Parrot Crossbill
Loxia pytyopsittacus von Borkhausen, 1793 (17, 2)
Photo © By Marton Berntsen - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=66236236
STATUS
Western Palearctic. Monotypic.
OVERVIEW
A review was carried out by G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse (1985) and published in British Birds 78: 482-505, with the findings being adopted. However, the records from Sussex and Devon were not accepted by the BOU (1971) who stated that there were under ten reliable records during 1818-1907, between September and March, all in SE England (Norfolk to Kent) except two together in Gloucester.
An additional record to this review is the first for Scotland that occurred in Perth & Kinross in 1928, the specimen residing in a Dutch museum.
All other records were found not proven.
RECORDS
1). 1818 Suffolk Blythburgh, female, undated, now at Cambridge University Museum.
(Yarrell, 1871-85; BOU, 1883; Ticehurst, 1932; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 208, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'Among these are two in the Museum of the University of Cambridge - one, apparently a hen, certified by a label in Mr. Jenyns' handwriting as having been killed at Blythburgh in Suffolk in 1818.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883) and accepted locally after examining the specimen (Ticehurst 1932: 83).
2). 1850 Suffolk Saxham, near Bury St Edmunds, male, shot, November, now at Cambridge University Museum.
(A. Newton, Zoologist 1851: 3145; Newman, 1866; Yarrell, 1871-85; BOU, 1883; Ticehurst, 1932; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History Alfred Newton of Elveden Hall (1851) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. IX. p. 3145, dated 30th April, 1851, says: 'About a month ago I was fortunate enough to obtain from Mr. Head, bird-preserver at Bury St. Edmund's, a specimen, a fine red male, of the Parrot Crossbill, which was shot at Saxham in this county, last November.'
Stevenson (1866 (1): 239) adds: 'The same Gentleman [Mr. Thornhill] also mentions "a fine red male", in his own possession, which was shot at Saxham, in Suffolk, in November, 1850, and was purchased by him in the following March from Mr. Head, a bird-preserver, at Bury St. Edmunds.'
Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 208, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'Among these are two in the Museum of the University of Cambridge - one [1818 Suffolk] and the second, in the cock's red plumage, which was obtained off Mr. Head, formerly a bird-stuffer at Bury St Edmunds, and said by him to have been killed at Saxham in the same county, in November 1850.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883) and accepted locally after examining the specimen (Ticehurst 1932: 83).
3). Pre 1851 Norfolk Riddlesworth Hall, male, shot, undated.
(A. Newton, Zoologist 1851: 3145; Newman, 1866; Stevenson, 1866; Yarrell, 1871-85; BOU, 1883; Seago, 1977; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History Alfred Newton of Elveden Hall (1851) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. X. p. 3145, dated 30th April, 1851, says: 'As Messrs. Gurney and Fisher do not include this species in their 'Account of Birds found in Norfolk', (Zool., IV. p. 1312), I am glad to be able to say that at Riddlesworth Hall there is one, also a red male, which was shot in the neighbourhood, and in that county, some years since.'
Stevenson (1866 (1): 239) adds: 'It is still preserved in Mr. Thornhill's collection.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883).
4). 1861 Gloucestershire Near Cheltenham, two: male and female shot, late November.
(W. V. Guise, Zoologist 1862: 7844; Newman, 1866; Swaine, 1982; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History W. V. Guise of Elmore Court (1862) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XX. p. 7844, dated 2nd December, 1861, says: 'This bird, the occurrence of which I noticed three years since in the pages of The Naturalist, has again made its appearance in the neighbourhood of Cheltenham. Nathaniel Skelton, bird-preserver of that place, writes me word that he has taken three examples this autumn.'
Comment Some discrepancy over how many to count. Cheltenham is where the discredited White's and Clarke lived (A. G. Knox, British Birds 94: 66). Not known to have been seen by a competent authority.
6). 1862 Essex Near Colchester, three: male and two females, shot, 21st February, now at Yorkshire Museum, York.
