GMS NEWS Spring 2009

GMS NEWS GMS News Week 9 Spring 2009

Twin-spot Quaker by Tony Williams

Introduction and UK situation Dave Grundy

So, What’s the News from Spring 2009?

We’ve had records back from an amazing total of 257 gardens to date – well done to everyone who sent them in. This is a big increase on the 145 gardens that returned records for spring 2008 – so well done to you all.

I’m hearing mixed stories of recorders doing much better in spring 2009, but with some doing poorly. So how do our collective statistics back this up? If you remember 2007 and 2008 were both very poor summers for moth numbers in gardens.

1 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

Hebrew Character, top of the charts for spring 2009 – D. Grundy

Spring 2008 was also very poor, but if you remember back to 2007 then the spring was very warm and good for moths, going rapidly down hill in May. So will spring 2009 beat the awful spring for 2008 and will it come close to figures for the very good spring of 2007? Enough of the talk, now on with the charts for spring 2009. The following table shows the top 20 commonest moths across all of our gardens:

Britain & Ireland Spring GMS Totals Top Twenty Species Name Total Average / Comments Position Moths garden 1 Hebrew Character 8351 32.49 2 Common Quaker 7866 30.61 3 Small Quaker 4258 16.57 Not CI 4 Clouded Drab 2434 9.47 5 Early Grey 1576 6.13 6 Early Thorn 709 2.76 7 Twin-spotted Quaker 632 2.46 8 Oak Beauty 471 1.83 Not EE,NE 9 Brindled Beauty 391 1.52 Not IR,NE,NW,CI 10 March Moth 386 1.50 Not NE 11 Chestnut 317 1.23 Not NW 12 Double-striped Pug 282 1.10 13 Red Chestnut 281 1.09 Not WM,EE,EM,IR,SE,CI 14 Shuttle-shaped Dart 238 0.93 Not IR,SC,CI 15 Muslin Moth 231 0.90 Not NE,NW,SC 16 = Brimstone Moth 230 0.89 16 = Flame Shoulder 230 0.89 18 Dotted Border 178 0.69 Not NE,NW,SE,CI

2 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

19 Powdered Quaker 168 0.65 Not NW,SE,CI 20 Early Tooth-striped 117 0.46 Only SC

Nothing 257 1.00 (The Comments column shows areas where the species are not on the recording form – usually because it is rare in this area)

So, the commonest moth we recorded was Hebrew Character for the second year running, with a total of 8,351 moths seen and an average of 32.49 per garden over the 9 weeks. The average per garden shows a big increase on 2008 when the average was only 20.06. The bottom row marked ‘Nothing’ is a measure of how many weeks there were when moth-trappers put their traps out and recorded no moths at all. By chance this gives a total of exactly 257 blank weeks between us giving an average of one week out of nine with an empty trap across all gardens. This is lower than the average of 1.35 recorded in 2008. So between us we had less empty traps than in 2008, which suggests a better spring for us. The ‘Spring Big 5’ were again the commonest species across our gardens, these are Hebrew Character, Common Quaker, Small Quaker, Clouded Drab and Early Grey. The first three species are by far the commonest. Occasionally Twin- spotted Quaker can be nearly common enough to qualify in a ‘Spring Big 6’, but it was a long way behind in 2009.

Early Thorn, had an excellent spring – DaveGrundy

Early Thorn had an excellent spring moving up from an average of 1.26 per garden to 2.76 per garden. Pic shows characteristic resting pose, butterfly fashion, of Early Thorn.

Red Chestnut did well in Spring 2009 to reach 13th place with records mostly coming from Wales, Scotland and SW England. Powdered Quaker only just makes it into our top 20 and may be a species for us to worry about as it seems to be in decline, with good numbers only coming from the East of England with an average of 2.46 per garden. Finally it will be a surprise for most of us to see Early Tooth-striped in the top 20. This species is only recorded in Scotland in the GMS, so it is a sign of just how common it is that Scottish gardens record an average of 7.80 per garden to take the species into the top 20! Another interesting feature to see from this chart is how some species that are common in our gardens are just not seen in other gardens. For

3 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

instance I hadn’t realised that Shuttle-shaped Dart is scarce in Scotland and Small Quaker is scarce in the Channel Isles (I had just assumed they were common everywhere!). Comparisons can now be made for West Midlands records for the first 9 weeks in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009. Unfortunately we don’t have enough data yet to make these comparisons for other parts of the UK. A comparison of the fortunes of the ‘Spring Big 5’ and Twin-spotted Quaker is shown in the graph below:

West Midland Garden Moth Records - 6 Common Spring Species - 2004 to 2009

30.00

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00 Average NumbersAverage of Moths per Garden 5.00

0.00 123456 Year

Common Quaker Hebrew Character Small Quaker Clouded Drab Early Grey Twin-spotted Quaker

The graph shows well that this is the best spring for Hebrew Character since West Midlands GMS spring records began in 2004. Small Quaker, Common Quaker and Hebrew Character all appear to have populations fluctuating in parallel. The other three species are also fluctuating at lower levels but roughly in parallel. 2009 was a good spring for all of these species.

