Fieldfares breeding in the R. A. Frost and Philip Shooter

t is widely known that in recent years Fieldfares Turdus pilaris have bred I or attempted to breed in the Peak District on several occasions, but the localities, timing and, sometimes, the authenticity of the records, have often been vague or open to doubt. In an attempt to put the record straight, we have checked all relevant statements in local bird reports with the original sources (so far as possible) and have contacted ornithologists known to have significant information.

[Brit. Birds 76: t>2-lij, February 19B3] We have used the term 'Peak District' loosely. Rather than follow the exact boundaries of the National Park, we have dealt with the larger area of the southern Pennines south of a line roughly from Penistone to Saddleworth. There, Fieldfares have bred in a variety of localities, both on the millstone grit and on the carboniferous limestone, but, except on the Staffordshire moors, have not been known to nest twice in any one locality. Hence, localities are revealed, as there seems to be no threat to the species' welfare by so doing, except at the Staffordshire sites. The first known breeding of Fieldfares in Britain was in 1967, when a pair nested in Orkney (Balfour 1968), and in the same year a pair probably bred in Co. Durham (Sharrock 1976). Small numbers have continued to nest fairly regularly in Scotland and in parts of . Perusal of the reports of the Rare Breeding Birds Panel in British Birds suggests that the Peak District is probably the most regular breeding area for English Fieldfares. The first recent year for which there is evidence of summering in the Peak District was 1967, but there are two older records worthy of mention. On 1st May 1921, Ralph Chislett found a pair of Fieldfares near Hathersage which appeared to be the owners of a partly built nest, but they had gone a week later (Fitzherbert 1922). During 19th-21st June 1946, up to five were seen at Wigley (Harwood 1946); these could conceivably have been a family, though the account gives no suggestion of this. The records below concern definite or probable breeding occurrences (following the criteria used in Sharrock 1976) or sightings during the months of June and July. May records are not included, as migrant 62 Fieldfares breeding in the Peak District 63

Fieldfares are often recorded well into that month, sometimes in flocks; likewise August, as immigrants are sometimes recorded then. Of course, with such a common winter visitor, it could be argued that some of the midsummer records may merely refer to late, lost or sick stragglers. Perusal of records for an adjacent lowland county, Nottinghamshire (in the Notting­ hamshire Bird Report, 1967-1980), however, revealed that there are no July records and only three for June, with none later than 2nd, except for an injured individual on 13th. Furthermore, although the Redwing Turdus iliacus is a quite common winter visitor and passage migrant in the Peak District, there is only one definite midsummer record, in June 1976 (Frost 1978). Thus, it seems likely that the midsummer records of Fieldfares in the Peak District refer to potential colonists. Most of the definite breeding records have come from upland areas of the millstone grit region, the only exceptions being from Hay Dale in 1970 and in 1980, both areas lying on the carboniferous limestone. The Foolow site is upland pasture bounded by stone walls with occasional trees and bushes. Hay Dale is a small, dry limestone valley in a similar area. All of the other sites are upland pasture, moorland, moorland doughs, or open oak woodland, with the exception of a pair probably breeding in a village in north Staffordshire in 1975. Only a few nests have been found. The likely nest of 1974 was in a birch Betula at about 3 m from the ground. It closely resembled the nest of a Mistle Thrush Turdus viscivorus, with large amounts of loose sheep's wool hanging down the front. The village birds of 1975 probably utilised a holly Table 1. List of summer records of Fieldfares Turdus pilaris in the Peak District since 1967 All of the Staffordshire records were submitted by F. C. Gribble and M. Waterhouse 1967 Barbrook, one throughout July (R.A. Frost). 1968 No records. 1969 Moorfield, Glossop, pair carrying food regularly to ditch in field, but impossible to investigate further because of presence of bull (J. E. Robson). 1970 Hay Dale, Wheston, adult with two recently-fledged young on 14th June (R. A. Frost). 1971 No records traced despite statements to the contrary in the Bird Report and in Frost (1978). 1972 No records. 1973 Mellor, pair prospecting possible nest-sites, 12th May (Cheshire Bird Report, 1973). Little Don Valley, one on 9th June (I. Francis). Ramsley Moor, one on 29th June (R. A. Frost). Stannington College, one on playing field on 24th July (A. Hancock). 1974 Langsett, pair summered (D. Gosney, D. Herringshaw). Barbrook, adult in June (S.Jackson). Leash Fen, pair in June and what was thought to be used nest found later (Dr A. J. Deadman, P. Shooter). North Staffordshire, one pair bred and reared four young. A second pair probably bred 3 km away. 1975 Bingham Park, Sheffield, one on 4th June (R. A. Butterfield). Rivelin, one on 14thjune (D. & J. W. Atter, D. Gosney, D. Herringshaw). Edale, pair with four recently fledged young on 28th-29th June (M. L. Plater). Barbrook, one on 6th July (M. E. Taylor). North Staffordshire, one pair bred close to 1974 site. Second pair present. 1976 Wharncliffe, one pair attempted to breed unsuccessfully; apparently incubating 64 Fieldfares breeding in the Peak District