(C. R. Bree, Zoologist 1862: 8032-33; Yarrell, 1871-85; BOU, 1883; Christy, 1890; Hudson & Pyman, 1968; Cox, 1984; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Denton, 1995).
History C. R. Bree of Colchester (1862) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XX. pp. 8032-33, dated 14th April, 1862, says: 'Three specimens of the above so-called species of Crossbill (Loxia pityopsittacus [sic]) were brought to me in the flesh on the 21st of February last. They were one male and two females, and were killed on the Lexden or London road, just south of this town. As there is a good deal of interest attached to the natural history of the Crossbill, and more particularly as to the specific difference of the common and parrot, I will, with your permission, give a description of the birds captured at Colchester, with one or two remarks.
The male bird (all the measurements were taken in the flesh) was of the following dimensions: - length, 7½ inches; carpus to tip; 4 inches; tarsus, ¾ inch; beak from rictus, ¾ inch, circumference of beak at base, 2 inches. One of the females differed from this measurement; only in having the beak about a line less; the other was altogether smaller: - Length, 7 inches, carpus to tip, 3 and eight tenths inches; tarsus, ¾ inch; beak, ¾ inch; circumference of beak, one and nine tenths inch. In pluming the male bird was, on the top of the head and cheeks, middle of back, chest, abdomen and flanks, of a mottled brick-red and green, the former predominating; rump and upper tail-coverts bright vermillion-red, tinged with yellow; sides of throat-scapularies and upper wing-coverts dirty green; primaries and tail brown-black; under tail-coverts grey; feet dull brown; tarsi lighter; beak horn-colour; the lower mandible lightest.
The female had those parts which were mottled with brick-red in the male, green; rump and upper tail-coverts bright yellow; throat and under tail-coverts grey; primaries and tail black-brown. No other differences. Their crops contained the seeds of what I believe to be the Scotch fir: I enclose, some for your opinion. I have heard of one other specimen having been shot, which, from its size, I should infer was this species; and I have seen a male of the Common Crossbill which was entirely dark brick-red, which was shot in February near Walton-on-the-Naze.
There is no difficulty in distinguishing the Parrot Crossbill, by its greater size and by the marked difference in the thickness and breadth and general parrot-like appearance of the beak. Whether they are distinct species or not I am not prepared to say. They are, however, sufficiently distinct to be kept and described separately, which is all we can say of many other closely-allied forms.
Mr. Wheelwright has been good enough to send me a series of skins, old and young, with the nest and eggs, of the Parrot Crossbill from Sweden. There is no difference whatever in the plumage, but my specimens are rather larger than those from Sweden. Your ornithological readers will doubtless have seen Mr. Wheelwright's paper upon the plumage of these birds (Zool. 8001), in which he thinks the yellow dress that of the old male. He will, I have no doubt, work out this question satisfactorily, as he is in a country where any number of specimens can be procured. Mr. Wheelwright informs me that the Parrot Crossbill appears only in alternate years in the neighbourhood of where he resides.
In fact, he only gets the Common Crossbill one year and the Parrot the next, and vice versa, one species replacing the other. This interesting fact looks, I think, very much like a question of maturity between the two forms. It cannot be that the stronger drives the weaker away in the struggle for existence.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883).
Christy (1890: 126) adds: 'These three specimens, two in greenish-brown, and one in red plumage, are still in the Bree collection in Mr. Harwood's possession.'
Glegg (1929: 28-29) placed the record in square brackets after the separation of the Scottish Crossbill in 1904, and felt that that was the safest option, until the skins had been re-examined.
9). 1864 Greater London Southgate, Middlesex, two: immature male and female, both shot, November.
(Harting, 1872; Yarrell, 1871-85; Witherby, 1920-24; Clarke, 1927; Glegg, 1935; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Self, 2014).
History Harting (1872: 115) in his listing, says: 'A pair, Southgate, Middlesex, Nov. 1864. The male in the collection of Mr. Bond.'
Glegg (1935: 35) says: 'Of the pair shot at Southgate, the female was prepared for the table. However, the male passed into Frederick Bond's collection, and later to that of J. H. Gurney. It was examined by the Editor [H. F. Witherby] of A Practical Handbook of British Birds.'