So Which are the Commonest Ten Species in each GMS area?

Top 10 GMS Species for All Areas – Spring 2009 (a) Channel Isles (6) Wales (31) East England (24) East Midlands (17) Species Avge./ Species Avge./ Species Avge./ Species Avge./ garden garden garden garden 1 C Quaker 37.50 H Character 46.10 C Quaker 30.13 H Character 14.59 2 H Character 22.67 C Quaker 34.68 H Character 29.04 C Quaker 12.12 3 Early Grey 17.33 C Drab 18.55 S Quaker 12.25 Early Grey 6.18 4 S-s Dart 9.50 S Quaker 10.45 C Drab 11.88 C Drab 4.88 5 C Drab 7.67 Early Grey 9.03 Early Grey 5.13 Early Thorn 1.06 6 E Thorn 7.50 E Thorn 4.94 P Quaker 2.46 S Quaker 0.88

4 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

7 F Shoulder 6.83 Brindled 4.58 T-s Quaker 2.08 S-s Dart 0.82 Beauty 8 Oak Beauty 4.67 T-s Quaker 3.94 S-s Dart 1.58 March Moth 0.71 9 T-s Quaker 4.33 Oak Beauty 3.77 Brimstone 1.42 Muslin 0.71 10 D-s Pug Red Chestnut 3.61 D-s Pug 1.38 LB Apple 0.53 Moth

Nothing 0.33 Nothing 0.29 Nothing 0.88 Nothing 1.88

Top 10 GMS Species for All Areas – Spring 2009 (b) Ireland (7) North East (2) North West (16) Scotland (15) Species Avge./ Species Avge./ Species Avge./ Species Avge./ garden garden garden garden 1 H Character 33.71 H Character 30.00 C Quaker 32.81 H Character 47.47 2 C Quaker 21.00 C Drab 14.50 H Character 29.63 C Quaker 42.80 3 C Drab 12.29 C Quaker 10.00 C Drab 11.06 C Drab 15.27 4 Early Grey 10.29 Red Chestnut 5.00 S Quaker 8.13 E Tooth- 7.80 striped 5 E Thorn 8.00 Yellow 3.00 Early Grey 5.94 Chestnut 4.87 Horned 6 March Moth 3.86 Early Grey 2.00 T-s Quaker 2.69 Red 3.67 Chestnut 7 T-s Quaker 2.00 Garden 1.00 E Thorn 2.56 T-s Quaker 2.80 Carpet 8 S Quaker 1.86 Engrailed 1.00 March Moth 1.38 Brindled 2.67 agg. Pug 9 Dotted 1.43 S Quaker 1.00 Oak Beauty 1.38 Yellow 2.60 Border Horned 10 P Quaker 1.00 Chestnut 1.00 E subpurp - 1.25 S Quaker 2.07 urella

Nothing 1.71 Nothing 1.00 Nothing 0.81 Nothing 2.20

Top 10 GMS Species for All Areas – Spring 2009 (c) South East (29) South West (40) West Midlands (52) York / Humber (18) Species Avge./ Species Avge./ Species Avge./ Species Avge./ garden garden garden garden 1 S Quaker 71.10 H Character 41.95 H Character 28.25 H Character 26.50 2 C Quaker 50.31 C Quaker 27.55 C Quaker 25.27 C Quaker 23.78 3 H Character 25.34 S Quaker 11.25 S Quaker 17.04 C Drab 9.50 4 Early Grey 8.21 Early Grey 5.58 C Drab 6.75 Early Grey 5.11 5 C Drab 6.69 C Drab 5.20 Early Grey 4.44 S Quaker 2.83 6 S-s Dart 3.00 E Thorn 3.63 E Thorn 2.44 White-s H- 1.50 moth 7 Oak Beauty 2.79 T-s Quaker 3.45 T-s Quaker 2.15 E Thorn 1.50

5 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

8 Brimstone 2.59 Oak Beauty 3.03 Oak Beauty 1.62 P Quaker 1.06 9 D-s Pug 2.48 F Shoulder 2.43 March Moth 1.25 Chestnut 0.72 10 T-s Quaker 2.41 Muslin 2.40 Brindled 1.17 Twenty- 0.50 Beauty plume

Nothing 0.45 Nothing 1.00 Nothing 1.42 Nothing 1.11 (The figure in brackets is the number of gardens for that area, eg. 29 gardens sent in records for SE England)

For most areas the top ten species are roughly the same as for the national statistics, but there are interesting variations. Small Quaker is the commonest species in SE England with a very high total. Common Quaker appears commoner than Hebrew Character in the Channel Isles, E and SE England. Hebrew Character appears commoner in most other areas. Clouded Drab is in the top three species for Wales, Ireland, Scotland and the north of England. Brimstone is only in the top ten for E and SE England. Powdered Quaker is much commoner in E England than elsewhere. Yellow Horned is a common garden moth in Scotland and NE England , while not very common elsewhere.

