silwood Park, near Ascot, Berks, (vide SANDS, W.A., 1954, EMM 90, 301). It has since been recorded in three of the Home Counties at widely separated localities. It is associated with hawthorn, but only on those bushes bearing abundant fruit. Middx. Hounslow Heath, 14.vii and 8.viii.53, two adults beaten from hawthorn, GEW (33c) and (EMM 90, 237); HH [presumably Hounslow Heath], 23.vi.53, presented by GEW (BM). Surrey. Bookham Comoon, 11. vii. 56, a single £ beaten from a large heavily-fruiting hawthorn, GEW (EMM 92, 300); 16.vi.57, a single $ beaten from hawthorn, EWG (24). [Beyond the Society’s boundary it has been taken at Chilworth, 18.vi.61, AMM (MM); Elstead Common, 12.vi.59, on old hawthorns in fruit, AMM (BM); and Witley, 18.vi.62, AMM (BM)]. Bucks. Langley Park, 16.vi.55, beaten from well developed fruiting hawthorns growing in rough, uncut pasture, GEW (EMM 92, 47); on the boundary at Ditton Park near Datchet, 1. vii. 55, GEW (BM) (EMM 92, 47); Slough, 7.vii.62, AMM (BM); and beyond at Hedgerley Park, 56 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 2.vii.55, GEW (EMM 92, 47); and Burnham Beeches (Burnham Golf Course), 19.vii.54, beaten from well-grown fruiting hawthorns accompanied by numbers of Atrcictotomus mali, GEW (EMM 90, 237); 16.vii.55, WJLeQ (21). Alloeotomus gothicus (Fall.) Sp. 232 p. 206 Rare. First recorded in Britain from Oxshott, Surrey in 1951. Since then it has been found in five other counties including a further two in the London Area. This species is associated with plantings of Scots Pine (. Finns sylvestris ) on which adults may be found during the months of July to September. Middx. Hampstead Heath, 24.vii.57, DL (SL) (54). Kent. Blackheath, at mercury vapour light, AAA (22). Surrey. Headley Heath, 16.ix.52, on young Pinus sylvestris trees, HDS (EMM 89, 64) and (1/1952-53); Boxhill, 10.viii.52 $ ?, 20.viii.52 and 29.ix.59, beating young Scot’s Pine AMM (BM); Oxshott Heath, 14.ix.51, by beating Scots Pine, HDS (BM) (EMM 88, 273-5 and 96) and (1/1952-53, 2); 1963, AAA (51); 17.vii.60, DL (HD); Esher Common, 25.ix.51, a single $ from Scots Pine, FJC (SL) (EMM 88, 273-5 and 96) and (1/1952-53, 2); West End Common, 20.viii.51, a single $ from Scots Pine, FJC (EMM 88, 273-5 and 96) and (1/1952-53, 2); and just beyond the boundary at Egham, 6.viii.55, on pine, GEW (40); and at Chobham, 8.viii.56, GEW (40). Subfamily: Phylinae This subfamily of the Miridae has 63 representative species in Britain of which 57 have so far been recorded in the London Area. Lopus decolor (Fall.) Sp. 233 p. 210 D&S p. 393 ( Oncotylus decolor ) S p. 297 ( Onychumenus decolor ) B p. 498 (Sp. 378, Onychumenus decolor ) Frequent. Occurs throughout the London Area on commons, rough pastures, grassy banks and fields, and sometimes in damp meadows. It is associated with various grasses, particularly the bents, Agrostis canina and A. tenuis, and Yorkshire fog ( Holcus lanatus ) on which it feeds and lays its eggs. The adults are found during July and August, and rarely until early September. Middx. Hampstead