11). 1868 Greater London/Kent Bostal Common, near Plumstead, female, shot, January, now at British Museum.
(Balston, Shepherd & Bartlett, 1907; Ticehurst, 1909; Witherby, 1920-24; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Self, 2014).
History Balston, Shepherd & Bartlett (1907: 196) say: 'There is a skin of a female in the British Museum which was obtained at Bostal Common, Plumstead, in Kent, in January, 1868, and presented by Mr. H. Whitely, of Woolwich.'
Ticehurst (1909: 171) says: 'The only specimen which can be accepted as genuine is the one which was presented to the British Museum by Mr. H. Whiteley, of Woolwich. It was shot on Bostal Common, Plumstead, in January, 1868, and is a typical female of this form and still in good plumage and condition. The mandibles are broad, strong and much curved, the lower one crossing the upper to the left.'
12). 1870 Sussex St Leonards Forest, shot, March, now at Booth Museum, Brighton (either BoMNH 208120 or 208121).
(Borrer, 1891; Booth, 1901; Walpole-Bond, 1938; Shrubb, 1979; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; James, 1996).
History Borrer (1891: 140-141) says: 'I have a specimen in the red plumage, which was shot in St. Leonards forest in March 1870.'
Booth (1901: 215, 3rd ed.) says: 'Shot in St Leonards Forest, Sussex, March, 1870. Birds of Sussex, p. 140.'
Accepted locally by Walpole-Bond (1938 (1): 110-111) who adds: 'Originally it belonged to Borrer, but it may be seen by all in the Dyke Road Museum, Brighton.'
James (1996: 537) adds: 'It is in the Booth Museum, Brighton (Either BoMNH 208120 or 208121).'
13). 1888 Norfolk Earlham, two, females, shot, 22nd March, now at Castle Museum, Norwich.
(Southwell, 1890; Riviere, 1930; Seago, 1977; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History Southwell, Editor (1890 (3: 391-392) in Stevenson's Birds of Norfolk, under 'Appendix B' says: 'Mr. J. H. Gurney, jun., and Colonel Butler, on April 16th, 1888, identified at Mr. Gunn's shop, where I also saw them shortly after, two Parrot Crossbills which had been killed a few days previously near Norwich. There can be no question as to the accuracy of Mr. Gurney's determination of the species, but it is remarkable that, although several other crossbills were killed in the same locality about that time, two only proved to be L. pityopsittacus [sic].'
15). 1892 Devon Marley, near Exmouth, male, obtained, undated, now at Royal Albert Memorial Museum, Exeter.
(W. P. Lowe, Ibis 1939: 75; Moore, 1969; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History Willoughby P. Lowe (1939) in The Ibis, Vol. LXXXI. p. 75, under 'The Bird Collections in the Royal Albert Memorial Museum, Exeter', says: 'Although the Parrot-Crossbill was recorded by D'Urban as occurring in Devon in the Zoologist, 1888, p. 91, it is not so mentioned in the Practical Handbook of British Birds. I can now record another fine male specimen obtained at Marley, near Exmouth, 1892. This bird has been carefully compared with specimens in the British Museum, and there is no doubt as to its identity.'
Comment W. P. Lowe was the Curator. Jenks (2004: 177) suggests there is confusion with the 1888 Devon record and that the species should probably be removed from the Devon List.
16). 1907 Norfolk Langham, adult male, shot, September.
(C. Borrer, British Birds 10: 20; S. H. Long & B. B. Riviere, Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 10: 499; Witherby, 1920-24; Pashley, 1925; Seago, 1977; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505).
History Clifford Borrer (1916) in British Birds, Vol. X. p. 20, says: 'As well identified examples of the Parrot-Crossbill (Loxia pytyopsittacus) seem to be very few in number, I think it important to record the following undoubted specimen from Norfolk. Mr. Pashley, of Cley, told me that a bird he believed to be the Parrot Crossbill was taken by a gamekeeper named John Forsdick, at Langham, a few miles inland, in September 1907. The specimen was lost sight of until the other day, when Pashley found the head only, the bird having been so knocked about when shot, that it was not worth mounting. The wing measurements were thus unfortunately lost, but I submitted the skull to Mr. Witherby and Dr. Hartert, who have both been kind enough to examine it with the utmost care, and express the opinion that it is a true Parrot Crossbill. The bird was in red plumage, and apparently an adult male.'