Yellow Horned, common in Scotland and NE England gardens – D. Grundy

The records for nothing in the trap are interesting to see with Wales and the Channel Isles recording the lowest number of empty traps, while Scotland and Ireland that are much further north and west record much higher numbers. Maybe more surprising is to see E and W Midlands with higher numbers, does this maybe show that the centre

6 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 of England is cooler in spring due to being further away from the warming influence of the sea. So, well done to everyone in recording so many moths for us to study. It appears that the average numbers of moths per garden for most species have increased significantly from 2008 to 2009, with the average number of empty traps declining. So I believe that we can safely say that spring 2009 was better than 2008 for most areas and on a par with 2007 for most species. What will happen with our early summer records – I suspect that a cold May will be reflected in out early summer records, but will we get a warm June to increase numbers?

Co-ordinators reports

First quarter in Scotland. Heather Young, GMS regional co-ordinator.

15 sets of results were returned north of the border – a healthy start to the season, as only 4 Scottish gardens were represented in the 2008 figures. Since Dave’s report covers the main vital statistics, mine will be a little more qualitative than quantitative. We now have excellent geographic coverage of Scotland, with traps set from Orkney to Castle Douglas in Dumfries and Galloway, and good representation from coast to coast including every category of garden classification (small – very large; urban – rural). Not surprisingly, we therefore have a huge range in the numbers of moths turning up in our traps – from 0 (yes, zero) to 753 individuals, representing 35 species (23 species in the most productive garden). No doubt the stats experts will eventually tease out the reasons behind the differences in catches, so I will content myself with expressing gratitude to all those who faithfully set their traps each week, only to record yet another nil return – I’m sure things can only get better!

A large, rural garden in Rosehall, near Lairg, Sutherland, and a Scarce Prominent, one of its most illustrious inhabitants. Photographs courtesy of Christine Blanco.

More than half of all our moths were recorded from two gardens near A small, urban garden in Glasgow – Scott Killecrankie in Perthshire, so if you’re blames the lack of illustrious inhabitants on the over-enthusiastic garden maintenance scheme! planning a moth-ing holiday, you know Photograph courtesy of Scott Shanks. where to start! One of the members there was the proud recipient of an ALS beginner’s kit from the GMS, and also our youngest participant in Scotland – well done Lewis, keep up the good work.

A quick run-down of our Scottish top ten (based on overall numbers recorded), in the time-honoured tradition of reverse order, reveals Small Quaker surprisingly sneaking

7 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

in at Number 10. ‘Locally abundant’ I feel is the appropriate term, as only 3 gardens reported this species (2 in Killiecrankie, and one in Rosehall, Sutherland). Number 9 is the rather more spectacular Yellow Horned, with Christine’s little Rosehall Heath trap brimming with 17 in week 3, but much more widespread, occurring in 6 of our gardens (including my own I’m glad to say). Number 8 in the abundance chart is the Brindled Pug, the cause of much debate in the GMS chat room, but thankfully only 4 of us had to grapple with its identification! A species I understand to be increasing in abundance in Scotland appears at Number 7 – the Twin-spotted Quaker – again recorded in 4 gardens, in central and western areas (and would have been 5 if the one I saw in mine had been on a GMS night!). Red Chestnut makes the chart at Number 6, occurring from Orkney to the Borders in 8 of the 15 gardens, one more garden than, but not quite as abundant as, the Chestnut, which is our Number 5. Another species occurring in greater numbers in the northern half of the country (and another one I recorded only on a non-GMS night!) comes in at Number 4 – Early Tooth-striped – six gardens including Lee’s in Hoy on Orkney. So what are our Top Three early season moths? No prizes for guessing they all belong to the Orthosia tribe! In third spot, the rather unflatteringly-named Clouded Drab, in almost every garden outside Glasgow (12 in all). A very close second place goes to the aptly-named Common Quaker, in 13/15 gardens; but with a whopping 712 individuals, also in 13 gardens across the length and breadth of the country, our Number One for the first quarter of GMS 2009 is (fanfare) the Hebrew Character! I quite like the little chaps, being easy to identify, and extremely co-operative (very good at playing dead), but some folk must have got a bit tired of counting them – 155 of Lee’s 180 Orkney moths were Hebrew Characters!