Heath, 5.viii.60, DL (HD) (54); Finchley 31.vii.43, swept in grass, CHA (17); Edgeware (Scratch Wood), 21.vii.57, mostly $ $ and a few spent £ DL (54); 18.viii and 22.vii.60, DL (HD); 18-26.vii.60, a single adult and 28 V instar larvae swept from grassland, DL (EMM 97, 65); Ruislip L.N.R., 29.vii.55, by sweeping in the short grasses Agrostis tenuis and A. canina, EWG (49); Harefield, 8.vii.64, WJLeQ (21); Uxbridge, 23.vi.35, on Holcus lanatus, DCT (33a); Hounslow Heath, 14.vii. and 8.viii.53, locally common on seeding grasses on the Heath and on a rubble tip, GEW (33c) (EMM 91, 54) and (40); 26.vii and 9.viii.53, DL (HD) (54). Herts. Chorleywood, 1 0.viii. 1 6, EAB (BM) (11) (12); Bushey, 25.vii.43, CHA (17); Aldenham, 23.vii.61, DL (HD) (54) and Rickmans- worth, 18.viii.16, EAB (BM). Essex. Epping Forest, by sweeping in grassy places, CN (35a) (Chingford) 15.vii.ll, EAB (BM); (Loughton) 30.vii.50, DL (HD); (High Beech) 21.vii.53, DL (HD); Purfleet, RML (5); and beyond the boundary at Danbury Common, nr. Chelmsford, 30.vii.60, JHF (42). 121 HEMIPTERA-HETEROPTERA OF THE LONDON AREA 57 Kent. Blackheath, associated with Agrostis tenuis , AAA (51) (22); Eltham, abundant in a field by sweeping amongst short grass in July, D&S (28) (4) (22); Erith, JAP (BM); Dartford Brent, amongst ferns, etc., in August, D&S (28) (4) (22); Bexley (Joy den’s Wood) ll.vii.64, KCS (14); Darenth, D&S (22); and Sevenoaks, l.viii.57, sweeping grass, A MM (BM) (22). Surrey. Wandsworth, ES (3) (37); Wimbledon, EAN (3); Merton Park, FJC (62); Ashtead Common, l.viii.46, FJC (SL) (62); Epsom Common, FJC (62); Boxhill, 24.vi.51, DL (1/1951-52, xvi); Bookham Common, 29.vii.50, FJC (1/1950-51, 76) (62); vii., viii. DL (34); Esher Common, JAP (BM); West End Common, 21. vii. 52 and 4. viii. 53, FJC (SL); Egham, 21. vii. 54, in swampy field, ‘large numbers of larvae at bases of Juncus and grass tufts even where these were standing in water’, GEW (EMM 91, 54) (40); Chertsey, TRB (37) (3); on the boundary at Byfleet, 3.viii.l892, AJC (HD); and beyond at Chobham Common, ES (37) (3); vii. 54, large numbers swept from sparse grass tufts on dry gravelly soil, GEW (EMM 91, 54); Woking, viii. 1900, ES (HD); Guild¬ ford, 16. vii. 43, ECB (NM); Shalford EAB (3); Farley Heath, viii. 1892, EAB (BM); Abinger, viii. 1899, EAB (BM); and Gomshall, EAB (3). Bucks. On the boundary at Slough (ICBFS), 7.viii.31, a $ taken by sweeping, WHG (41); (PILG) vii. 55, GEW (40); Chalfont St. Peter, 17. vii. 25, adult and III instar larva, EAB (BM); and beyond at Whitend Park nr. Chesham, 20.vii.61, WJLEQ (21); and Beaconsfield, 8.ix.62, sweeping grass is cleared woodland, GEW (EMM 98, 207). Oncotylus viridiflavus (Goeze) Sp. 234 p. 210 D&S p. 385 (Ahoterops setulosus) S p. 297 B p. 499 (Sp. 379) Occasional. Associated with Black Knapweed or Hardheads (Centaurea nigra) feeding mainly on the flower heads. This bug over¬ winters in the egg stage and the larvae hatch in late June or beginning of July. These become mature by the end of July or early August but die off soon after