Admitted by S. H. Long & B. B. Riviere (1918) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. X. p. 499, under 'Additions to Part XI (Seventh List) 1914-18'.
17). 1928 Perth & Kinross Near Pitlochry, Perthshire, adult male, obtained, August, now at National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, The Netherland (Cat. No. 56978).
(R. W. Summers Scottish Birds 24: 43-45; Ed., Birding Scotland 8 (3): 101; Forrester & Andrews et al, 2007).
History Ron Forrester (2005) in Birding Scotland, Vol. VIII. p. 101, on behalf of Scottish Birds Records Committee, admitted this record onto the Scottish List.
Forrester & Andrews et al. (2007 (2): 1434) say "The first confirmed Parrot Crossbill in Scotland was an adult male collected by Frank Nisbet near Pitlochry (Perth & Kinross), an inland forest location, in August 1928, and is now at National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, The Netherlands (Cat. No. 56978).'
1950-57 RECORDS
18). 1953 Isle of May No locality, adult female, trapped, 18th September.
(J. R. Gordon & W. D. Grant, British Birds 47: 274; E. V. Baxter, Scottish Naturalist 67: 100; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 483; Thom, 1986).
History J. R. Gordon & W. D. Grant (1954) in British Birds, Vol. XLVII. p. 274, under 'Scottish or Parrot Crossbill on the Isle of May', say: 'Among the Crossbills (Loxia curvirostra) seen on the Isle of May on September 18th, 1953, was an adult female which at close quarters appeared markedly larger than all the rest, males included, and more grey on the crown and nape than the other females. Later it was trapped and it was immediately noticed that the bill was abnormally large and deep.
The following measurements were obtained and seem to fall within the range of the Parrot Crossbill (L. (c.) pytyopsittacus): length of upper mandible, 20 mm.; depth of bill at base, 14.5 mm.; wing, 102 mm.; tail, 58.5 mm.; tarsus, 20 mm.; weight, 38.2 gms. The upper-parts were darkish-grey tinged with lemon yellow; the nape was particularly grey and the head was speckled grey-brown, the ear-coverts being a uniform dark grey-brown the rump was greenish yellow. The throat and belly were light grey, the breast and flanks slightly darker, tinged greenish-brown; the under tail-coverts were grey with broad lighter margins. On the wings there were grey-white tips to the secondaries. A photograph was taken of this bird in the hand, together with the largest male Crossbill trapped on that day, for comparison; this is reproduced on plate 47 (lower). Apart from ourselves and Peter Gamble who photographed it, the bird was also seen by M. Gamble.'
[We have gone very carefully into this description and discussed it with Col. R. Meinertzhagen and Mr. A. G. S. Bryson. While the measurements fall within the range of the Parrot Crossbill, pytyopsittacus, they do not at the same time exceed that of the Scottish race (L. c. scotica) (except in the matter of the tarsus which as given is greater than the upper limit of either and which may therefore be ignored, as it is not a very critical measurement at any time and is in any case of little significance in separating these Crossbills).
Either of these is then a possibility, for the Scottish bird has occurred well to the south of its breeding-haunts and it seems not unlikely that one should have been swept up in the heavy passage of Crossbills from N. Europe which took place in the summer and autumn of 1953 (antea, Vol. XLVI. pp. 271, 457).
Further, while the measurements seem certainly too large for the typical race of curvirostra, Col. Meinertzhagen suggests that hybrids between pytyopsittacus and curvirostra do occur and one of these could well be the size of the May bird. Particularly as it was not possible for this bird to be examined against skins, it would be unwise to attempt a clear-cut decision. - Eds.]
19). 1954 Northumberland Near Catcleugh, Durham, immature male, killed by car, 16th September.