So much for the GMS species list – but what else is out there? One good thing about having people trapping regularly, regardless of the weather forecast, is that records are generated for all species of moth across the country, and if passed on to the relevant county moth recorders, can contribute to the National Moth Recording Scheme, and add to our knowledge of moth distribution and abundance. I’ve already mentioned Scarce Prominent, a ‘local’ species that cropped up in more than one garden, but this is really just an excuse to show-case one of Scotland’s most spectacular moths in an effort to cause a few of our southern colleagues to feel just a little twinge of jealousy (exotic migrants are thin on the ground up here!). Another recipient of an ALS beginner’s kit, Margaret in Aboyne, Aberdeenshire, managed to trap not one, but two (a matching pair) beautiful Kentish Glory moths, and I leave you with the stunning evidence (good on you Margaret!):

Male Kentish Glory from Aboyne. Female Kentish Glory, also from Aboyne. Photograph courtesy of Harry Scott. Photograph courtesy of David Jenkins.

8 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 Report from Wales. Norman Lowe, GMS Cymru co-ordinator

Recorders in Wales have contributed results from a record 31 gardens. Most recorders complained of poor results and more than half recorded less than 100 moths over the 9 weeks. On the other hand two recorders, who must live in favoured locations, notched up more than 450 moths, an average of over 50 moths on each night!

The table below shows the numbers of the 20 commonest moths. As usual, the Big Spring Five take the top 5 positions, although Clouded Drab is in a higher position then usual and Small Quaker and Early Grey have dropped down accordingly.

Rank Name No. per garden 2009 1 Hebrew Character 1429 2 Common Quaker 1075 3 Clouded Drab 575 4 Small Quaker 324 5 Early Grey 280 6 Early Thorn 153 7 Brindled Beauty 142 8 Twin-spotted Quaker 122 9 Oak Beauty 117 10 Red Chestnut 112 11 Mottled Grey 94 12 Chestnut 70 13 March Moth 60 14 Streamer 48 15 Dotted Border 46 16 Shoulder Stripe 44 17 Double-striped Pug 40 18 Engrailed 20 18 Powdered Quaker 20 20 Purple Thorn 15

Now that we have a 3 year run of data it’s interesting to see how numbers have fluctuated and the table below shows the average number per garden during the period. It can be seen that almost all species have declined between 2007 and 2009, some by a large amount.

In particular Small Quaker, Shoulder Stripe and Double-striped Pug have gone down by more than 75% and all three have declined consistently over the period. Only three species, Early Thorn, Purple Thorn and Mottled Grey have increased and each of them declined in 2008 but increased sufficiently this year to more than make good that loss.

Early Thorn showed an increase in Wales over 2007

9 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

Average no. per garden % Change Rank Name 2007-2009 2009 2008 2007 1 Hebrew Character 46.10 26.50 58.11 -20.67 2 Common Quaker 34.68 19.12 75.72 -54.20 3 Clouded Drab 18.55 10.62 20.89 -11.20 4 Small Quaker 10.45 22.69 43.72 -76.10 5 Early Grey 9.03 6.96 18.22 -50.43 6 Early Thorn 4.94 3.19 3.72 32.60 7 Brindled Beauty 4.58 2.92 6.00 -23.66 8 Twin-spotted Quaker 3.94 2.65 8.33 -52.77 9 Oak Beauty 3.77 2.81 5.72 -34.04 10 Red Chestnut 3.61 3.08 10.22 -64.66 11 Mottled Grey 3.03 0.58 1.28 137.31 12 Chestnut 2.26 1.42 2.39 -5.48 13 March Moth 1.94 1.19 4.83 -59.96 14 Streamer 1.55 0.88 2.17 -28.54 15 Dotted Border 1.48 1.35 3.94 -62.38 16 Shoulder Stripe 1.42 4.19 6.78 -79.06 17 Double-striped Pug 1.29 1.62 6.89 -81.27 18 Engrailed 0.65 0.31 1.00 -35.48 18 Powdered Quaker 0.65 0.69 0.94 -31.69 20 Purple Thorn 0.48 0.27 0.39 24.07

Reports from gardens

A comparison of GMS weeks 1-9 in Langport, Somerset (VC6). John Bebbington

My back garden is smallish (27 x 9 metres), on the edge of town, and surrounded by larger gardens which have a good range of habitats. Within 100m there are hedgerows and pasture while in front of the house is a busy main road with, beyond, a gentle slope down to west Sedgemoor. However there is a street lamp in the front garden and I suspect that this has an effect on movement from the Levels. About 1/2km to the South-east is the old Kelways Nursery site which, until last year, was a superb brownfield site with a great diversity of plants and invertebrates. Sadly the site is now under development and will have “96 dwellings” on it!