pairing. Essex records wanting. Middx. Edgware (Scratch Wood) 17-25. vii. 49, on Centaurea nigra , CHA (17); 18.vii.60, 22. vii. 60 (adults, V and IV instar larvae) on knapweed, common, DL (HD) (EMM 97, 65); 5.viii.56, DL (54); 26.vii.60, DL (HD) (54); Mill Hill, 15.viii.58, DL (SL); Ruislip LNR, 24. vii. 56, V instar larva swept from short grass and herbs on chalk area, EWG (49); and Harefield, 22.vii.33, a single $ on Ononis and 27. vii. 34 and 1. viii. 35, common on Centaurea nigra, DCT (33a); 26.viii.51, WJLeQ (21). Herts. Near Whetstone, 17.vii.60, a single $ taken in light trap, PHW (47). Kent. Otford, AAA (22); and on the boundary at Sevenoaks, EAB (4) (22). Surrey. Banstead, 28.vii.55, GEW (40); Ashtead, FJC (62); Reigate, 6. viii. 50, beaten from hedgebank, GBR (EMM 87, 139) (62); Ranmore Common, 18.viii.10 and 30.vii.ll, WW (1/1910-11, 123) (60) (62); Book- ham Common, FJC (62); 29.vii., and 5. and 7.viii.50, nymphs and adults “the latter observed feeding on heads of Centaurea nigra just below the flowers”, DL (1/1950-51, 13-14) (EMM 86, xxxii) and (34); 5. viii. 50, DL (SL) (HD) and (WLJeQ coll.); 29.viii50, DL (1/1950-51, 76); and Effing¬ ham, FJC (62). 122 58 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Bucks. Beyond the boundary at Wooburn Green nr. Beaconsfield, viii.54, on knapweed, GEW (40). Conostethus griseus D&S Sp. 235 p. 211 (as C. frisicus) S p. 300 (C. salinus) B p. 499 (Sp. 380, C. salinus) Rare. Being a saltmarsh species it is in the London Area, confined to those two counties which have the appropriate maritime habitat, namely Essex and Kent. It has been taken on the Thames-side marshes in June by sweeping in marsh vegetation. Essex. Beyond the boundary at Benfleet, 18.vi.50, sweeping in saltmarsh, AMM (BM); and on Canvey Island, 27.vi.14, EAB (BM) (NM in ECB coll.). Kent. Abbey Wood (Erith) marshes, 31.viii.55, larva, EWG (24); and on the boundary near Gravesend, on Arenaria maritima , etc., JAP (36) (37) (3) (22). Conostethus roseus (Fall.) Sp. 237 p. 21 1 D&S p.398 S p.301 B p. 501 (Sp. 382) Local. Has occasionally been taken in the London Area from the end of May to early July where it is considered to be associated with papilionaceous plants especially clovers ( Trifolium spp .) and rest-harrow (< Ononis spp.). The late Dr. A. M. Massee took it some years ago on Gromwell ( Lithospermum officinale) though its presence on that species of plant may have been only incidental. Bucks, records wanting. Middx. Hampton Wick, ES (37); Elillingdon, 17.vi.33, in dry grass (33a). Herts. St. Albans, 24.vi.24, PH (BM); and beyond the boundary at Royston, vi.05, EAB (BM (NM in ECB coll.) (SL) (11) and (12). Essex. Epping, TAM (5) (35a); Epping Forest, 22.vi.ll, one specimen by sweeping, CN (35a). [The record of W.A. Sands of Conostethus salinus Sahl. (=C. griseus D&S — the previous species) reported in Epping Forest, 1950 (see Essex Naturalist 28, 296, 1951) is probably intended for this species]. Kent. Eltham, vi., abundant by sweeping amongst short grass etc., in a field, D&S (28) (4) (22) (37). Surrey. Coombe Wood, ES (37) (3) (62); Wimbledon Common, EAN (3); 20.iv.49, FJC (SL) (62); Reigate, ES (37) (3) (62); Oxshott, TRB (37) (3) (62); Weybridge JAP (BM); GCC (37) (3) (62); and beyond the boundary at Woking, vi. 1888, ES (HD) (37) (3) (62); Chobham Com¬ mon, 18.vi.55, GEW (40); vii., a few swept from dry grass tufts, GEW (EMM 91, 54); Virginia Water, 6.vi.55, on Trifolium GEW (40); Guild¬ ford, GCC (3); and Whitley Common, 12.vi.59, “associated with Litho¬ spermum officinale L.”, AMM (BM); v-vi.58 locally abundant, larvae and adults in short grass, Trifolium arvense, etc., GEW (Entom. 92, 9, 1959). Hoplomachus thunbergi (Fall.) Sp. 238 p. 212 D&S p. 396 ^ S p. 301 B p. 502 (Sp. 383) Local. This species, where it has been recorded on mainly Mouse¬ eared hawkweed ( Hieracium pilosella), seems to occur only in situations where there are many of its host plants growing together in short turf (e.g. on chalk downland, commons, edges of golf courses), and where such colonies have been established some years. Overwintering in 123 HEMIPTERA-HETEROPTERA OE THE LONDON AREA 59 the egg stage, the adults of this bug may be found in June and July. Middx. Finchley, 8.vi.44, on Hieracium auriantiacum and Leontodon sp., CHA (17) (EMM 81, 163-4); 6.vii.46 and 8.vi.47, on H. auriantiacum CHA (17); Ruislip LNR, 27.vi.55, three adults swept from a large colony of Hieracium pilosella growing in short turf on bark of dry ditch, EWG (49) (24). Herts. St. Albans, 24.vi.24, PH (BM). Essex. Beyond the boundary at Althorne, near Burnham-on-Crouch, 16. vii. 50, in rough meadows behind the sea wall, WAS (35b). Kent. Darenth Wood, - TRB (4) (22); Birch Wood nr. Darenth Wood, vii., JAP (28 (36) (4) (22); and beyond the boundary at Burnham (Gt. Culand chalk pit) 26.vi.65 and 30.vi.65, on H. pilosella, abundant, AMM (BM). Surrey. Coulsdon, 20. vii. 07, ECB (NM); Reigate, ES (37) (3); Reigate district, J&TL (32); Boxhill, 28.vi.08, WW (60) (62); 18.vii.37, ECB (NM); 14.vii.51, DL (HD) (SL) (WJLeQ coll.); AAA (51); DC in AAA coll. (51); Ashtead Common, 10.vii.48, FJC (SL) (62); Bookham Common, 4. vii. 54, associated with Hieracium pilosella, AMM (BM); on the boundary near Egham, vii and viii.64, on H. pilosella on dry bank, GEW (EMM 91, 54); and beyond at Chobham Common, vii. 1877, ES (HD) (3). Bucks. Beyond the boundary at Wooburn Green, 10.vi.53, on Hieracium pilosella, GEW (40); Booker, 19. vii. 54, GEW (WJLeQ coll.); and Taplow, 7.vi.53, in a disused sand-pit, adults and larvae in some numbers on one large patch of Hieracium pilosella, GEW (EMM 89, 232) (40) (WJLeQ coll.); 18.vi.54 GEW (SL). Tinicephalus hortulanus (Mey.