(G. W. Temperley, British Birds 48: 135; G. W. Temperley, Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Natural History Society 11: 130; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Eds., British Birds 79: 680, corr.; Temperley, 1951; Galloway & Meek, 1978-83; R. W. Summers et al., Ibis 144: 397).
History G. W. Temperley (1955) in British Birds, Vol. LXVIII. p. 135, says: 'On 16th September 1954 an immature cock crossbill was brought to the Hancock Museum, Newcastle upon Tyne.
It had been picked up dead near Catcleugh, Redesdale, Northumberland, on the main Newcastle to Jedburgh road, having just been knocked down by a passing vehicle. It was one of a party of four - the others being a second red bird and two green. After the accident, these three remained near the road-side, flying round calling to one another, and were under observation for some twenty minutes. Unfortunately the observer did not take any special note of their size.
Upon examination at the Museum, however, it was at once seen that the dead bird was unusually large and that it had an exceptionally stout bill. The depth of the bill at the base was 13 mm. and the length of the upper mandible 22 mm., while the over-lap of the upper mandible was very prolonged.
It was therefore sent to the Editors of British Birds. Col. R. Meinertzhagen and I. J. Ferguson-Lees compared it with skins in different collections and all who have seen it are satisfied that it is a Parrot Crossbill (Loxia, (c.) pytyopsittacus). Dr. H. M. S. Blair informs me that, within the last decade, Parrot Crossbills have been found breeding close to the southern and western sea-boards of Norway, near the towns of Kristiansand and Bergen; so their appearance as immigrants to this country is not unlikely.
No immigrant Common Crossbills were recorded here in 1954; but as the Parrot and Common Crossbills do not necessarily breed in the same district in the same year in Norway, an immigration of the former would not necessarily be associated with an "invasion" of the latter.'
R. W. Summers et al. (2002) in The Ibis, Vol. CXLIV. p. 397, says: 'Measurements of museum specimens from England...a male from Redesdale, Northumberland, in 1954, whose bill and wing dimensions put it in the range of Parrot Crossbill.'
NOT PROVEN
0) Pre 1776 Shropshire No locality, pair, killed, undated.
(Pennant, 1776; Fleming, 1828; Yarrell, 1845; Seebohm, 1883-85).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Pennant (1776 (1): 319) says: 'We received a male and female out of Shropshire, which were superior in size to the former; the bill remarkably thick and short, more curvated than that of the common kind, and the ends more blunt.'
Admitted by Fleming (1828: 76). While, Yarrell (1845 (2): 24-25, 2nd ed.) says: 'The first notice of the appearance of this bird in this country that I am acquainted with, occurs in Pennant's British Zoology, at the commencement of his account will be found: - "We received a male and female of the large variety out of Shropshire: the bill was remarkably thick and short, more incurvated than that of the common bird, and the ends more blunt".
This bird was considered only as a variety of the common species by Gmelin, who called it Loxia curvirostra major; but it is now admitted as a distinct species by Bechstein, Brehm, Meyer, Naumann, and Nilsson, besides those authors enumerated under the title here, and probably many others of good authority.'
Seebohm (1884 (2): 31-32) says: 'The Parrot Crossbill was first noticed as a British bird by Pennant in 1766, in his British Zoology (p. 106). He received a male and female "out of Shropshire".'
0). 1822 Highland Gairloch Estate, Ross & Cromarty, two, January, one now at National Museums of Scotland (NMSZ 1876.48.143).
(Selby, 1825; Bewick, 1826; Fleming, 1828; Selby, 1833; W. Jardine, Naturalist's Library 12: 223-227; Macgillivray, 1837-52; Gray, 1871; BOU, 1883; Saunders & Clarke, 1927).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Selby (1825) says: 'The probability suggested, in the history of the common Crossbill, that another species might be entitled to a place in the British Fauna, has been now placed beyond doubt; and, through the kindness of a scientific friend, Sir William Jardine of Jardine Hall, in Dumfriesshire, I am enabled to give a figure of the species in question, which will exhibit, better than any description, the characteristic difference between it and the common one.