Looking at all my garden trapping records for the year to date I was tempted to think that this year (2009) was a vast improvement on 2007 and 2008. Overall total catches for weeks 1-9 were: 07 08 09 Individuals 204 96 178 Species 30 16 23

But then I looked at the number of trapping nights and realised that I had trapped nearly twice as often this year as in the previous two years! This is where the GMS is good – it’s easy to make direct comparisons between years, although the weather may be bad on the trapping night. For example in week 9 this year I had 36 moths of 21 species and 56 moths

10 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 of 19 species on the previous two nights, but GMS night yielded 11 individuals of 6 species!

Weeks 1-9 Species 2007 2008 2009 Hebrew Character 52 41 59 Common Quaker 27 7 34 Brimstone Moth 25 10 12 Muslin Moth 17 1 11 Clouded Drab 13 7 16 Double-striped Pug 12 2 2 Early Grey 10 3 11 Light Brown Apple Moth 8 0 1 Powdered Quaker 5 6 2 Chinese Character 3 0 0 March Moth 3 1 0 Garden Carpet 3 0 0 Shoulder Stripe 3 1 0 Pale Tussock 3 0 0 Small Quaker 3 8 6 Brindled Beauty 2 0 0 Oak Beauty 1 2 5 Dotted Border 1 2 3 There seems to have been a recovery in numbers and to some extent in species from last year’s poor showing. Looking at the 15 species which were commonest in 2007, all except Powdered Quaker and Small Quaker showed a decline in 2008 and Hebrew Character, Common Quaker, Brimstone, Muslin, Clouded Drab and Early Grey have ‘bounced back’ to some extent. Oak Beauty and Dotted Border show an increase.

Oak Beauty – increased in Langport

11 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 What can be read into the data? Well, as a student I studied statistical analysis and later as a teacher of sixth-form and university ecology field courses stressed the importance of adequate data. There’s no doubt that my own results, taken in isolation, are insignificant, but perhaps as part of the overall data for the South-west they may help to indicate trends. Let’s hope that 2009 really will show an improvement over 2008.

Reader’s Forum

This is the section of the newsletter in which reader’s contribute their own news and views on moths in general. So if you have anything you’d like to tell us about, or opinions you’d like to air, please let us know. We’d love to hear from you.

Our first article is from George Davis, SW Regional Co-ordinator, who suggested to Dave that he should do something about identification issues for the newsletter. Dave took him up on this, and we are very glad that he did!

ID issues a personal view. George Davis

To the 30% of our group who are members of the chat-site the debate about pugs , specifically Brindled vs Oak Tree has been a hot issue. It soon became apparent that even to expert experienced mothers there could be discussion and disagreement about pug photos. To some, not in the chat-site, they might be surprised. Before this there was even some debate about Poplar Grey vs Knot Grass; I suspect we might all be surprised at that. The pugs are known to be a tricky group but surely the other two are easy to differentiate by photo.

This whole area brings up so many issues for us as a group and individually whatever stage of expertise we think we are. The correct ID of moths is key to our own lists and personal satisfaction as well as schemes like the GMS and National data bases. When we start mothing the variety is bewildering and it is not uncommon for us to take an hour trying to find the moth either in a book or on the net. We then, hopefully, want some confirmation that we were correct with our ID. The chat-site is great for this.

When June comes and you have 60 different species, all unfamiliar to you there is not enough time in the day to check everything. Four weeks later the species are still coming – but different ones. At this stage, it is easy to get ‘easily identifiable’ moths wrong. We need lots of help from mothing friends confirming what we think our moths are. The GMS has a lot of new mothers. The chat-site is a fantastic forum for identification of photo’s and support.

There are plenty of pitfalls however which it would be good to remember. A photo, without any idea of size, taken at a funny angle can be very deceiving. Subtle colour can be very useful to aid ID but the use of flash can bleach it all out. Moths can have their important ID characteristics hidden –for example on the hind-wing. Moths have their own Jizz; dead moths or ones cold out of the fridge/freezer can lose it! On top of all of this moths can be very worn, lose their scales and some have aberrant markings. Amazing therefore that the experts agree so often. The pug debate showed however that agreement is not always possible. We know some moths, for instance, the daggers are best identified as larvae or by dissection.