-Dur) Sp. 239 p. 212 D&S p. 394 (Oncotylus tanceti) S p. 303 (Macrocoleus hortulanus) B p. 504 (Sp. 386, M. hortulanus) Occasional. Associated with the Common Rock-rose (Helianthemum chamaecistus), a plant essentially of the chalk areas particularly along the N. Downs, and in Herts, and Bucks. The adults of this bug may be found on its host during July and August. Herts. Beyond the boundary on Tring Hills, vii. 1897, on Helianthe¬ mum, AP (HD) (11) (12) (37). Essex. Purfleet, RML (4). Kent. Darenth Wood, JAP (BM); ES (37) (4) (22). Surrey. Caterham, GCC (37) (3); Chipstead, 11. vii. 56, GEW (40); Banstead (Park Downs), 8. vii. 55, a large number taken as adults and all larval stages on Helianthemum chamaecistus (primary food plant), GEW (EMM 92, 48); Banstead Downs, AAA (EMM 95, 96); Reigate Hill, vii. 1873, on Onosis [s/c], ES (HD) (BM) (37) (3); Mickleham Downs, JAP (BM); ES (37) (3); 17.vii.48, amongst Helianthemum, FJC (SL) (1/1948/49, 73); between Leatherhead and Mickleham, vii, sweeping amongst flowers, etc., on hedgebank, D&S (28) (3); Boxhill, 9.vi.l7, III and II instar larvae, EAB (BM); FJC (62); Headley Lane, ES (36); and beyond the boundary at Shere, viii.1892, £A£(BM) (3); Abinger, 26.vi.15, EAB (BM); and Chobham, viii.1876, ES (BM). Bucks. Just outside the boundary at Latimer, 18.ix.34 on Helianthe¬ mum, DCT (12); and beyond at Wooburn Green, 10.vi.53, GEW (40 and Coombe Hill, 11. vii. 54, by sweeping grass on chalk hillside, WJLeQ (21) (EMM 90, 250). 60 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Megalocoleus molliculus (Fall.) Sp. 240 p. 212 D&S p. 387 ( Macrocoleus molliculus) S p. 303 {Macrocoleus molliculus) B p. 503 (Sp. 385) Locally common. Another species confined to a single host plant, namely the Common Yarrow ( Achillea millefolium). This bug over¬ winters in the egg stage; the larvae hatching in early June. Adults which may be taken by sweeping are found from July to September. Middx. Cripplegate, City of London, 23.vii.55, IV and V instar larvae swept from vegetation colonizing a derelict bombed basement site, EWG (25); Hampstead Heath, 5.vii.52, 26.vii.53 and 15.viii.50, DL (54); Muswell Hill, viii.20, EAB (BM); Finchley, 20.vii.43, on Achillea, CEL A (17); Edgeware (Scratch Wood), 22.vii.60, scarce, DL (HD) (54); Ruislip LNR, 29.vii.55, f /c] on Tansy, DL (HD) (1/1950-51, 77); 25.vii.52, DL (HD) ( WJLeQ coll.); 12.ix.53 on Tansy, WJLeQ (21); Surbiton, on Achillea , ES (37) (3); Oxshott Heath. 18.vii.53, common [s/c] on Tansy near railway station, FJC (1/1953-54, 85-86); West End Common, FJC (62); and beyond the boundary at Chobham, viii.1875, viii.l 876 and vii.1892 on Tanacetum , ES (HD) (36) (37); by the River Wey at Burnham near Guildford, 20.vii.43 (?(?.& ? ?, ECB (NM); 20.vii.45, AMM (BM); Gomshall, FJC (62); and Shalford, EAB (37) (3). Bucks. Langley, 20.viii.56, on Tansy, GEW (40); Slough (PILG), viii.53, “common" on Tanacetum vulgare on canal bank, GEW (EMM 90, 40); and beyond the boundary at Amersham, 22.ix.56, WJLeQ (21). Amblytylus delicatus (Perr.) Sp. 242 p. 213 S p. 304 B p. 505 (Sp. 387) Rare. Only taken so far in Surrey (both records beyond the LNHS area). The adults should be searched for, from mid July to mid August, on its host plant cudweed ( Filago germanica) which grows in dry situ¬ ations. The bug overwinters in the egg stage. Surrey. Beyond the boundary at Woking, viii.1888, ES (HD) (37) (3); and at Witley, 8.vii.58, GEW (40) (Entom. 