This specimen was procured by Sir William from Mr. D. Ross, gunmaker in Edinburgh (a person well acquainted with most of the feathered inhabitants of our islands, and one of the best preservers of animals in the kingdom), to whom it had been sent from Ross-shire, along with several others; but he cannot, now say whether they were all of the same species. Another very mutilated specimen of this bird is in the Edinburgh Museum.'
Fleming (1828: 76) says: 'A Scottish example of this species was sent from Ross-shire to Mr. D. Ross, gunmaker, Edinburgh, and is recorded, on the authority of Sir William Jardine, by Mr. Selby, in his valuable Illustrations of British Ornithology, I. p. 254.
According to Temminck, Orn. I. 325, the bill is shorter than the middle-toe, and seven lines broad at the base. This species is common to Europe and North America, and may be expected to occur in this country occasionally.'
Selby (1833 (1): 332) says: 'The probability suggested, in the history of the Common Crossbill, that another species might be entitled to a place in the British Fauna, has been now placed beyond doubt; and, through the kindness of a scientific friend, Sir William Jardine of Jardine Hall, in Dumfriesshire, I am enabled to give a figure of the species in question, which will exhibit, better than any description, the characteristic difference between it and the common one. This specimen was procured by Sir William from Mr. D. Ross, gunmaker in Edinburgh (a person well acquainted with most of the feathered inhabitants of our islands, and one of the best preservers of animals in the kingdom), to whom it had been sent from Ross-shire, along with several others; but he cannot now say whether they were all of the same species.
Another very mutilated specimen of this bird is in the Edinburgh Museum....Plate 53. Fig. 1. Natural size, Bill very strong, five-eighths of an inch deep, shorter than the middle toe, much hooked, and the crossing point of the lower mandible not reaching so high as the ridge of the upper one; but in the Common Crossbill it comes beyond that part. Head large. Body thick, and considerably exceeding in size that of the common species. The whole of the upper and under parts of the body has an intermixture of tile-red, sulphur and wax yellows, and greys. Wings deep hair-brown. Greater coverts and quills tinged and margined with wine-yellow. Tail the same as the wings. Legs and toes yellowish brown. Claws black.
This appears to be a young male, as it answers to Temminck's description of the bird at a year old. According to that author, the plumage of the old male is principally of an oil-green colour, tinged with grey. The throat and sides of the neck bluish-grey. Rump sulphur-yellow, inclining to lemon-yellow. Breast and belly the same, but mixed with grey. Flanks with streaks of blackish-grey.'
Macgillivray (1837 (1): 430) says: 'Mr. Selby has figured and described, in his well-known Illustrations, a well-stuffed specimen, procured by Sir William Jardine from Mr. D. Ross, gunmaker in Edinburgh, to whom it had been sent from Ross-shire, along with several others.' The bill is described as "very strong, five eighths of an inch deep, shorter than the middle toe", &c. In the figure it is seven twelfths deep at the base, and about eleven twelfths long. This bird I admit to be of the species, on account of its great size and the shortness of the tips of the mandibles, but after all, it seems to me scarcely doubtful that L. europaea and L. pytiopsittacus [sic] are the same bird.'
Gray (1871: 154) says: 'Two came into the possession of Sir William Jardine in 1833; they were taken in Ross-shire.'
Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 209, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'In Scotland, two were obtained, according to Jardine, in Ross (prior to 1833), one of which came into his possession and the other into Selby's, where it served to illustrate that gentleman's work as well as the later editions of Bewick's.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883).
Bewick (1885 (1): 231-232, Memorial Edition) says: 'The above figure was taken from a preserved specimen obligingly lent to this work by Sir William Jardine, Bart. The bird was shot in Ross-shire, in 1822. In Mr. Selby's splendid work on Ornithology, so creditable to his zeal in the cause of science, this bird occupies a distinct place, agreeably to M. Temminck's arrangement. The bill is dark horn colour; irides hazel: the predominant colour is red, rather clouded on the back, and more or less mixed with green on the breast, belly, and vent; hinder part of the neck is mixed with dark ash; the wings and tail dusky, each feather distinctly edged either with a pale colour, or with pale green; the legs and toes dusky; claws hooked, and rather strong.'