12 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 I was so grateful for the pug discussion! All the mothers who have told me they are easy – I have never found it so. I am so grateful to our experts for expressing their opinions. The more expert one becomes the greater the risk to one’s reputation. Good on them for sharing their knowledge so willingly – I believe we all need to be grateful to them whether or not in the end every ID is completely sorted. It is also great that mothers who are learning ask their questions and post their photos; from the ensuing discussion we can all learn a lot. We have all been complete novices at some time. I suspect that some of you have not joined the chat-site because you are worried that your inquiries and ID issues will seem trivial. Please dismiss this thought. The chat-site is an ideal safe forum to discuss and learn. From the expert point of view they need you to express your views – so a big thank-you.

From all the above it is I think clear the reason why the GMS does not include moths with well known ID difficulties. That does not stop us having opinions and trying to identify them, however. The chat-site often has micro-moth queries as well as more unusual macro- moths. I believe that is all fine providing one realises some moths can only be ID’d by dissection. I also think that moths which are worn especially the pugs are best left alone. There can be so many moths in the Summer that I have to have a very special reason to be interested in a small worn bald pug.

I think all requests for ID should be accompanied by an idea of the moth’s size and if possible taken without flash. It would help sometimes in the ID. Lastly, but not least, remember that if you think you have something unusual or rare to keep it until it has been ID’d. it may need the underwing looking at or even be a County First in which case the recorder may want to see it.

Finally thanks again to those who post questions and pictures and to those more expert who willingly express their views and opinions, and always without having seen the moth!

Editor’s note. If you have any views or comments on this article, please write in and tell us.

Garden Moths – a newbie’s tale. Paul Kipling VC65

Well, since I’m new to this and Dave’s email said the Newsletter may benefit from member’s input, I thought I’d muse a bit! I’ve had an interest in moths for about 40 years, a frighteningly long time. There was a curiosity type shop in Knaresborough that sold all sorts of set moths etc, not great in retrospect, but I guess like a lot of us that’s where I kindled an interest. That, and sitting out during long warm summer holiday evenings in Western Cornwall watching things batter the hell out of themselves on the outside lights, things like Privet Hawks. I was about seven, and still have those set specimens, now as tattered as I suspect I am.

About 4 years ago I discovered digital photography, with this I now had a reason to think Lepidoptera again! I had always wondered about Moth Trapping but never really done anything about it until I went to the BC National Conference in York last winter. I bought a 125w MV bulb and its gizmo, and decided to make my own trap, because of course (!) it would be cheaper. Over the next 3 weeks of thinking about what I would need, I ventured to the local Farm supplies place, like a mega hardware store... must have it there, even if I didn’t know what “it” was!! “It” turned out to be Hen feeder, which I mutilated into a version of Frankenstein’s Trap. Would it work?, would I electrocute a) the moths, b) myself/ the cat??? I joined GMS to help motivate myself to trap regularly.

Thinking about it, this is going to be my best year, as almost everything is new!!

13 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 I tried the trap first a couple of nights before week 1 in case it was a farce. I needn’t have worried.. I trapped a few, and from then I was up and running. Thanks to everyone in the group I am learning fast, and being too naive to make assumptions, am madly identifying all sorts of questionable things.

My latest tally is 29 species, all new to me of course, and some such as Lesser Swallow Prominent and Mullein I think are stunning. A Chinese Character “dropped” in not long ago, I empathize with any living thing that other people think is poo!!! I live in the countryside 2 miles from the pretty North Yorkshire town Richmond. My abode is beside the river Swale, in its own 2-3 acres, and no, it hasn’t yet been under water! The river bank is a patchwork of mature trees and scrub, and has so far been a great conduit for visitors, we see Hummingbird Hawks every year, and I hope I’ll add other immigrants to that, though I’m still waiting for a Camberwell Beauty ( a man can dream).

Spring moths at Brancaster Staithe, Norfolk. Keith and Ann Herber

March

Having told a number of people that our moths catches this year, here in North Norfolk were very discouraging, with respect to both their numbers and the range of species, in a weak moment I decided to see how catches compared with 2007 and 2008.

This year we operated the trap [Skinner, 125 watt MV] on 12 occasions during March the same as in 2007, but last March [2008] weather constraints dictated that it was only operated on six occasions. So I was somewhat surprised to find that our total catch this year [117] was well up on 2007 [74], and even extrapolating from and massaging the 2008 figures [14], didn’t bring the totals anywhere near this year totals. However although we have seen more moths, the range of species was down compared with 2007, with 13 and 18 species recorded respectively.

Some species expected but missing from our March list were surprisingly March Moth, also Early Thorn, Twin-spotted Quaker, Angle Shades and Nut-tree Tussock. But two Pale Pinions and an Agonopterix heracliana [found on the lounge window] helped keep the interest up.