92, 9-10 (1959)). Amblytylus brevicollis Fieb Sp. 243 p. 213 S p. 305 B p. 505 (Sp. 388) Rare. A species occurring in dry grassland and taken by sweeping from late June to August. It is sometimes found in company with Lopus decolor, the males of which the male of A. brevicollis resembles. Middx. Uxbridge, 27.vii.34, a single $ on Holcus, DCT (33a). (Mr. D. Leston (in litt.) considers that this record probably refers to the next species]. Herts. Beyond the boundary at Harpenden, 15.vii.37, a single BSW in AMM coll. (BM). Kent. Shooters Hill, 30.vii.1900, in shrubbery (60) (4) (39) (22). Surrey. Chipstead, 16.vii.ll, ECB (NM); Mickleham, JAP (BM); Boxhill, 18.vii.37, ECB (NM); Ran more Common, 6.viii.05, by sweeping, WW (60) (62); Oxshott, WW (62); West End Common, 23.vii.ll, WW (60) (62); on the boundary at Wisley Common, WW (62); and beyond at Woking, vii.1890, ES (HD) (BM) (37) (3); Chobham, vi. 1 876, ES (HD) (37) (3). Bucks. On the boundary at Slough (ICBFS), 19.vi.34, found on grass, WHG (41). Amblytylus nasutus (Kirschb.) Sp. 244 p. 214 D&S p. 389 (A. affinis ) S p. 305 (A. affinis) B p. 505 (Sp. 389, A. affinis) Local. Occasionally found on commons and wasteland where it feeds on meadow grass (Poa pratensis) and allied species. Overwintering eggs hatch in May and the larvae become adults from mid June. Their numbers have diminished by early August. Middx. Cripplegate, City of London, 18.vi.55, swept from vegetation colonizing a derelict bombed basement site, EWG (25); Hampstead Heath, 126 62 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 20.vi.49, near Jack Straws, widespread, DL (HD) ( WJLeQ coll.) (1)1909-50, 36-8); Finchley, 2.vii.44, on Holcus lanatus, CHA (17) (EMM 81, 163-4); l.vii.50, DL (SL); Ruislip LNR, 8.viii.64, amongst grass on chalk area, RAPM (49); Harefield, 26.vi.52, WJLeQ (21); Hounslow, Heath 14.vii.53, locally common on seeding grasses on a rubble tip and on the Heath, GEW (40) (33c) (EMM 91, 54); 26.vii.53, WJLeQ (21). Herts. Rickmansworth, 4.vii.l900, S. R. Ashby in WW coll. (60); Bushey, 25.vii.43, CHA (17); Elstree, 22.vi.60, DL (HD) (54); Radlett, 20.vi.60, two adults and ten V instar larvae swept from grass in meadows, some found to be parasitized, DL (EMM 97, 66) (HD) (54); and beyond the boundary at Harpenden, 3. vii.55, GGES (HD). Essex. Beyond the boundary at Benfleet, 27.vi.14, EAB (BM); and at Writtle, 29.vi.48, by sweeping, AMM (BM). Kent. Blackheath, on clover, AAA (51) (22); Abbey Wood, on clover, AAA (51) (22); Lee, TRB (37) (22); Eltham, vii, a single specimen by sweeping short grass, etc, D&S (28) (4) (22) (37) (36); Bexley (Joyden's Wood) 11. vii. 64 and 3.vii.65, KCS (14); Ruxley gravel pit, 8. vii. 67, KCS (17); Farningham Wood, 21.vi.49, 2. vii. 61 and 5.vii.65, KCS (14) (22); and Westerham, AAA (22); and just beyond the boundary at Sevenoaks (Knole Park) 27.vii.63, KCS (14) (48). Surrey. Riddlesdown, 20.vi.53, EWG (24); Reigate, ES (37) (3); Boxhill, 18.vii.37, ECB (NM); 24.vi.51, DL (1/1951-52, xvi); FJC (62); Cheam (Nonsuch Park), 8.vii.55, EWG (24); Ashtead, GCC (37) (3); FJC (62); Mickleham, JAP (BM); Bookham Common, 1. vii. 49, FJC (SL) (62); vii, DL (34); 19. vii. 64, PSB (16); Sunbury-on-Thames, 22.vi.52, by sweeping, AMM (BM); Wey bridge, JAP (BM); on the boundary near Egham, 21. vii. 54, in swampy field, “large swarms of larvae at bases of Juncus tufts and grasses even when these were growing in standing water”, GEW (EMM 91, 54) (40); and beyond at Woking, vi. 1 882, viiJ890 and vi.1892, ES)( HD) (37) (3); Chobham Common, vii. 54, large numbers swept from sparse grass tufts on dry gravelly soil, GEW (EMM 91, 54). Bucks. Slough, 23. vii. 54, GEW (40); and beyond the boundary at Chesham Vale, 5. vii. 52, WJLeQ (21); Amersham, 22. and 24. vii. 56, 7. vii. 51 and ! 8. vii. 53, WJLeQ (21); Hawridge Common, between Chesham and Wendover, 23.vi.61, WJLeQ (21); Coombe Hill, 7. vii. 63, PSB (16); and at many other localities in the country, GEW (40). Macvotylus solitarius (Mey.-Diir) Sp. 245 p. 214 D&S p. 395 (Oncotylus pilosus) S p. 298 B p. 506 (Sp. 390) ' Local, though not uncommon in some localities where its primary host, Hedge Woundwort ( Stachys sylvatica ) occurs particularly if such colonies of the plant are growing at the edges of woods. The adults may be found from July until the middle of August. Also stated to be on Black Horehound (Ballota nigra). Middx. St. John’s Wood (Finchley Road), N.W.8, 13.vi.52, in old bombed garden on Stachys sylvatica DL (HD) (54); 16. vii. 52, DL (54); Finchley, 24.vi.44, on Stachys, CHA (17); Ruislip, 7.viii.44, CHA (17); Ruislip LNR, 24. vii. 56, adults swept from Stachys sylvatica EWG (49); vi-vii.64, larvae on host plant, RAPM (49); Uxbridge, 27.vii.34 and 8.viii.36, common on Stachys sylvatica on the juices of which it will feed, DCT( 33a). 127 HEMIPTERA-HETEROPTERA OE THE LONDON AREA 63 Herts. Bushey, 25.vii.43, CHA (17); Batchworth (Bishop's Wood), 14.vi.60, III-V instar larvae (the bulk which was large was in III and IV) on Stachys sylvatica, some parasitized, one bred out to adult 23.vi.60, DL (HD) (54) (EMM 97, 66); Hatfield Forest, 24.vii.60, DGH (ST); and beyond the boundary at Harpenden, 18.vii.37, BSW in PM coll. (BM); ll.viii.37, DCT (12); 12.viii.55, GOES (HD); 23.vii.55, in light trap, GGES (HD); and Berkhamsted, 31.vii.33, DCT (12). Kent. Charlton, AAA (22); Fawkham, 22.vii.56, GGES (HD); Gravesend, 4.viii.48, on Ballota nigra , TRES (13) (22); Eynsford, AAA (51); and beyond the boundary at Birling E. of Wrotham, 18.vii.54, AMM (BM) and AM Min PLJR coll. (MM); and Harvel, N.E. of Wrotham, 18.vii.54, both on flowers of woundwort, AMM (BM). Surrey. Caterham, GCC (37) (3); Chipstead, 21.vii.12, ECB (NM); Reigate, ES (37) (3); locally plentiful a Stachys sylvatica being first seen on 2.vii.50 and finally disappearing after 14.viii.50, GBR (EMM 87, 139); Mickleham, JAP (37) (3); Boxhill, FJC (60); Ashtead Common, 9.vii.47, abundant on Stachys , FJC (SL) (62) (1/1907-48, 57); Claygate, JAP (BM); Bookham Common, 16.viii.55, $, EWG (24); Oxshott, FJC (62); on the boundary at Effingham, 22.vii.49, FJC (SL) (62); and Egham, 