Saunders & Clarke (1927, 3rd ed.) add: 'Two obtained in Ross-shire in January 1822, formerly in the Jardine collection (one of which is now in the National Museums of Scotland).'
In an e-mail dated 8th February 2005, Bob McGowan, NMS, replied that he had traced this specimen this morning and a slip of paper in Harvie-Brown's Fauna of Tay notes said "This bird was figured by Selby; the type of Bewick's figure is in the Edinburgh Museum from "Ross" (J. Gibson in litt. Sept 14th 1885.). Harvie-Brown has written is this correct?" Return slip. Eagle Clarke replied: 'This specimen is still in the exhibited collection in the Museum. It is of the large-billed form, whatever that may be. The specimen is labelled "Ross-shire 1822" and is from the Jardine collection. Accession No. NMSZ.1876.48.143.'
Comment This record was not mentioned by G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse in a paper titled 'Parrot Crossbills in Britain' in British Birds 78: 482-505 where they listed all the apparently accepted records. Not acceptable. It definitely wants reviewing as the specimen is still extant complete with a description in Bewick.
0). c. 1823 Essex Saffron Walden, pair, shot, undated.
(J. Clarke MS.; Christy, 1890).
[Glegg, 1929; Cox, 1984; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Christy (1890: 126) says: 'Mr. Joseph Clarke relates (MS.) that a pair formerly in the Museum at Saffron Walden, were shot in a garden in that town about the year 1823. They were stuffed by Travis - so he informs me.'
Glegg (1929: 28-29), placed the record in square brackets.
Comment Personally, I don't trust J. Clark and Travis. Not acceptable.
0). 1831 Greater London/Surrey Tooting, killed, winter.
(E. Blyth, Field Naturalist 1: 130, 354; Bucknill, 1900; Self, 2014).
[Bucknill, 1900; BOU, 1971].
History E. Blyth of Tooting (1835) in the Field Naturalist, Vol. I. p. 130, says: 'I may avail myself also of this opportunity, to mention, that I lately saw a fine specimen of the Parrot Crossbill (Loxia pytiopsittacus [sic]), in the possession of an artizan in Southwark, who has a small collection of stuffed birds, &c. It was shot in the neighbourhood of London.' Further, p. 354, he adds: 'I think I may here safely record another instance of the Parrot Crossbill (Loxia pytiopsittacus [sic]), occurring in this neighbourhood, three winters ago. The specimen was not preserved, having been unfortunately destroyed by a cat; but the very minute description which I received of its size, and the peculiar structure of its bill (which differs from those of its congeners in the crossing point of the lower mandible not reaching so high as the ridge of the upper one), plainly indicated the bird to have been of this species; and on my showing plates of the different Loxia, the L. pytiopsittacus [sic] was at once selected as the kind which my informant had shot.'
Bucknill (1900: 122-123) says: 'Mr. Blyth, in the Field Naturalist, Vol. I. pp. 130, 354, mentions one killed at Tooting in the winter of 1831. It was not, however, seen by him, as the body was stolen and eaten by a cat. It seems to have been carefully described by its captor who satisfied Mr. Blyth as to its correct identification....Neither of these accounts [another in 1868] can be regarded as wholly satisfactory, but must be included for what they are worth.'
Comment Not acceptable in the review. The two articles by Blyth may refer to two separate records or just this one, but they are published together here. Self (2014) accepts it for Greater London presumably unaware of the review in 1985.
0). 1835 Essex/Greater London Epping Forest, obtained, autumn.
(Blyth, 1836; Yarrell, 1845; Christy, 1890).
[Glegg, 1929; Cox, 1984; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Self, 2014].
History Blyth (1836: 160) says: 'Another North American species, the Loxia leucoptera, with a wing like that of a chaffinch, has once occurred in Ireland, and also in Germany; and the fourth species, the Parrot Crossbill (L. psittacina], is numbered among the rarest occasional visitants to this country; it is remarkable for the size and power of its strong bill, which has a very parrot-like appearance. One was killed last autumn in the New Forest.'