Some quick sums indicate that our power usage is equivalent to about 6 moths per 1kwh, which raises the question of whether “coastal mothers” are really green!!!

April

A marked improvement in catches this month compared with March, but not quite up to that achieved in April 2007 particularly with regard to the range of species recorded, although it should be mentioned that this year our trap [Skinner, 125 watt MV] was not operated as regularly as in 2007.

A comparison of catches during April over the last three years is summarised below:

Year Total Moths Number of Number of Species sessions 2007 310 37 24 2008 40 11 12 2009 221 21 17

14 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 Two new moths were added to the April list, these were Frosted Green and Dotted Border, but for the second year running many regulars were missing, including:  Oak Beauty, five in 2007;  Hawkmoths. Lime, Poplar and Small Elephant usually trapped in small numbers, hopefully we should get some next month;  Prominents. Swallow and Lesser Swallow are both considered regular in April, with eight in 2007;  Flame Shoulder;  Chamomile Shark and Mullein, five in 2007;  and Angle Shades;

Finally a quick look at a comparison in catches of what I term our base-load species at this time of the year:

Species 2007 2008 2009 Shuttle-shaped Dart 35 7 Pine Beauty 16 3 5 Northern Drab 58 1 13 Common Quaker 14 18 Clouded Drab 42 11 45 Hebrew Character 43 12 94 Early Grey 13 6 12

Notable to us this year was the downturn in numbers of Northern Drab, with all records occurring during the last week, whereas in 2007 records were from the 7th onwards. The above comparison tables also highlight what an abysmal spring it was last year.

No doubt I will still bombard you all with nuisance emails requesting help on this that and the other ID, and I keenly anticipate the rest of the year, with hints of busy traps to come later. I also am amused to find Dave seems to have put some sort of jinx on Friday night’s weather. Is it always the worst night of the week!!! (Yes – Eds)

Items from the GMS Chat Room. Malcolm Bridge

E-mail chat for March A good number of GMS mothers contribute to or receive daily downloads from the GMS Chat Room accessed through: http://gms.staffs-ecology.org.uk. The following is a short selection from the many contributions chosen by myself. I hope that people whose contributions are overlooked will understand that the selection had to be modest so as not to overwhelm this “Weeks 1-9 report” and is entirely idiosyncratic – so blame me.

The month began with Angus (Wicklow) celebrating early March success with, appropriately, 23 March moths, a total beaten only by Common Quaker (27). A message about counting moths by security lights in the GMS count drew the reminder from Dave Grundy (DG) that “it is only moths attracted by the trap itself (albeit outside the trap) that…count for GMS.” DG continued that we should not count, for GMS, moths “at lighted windows….on buddleias or sugared patches…or moths scattered around the garden.”

DG was chuffed about “the amazing total of 135 new recorders joining GMS in 2009. Add that to the 187 who completed in 2008 and that makes a Grand Total of 320. Dave noted that several “will fall by the wayside but a total of 250 for the year must now be a realistic target!”

15 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 Patrick (Worcs.) trapped away from his garden in a local wood and recorded 23 species including 188 March moths and 102 T. alternella. John Clarkson, a self-styled “newbie” and “a lucky recipient of one of the GMS starter kits sought advice about egg boxes in traps – where and how many. John from Warks. responded and suggested that, early in the year a couple of large (12x12) egg trays leaning on opposite sides of the trap would suffice. Later in the season as numbers build up ( ed. hopefully ) he preferred smaller egg boxes stacked neatly for ease of removal and to minimise disturbance. John said that this made identifying and handling a larger catch more manageable.

Winston (W. Yorks. ) encouraged moth-ers around the area close to the trap and noted that “of my 11 moths recorded last night only 4 were inside the trap.” Winston said that Quakers seem to love going into the trap but March moths and Dotted Border seemed reluctant to enter his trap. DG spotted a problem of interpretation with Winston’s admirable advice and with a second issue raised about checking the trap before retiring for the night. He cautioned GMS colleagues: “About the question of recording moths round your trap - GMS wants you to try and standardise the way you trap each morning after your GMS night - so if you count your moths at dawn one morning and count everything nearby and then the next week you don't count till 11am and don't count moths nearby then this won't be very standardised. Better would be to count at 9am every week. So as much as you can on GMS nights please try and check round your trap for the same amount of time each week and please try and check your trap at roughly the same time in the morning. The important idea is for us all is to try and standardise our recording as much as we can to make our statistics as valuable as possible. But we are all human and will have occasional problems affecting trap checking time etc. So just try your best and due to the large sample of gardens that we are counting then variations between gardens will average themselves out. I hope this helps? just try your best. Best wishes Dave Grundy Birmingham”

A few contributors were disappointed that, after good catches in early March, numbers had fallen away. DG, who started with two blank Fridays, felt that his team had won the cup when a Hebrew Character turned up on the night of GMS wk 3. He commented that “I'm afraid that your moth numbers won't increase every week from now on. The normal pattern in spring is that you get good numbers of a few common species through March and April (but with fluctuations due to warm and cold nights) then in late April and through May there is always a lull in numbers and you might get the odd empty trap after a cold night. (editor – how true!) Then when you get the first warm weather in late May or early June suddenly the floodgates open and you get loads of moths and loads of species. Then you will start thinking - I wish it was still spring when there weren't as many to count!