21.vii.54, GEW (40); and beyond at Guildford, 27.vii.43, ECB (NM); Shere, EC , (37) (3); viii.1890, EAB (BM); viii.1892/ EAB (BM), EAB in ES coll. (HD) and EAB in ECB coll. (NM); and Chilworth, 25.vii.44, ECB (BM). Bucks. Denham, 10.viii.58, GEW (40); on the boundary at Slough (PILG), 1953, several found on Stachys sylvatica , GEW (EMM 90, 40); and beyond at Latimer Road, Chesham, 4.viii.65, sweeping in a field, WJLeQ (21); Latimer, 25.viii.51, WJLeQ (21); and Chesham Vale, 5.vii.52, WJLeQ (21). Macrotylus paykulli (Fall.) Sp. 246 p. 214 D&S p. 388 ( Macrocoleus paykulli) S p. 299 B p. 507 (Sp. 391) Local. This species is associated with Rest-harrow ( Ononis repens and O. spinosa), plants of dry situations such as on downland, waste ground and open banks. The adults are present on the host from June until August. Middx. Enfield Chase (Hadley Wood), 25.vi.44, CHA (17); Hare- field, 21.vi.52, WJLeQ (21). Herts. Barnet, viii.1885, EAB (BM); Chorley Wood, 16.viii.16, EAB (BM); St. Albans, 10.vii.24 and vii.25, EAB (BM); and beyond the boundary at Royston, 25.V.12, EAB (BM) (11); Wymondley, EAB (11); “widely distributed [sic] wherever Ononis its food occurs”, DCT (12). Essex. Woodford, 17.viii.25, EAB (BM): and beyond the boundary at Benfleet, 27.vi.24, EAB (BM). Kent. Lewisham, 1896, WW (37); and beyond the boundary at Sevenoaks, AMM (22). Surrey. [The record in Douglas & Scott (source 28 and repeated in source 3) under Macrotylus solitarius as “between Sanderstead and Addington, viii, a single specimen by sweeping amongst Ononis spinosa and c.,” should obviously be referred to this species — E. W. G.] ; Banstead Downs, AAA (51); Ashstead, JLH (62); Reigate Hill, vii.1873, ES (HD); Boxhill, WW (62); 17.vii.1895, AJC (HD); AAA (51); Headley Lane, WW (62); 10.viii.35, ECB (NM); Mickleham, 29.vi.ll, ECB (NM); and beyond the boundary at Abinger 25.V.12, EAB (BM). 128 64 THE LONDON NATURALIST, NO. 47, 1 968 Bucks. Just outside the boundary at Hedgerley, 17.vii.55, on Rest- harrow, GEW (40); and beyond at Coombe Hill, ll.vii.54 and 6.viii.60, on Ononis, WJLeQ (21). Orthonotus rufifrons (Fall.) Sp. 247 p, 215 D&S p. 352 ( Byrsoptera caricis) S p. 307 ( B . rufifrons ) B p. 509 {Sp. 393, B. rufifrons) Local. A species sometimes confused with Mecomma ambulans with which both sexes resemble. It is found on nettle particularly in those clumps growing in damp, shady situations. The adults which are present from July until September feed upon the flower buds and unripe fruit of the host plant. Middx. Edgeware (Scratch Wood), 30.vii.44, on Urtica, CHA (17); Ruislip LNR, 29.vii.58, $, EWG (49). Herts. Barnet, viii.1885, EAB $; Chorley Wood, EAB (11); St. Albans, viii.1885, $, EAB ; and beyond the boundary at Wymondley, viii.1880, (f, EAB (BM) (11). Essex. Theydon Bois, vii.12, adult $ and IV instar, EAB (BM); vii. 22, by sweeping CN (32a); Epping Forest (Ivy Chimneys), 25.vii.59, FB (18); and Purfleet, RML (5). Kent. Blackheath, vii, D&S (28) (4) (22); Abbey Wood, 30.vii.1898, by sweeping, IV IV (60) (4) (39) (22); Shoreham, 13.viii.22,