from 28th April to 8th May, but later thought to have been subjected to preda- tion, possibly by Carrion Crows Corvus corone (Baverstockrfa/. 1977). Three Shires Head, one flushed from heather on bank of stream on 8th May, thought to have come from nest but not possible to investigate further (P. Shooter). Langley, three in June (Cheshire Bird Report, 1976), thought to refer to 11th (J. P. Guest inlitl.). Wortley, one during 6th-18thjuly (N. Wareing, R. VVareing). Baslow, one on 18thjuly (M. A. Beevers). North Staffordshire, one pair nested. 1977 North Staffordshire, one pair nested about 1 Vi km from original site. Longdendale, one on several days in June (J. E. Robson). Alport Dale, three on 2nd June (T. Barlow, E.J. Smith). Agden, parties of 11 and five on 25th July (J. Laver, H. Laver). 1978 Longdendale, one seen carrying food in summer and one found plucked near nest of Kestrel Falco tinnunculns (J. E. Robson). (The statement in The Sheffield Bird Report 1977-78 that two pairs probably bred in North Derbyshire can no longer be substantiated.) 1979 Snake, adult found freshly-plucked at nest of Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus on 6th June (J. E. Robson). Holmesfield, two on 18thJuly (Sorby Natural History Society). 1980 Foolow, one nestbuilding on 18th May, but not present a few days later (A. & B. Hancock). Rivelin Valley, pair defended territory, but abandoned it in early May (K. Clarkson). Moscar, nest, with about five large young almost ready to fly, about 6 m up in birch, on 7thJune (J. W. Atter). 1981 Ladybower, two 'chacking' at Sparrowhawk in June; considered to be pair with fledged young (P. K. Gill, D. Herringshaw). Ilex aquifolium. The Wharncliffe nest of 1976 was in the fork of a sessile oak Quercus petraea at about 9 m. It was described as 'a loose, untidy structure somewhat resembling that of a Mistle Thrush, but a little larger and bulkier, and apparently constructed of large quantities of grass and other plant fibres interwoven with stalks of bracken Pteridium aquilinum and sheep's wool. The inner rim of the nest also appeared to be lined with this latter material, large quantities of which hung down on one side, making the whole structure appear very untidy. An assortment of quite large oak twigs formed a platform into which the rest of the nest material was woven' (Baverstock^a/.1977). The 1980 Foolow bird had constructed a freshly built, but unlined, nest of twigs and grasses, which resembled an untidy Mistle Thrush nest, at about 4V2 m on the side branch of a hawthorn Crataegus monogyna. The Moscar nest of the same year was at about 6 m in the fork of a birch.

Acknowledgments We should like to thank all the observers for their records, and in particular J. YV. Atter, F. C. Gribble, J. P. Guest, D. Herringshaw, J. E. Robson, Dr A. H. V. Smith and M. Waterhouse; F. C. Gribble and D. Herringshaw for their comments on the manuscript; and Mrs Carolyn Marriott for typing the text.

Summary Since 1967, Fieldfares Turduspilaris have been seen in summer in the Peak District in every year except 1968, 1971 and 1972. Breeding was proved in 1969, 1970, 1974-78 and 1980, but never for more than two pairs in any one year. The last few years have, however, produced relatively few records. Fieldfares breeding in the Peak District 65 References BALFOUR, E. 1968. Fieldfares breeding in Orkney. Scot. Birds 5: 31-32. BAVERSTOCK, A., KNIGHT, J., & MCKAY, C. R. 1977. Fieldfares (Turdus pilaris) nesting in South Yorkshire. Magpie 1: 70-71. CHESHIRE ORNITHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION. Cheshire Bird Reports 1965-80. DERBYSHIRE ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY. Derbyshire Bird Reports 1955-80. FITZHERBERT, N. H. 1922. Ornithological notes for Derbyshire 1921.J. Derbyshire Arch. & Nat. Hist.Soc. 1922:92-96. FROST, R. A. 1978. Birds of Derbyshire. Hartington. HARWOOD, N. 1946. Fieldfares in Derbyshire in June. Brit. Birds 39: 342-343. SHARROCK,J. T. R. 1976. The Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland. Berkhamsted. SHEFFIELD BIRD STUDY GROUP. Sheffield Bird Reports 1973-80. TRENT VALLEY BIRDWATCHERS. Nottinghamshire Bird Reports 1967-80. YORKSHIRE NATURALISTS' UNION. Ornithological Reports 1960-80.

R. A. Frost, 66St Lawrence Road, North Wingfield, Chesterfield, Derbyshire S425LL Philip Shooter, 153 Lower Market Street, Clay Cross, Chesterfield, Derbyshire S459LX

Before accepting this paper for publication, we consulted the Rare Breeding Birds Panel. That body was not unanimous, but the majority view—with which we concurred—was that the lack of repetition and the generally haphazard nature of the breeding attempts made it completely safe to name most sites, thus facilitating checks by observers in the area who may have additional information for past years. We are of the firm view that unnecessary secrecy breeds speculation and curiosity, which can lead to damaging disturbance. In this case, we and the authors favour openness. EDS