Jean (W. Cornwall) started with a hat-trick of blank Fridays and Peter (Guernsey) also regretted a slow start to his moth year with just ten macro species but a second only record for the island of the Leek moth. (ed. – currently the scourge of allotments in Shirley, Croydon )

George, also from Cornwall, recorded an early Pine Beauty and drew the response form Peter that: I was interested in your recent comment that Pine Beauty must have one of the longest flight periods of British species - my earliest is the 10 March and the latest 22 July (with several other records in July) perhaps that represents a second generation? The Early Grey is another: earliest 26 January and latest 29 June (with several other June records). My most unseasonal record was Light Arches on 1 January 2000.

The Butterfly Conservation moth officers chipped in with the news of a Barred Tooth- striped at BC HQ in Wareham, Dorset, and wondered where the privet was because they could not find any. DG’s trap finally came good in week 4 with a bumper catch of 1 monodactyla (Common Plume) and two Hebrew Characters.

16 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 E-mail chat for April April began with a bang with the announcement by Mike (Hereford) on April 1st of an unusual micro, Acleris orfopilla, alongside a Brindled Beauty and a Dotted Chestnut. Neighbouring Mike (Worcs) knew the moth to be limited to early April, possibly only April 1st, and other colleagues sought in vain extra information. The sighting had faint echoes of BBC’s Spaghetti Tree news item of some years earlier.

Equally unlikely, but anchored in fact, was the exchange of details about the improbable life style of the Small China Mark, C. lemnata. The larval stage feeds underwater (just) on floating duckweed.

Bryan (VC42) reported a stunning micro which he described so well (“tortrix shape but Merveille du Jour type markings and colour and looks lumpy”) that his query was answered with no need for a photo – Acleris literana, a genuine Acleris this time.

Tony (Caerphilly) shared his excitement after his first encounter with an Emperor moth which his wife named “Elvis.” People more familiar with Emperors in light traps suggested that the Emperor was more probably a female so “Elvis” became “Elvira” and everyone seemed pleased for Tony. John ( Somerset ) recounted his breeding success from 2008: “I had a very tatty female Emperor in the trap last April and by the time I looked in the morning she had laid over 50 eggs. I sleeved 20 of the larvae out on Blackthorn on my allotment and released the rest in a local hedgerow. I have 10 cocoons in a sleeve - I'm waiting impatiently for them to emerge!” Later John reported “- I have had one female (Elvira) and 4 males from my cocoons so far. The males are day-flying and don't seem to come to light.”

The annual early spring confusion of a large micro, Diurnea fagella, and the March moth was aired and Dave Grundy congratulated Danny Arnold on getting it sorted.

March moth Diurnea fagella

AND FINALLY….

Firstly, a big thank you, to all of you who sent in articles, notes and photographs for this issue. Malcolm and Norman, your new newsletter editors, have been really pleased with the response and this has helped to make this issue a full one. Please continue to send in 17 GMS NEWS Spring 2009 anything that you think would be interesting – the deadline for the next issue, the Early Summer GMS News, is 17 July.

As always, the main feature of the newsletter is the summary of results from the UK gardens. For this, please send in your records for Weeks 9-18 to your area coordinator as soon as possible after 3 July and definitely by 17 July.

Let’s hope for some warm weather and, at last, perhaps, lots of moths.

GMS News is sponsored by Focus Optics and Anglian Lepidopterist Supplies

Website for Garden Moth Scheme: http://gms.staffs-ecology.org.uk

18 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

GMS contacts

GMS organiser: Dave Grundy e-mail: [email protected]

GMS News editors: Malcolm Bridge e-mail: [email protected] tel: 020 8289 3839 2, Mayne Court, 48, Crystal Palace Park Road, London SE26 6UQ

Norman Lowe e-mail: [email protected] 6 Tai Canol, Llangorse, Brecon Powys LD3 7UR tel: 01874 658453 (mob.) 07773 248039

Chat room host: John Bryan e-mail: [email protected] (e-mail John if you would like to join the 100+ GMS colleagues who are part of our GMS chat.)

19 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

20 GMS NEWS Spring 2009

21