Yarrell (1845 (2): 25, 2nd ed.) says: 'Mr. Blyth has recorded an instance of its being obtained in the autumn of 1835 in Epping Forest.'
Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 208, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'Of these may be mentioned one said by Blyth, in his edition of White's Selborne (p. 160, note), to have been shot in the New Forest in the autumn of 1835 or 1836.'
Locally, Christy (1890: 126) quotes Yarrell, but says he can't find the reference to Blyth, however, Glegg (1929: 28-29) placed the record in square brackets.
Comment Some differences in the locality. Not acceptable.
0). 1838 Devon Near Millaton, Bridestowe, Dartmoor, nine, shot, undated.
(Rowe, 1848; J. Brooking Rowe, Transactions of the Plymouth Institution 1862-63: 65; Harting, 1872).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Rowe (1848: 233) under 'Supplementary List' says: 'Rare. Mr. Newton shot nine of them near Millaton, in 1838.'
J. Brooking Rowe (1862-63) in the Transactions of the Plymouth Institution, Vol. I. p. 65, says: 'Mr. Newton, in 1838, shot nine of these birds, see Rowe's Perambulation of Dartmoor, p. 233.'
W. S. M. D'Urban of Exmouth (1888) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XII. pp. 105-106, says: '...The only previously recorded occurrence of this species in Devon is that given by Dr. Moore, in his list of birds published in Rowe's Perambulations of Dartmoor (page 232), where Mr. Newton is said "to have shot nine near Millaton in 1838".'
0). 1842 Hampshire Near Lymington, flock, one shot, March.
(Yarrell, 1871-85; BOU, 1883).
[BOU, 1971].
History Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 209, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'Mr. Bond possesses three examples, one shot with others out of a flock near Lymington in March, 1842.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883) but not later (BOU 1971).
0). 1843 Hampshire Near Lymington, eleven, adult male, shot, March.
(J. E. Harting, Zoologist 1889: 415).
[BOU, 1971].
History J. E. Harting (1889) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XIII. p. 415, on Frederick Bond's bird collection, says: '...in whose collection they now are (Case 130), with a pair of the Parrot Crossbill, Loxia pityopsittacus [sic], from Christchurch, Hants, March, 1862, and an adult male of the last-named species shot near Lymington, Hants, in March, 1843, out of a flock of eleven birds.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). Pre 1845 Kent Dover, shot, undated.
(Ticehurst, 1909).
[Ticehurst, 1909].
History Ticehurst (1909: 170) says: 'The earliest record is of one which Thompson says was shot at Dover, and was then (1845) in the Dover Museum. There is still an adult Crossbill, presented by Thompson, in the general collection in this museum, but it certainly is not a Parrot Crossbill.'
Comment Misidentified. Not acceptable.
0). 1849 Nottinghamshire Edwinstowe, five, shot, 4th March.
(Felkin, 1866; Harting, 1872; Sterland & Whitaker, 1879; Whitaker, 1907).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Felkin (1866: 49) says: 'Five specimens of this rare bird were shot by Mr. H. Wells, A.D. 1848, in Edwinstowe Forest, and sent by him to the late Mr. Hugh Reid.'
Whitaker (1907: 104) says: 'A small party of these rare stragglers visited some fir trees which grow on the side of the cricket ground at Edwinstowe, and Mr. Wells, on March 4th, 1849, shot seven of them.'
Comment Regards how many were shot I go with the article nearest to the occasion. Two weeks later he was shooting four Two-barred Crossbills out of the same trees. Mr. Wells would appear to be unreliable or extremely lucky. Not acceptable.
0). 1849 Leicestershire & Rutland Near Melton, two, killed, undated.
(Browne, 1889).
[BOU, 1971; Fray et al., 2009].
History Browne (1889) says: 'Harley wrote: "On the authority of Mr. Bickley, of Melton Mowbray, it appears the Parrot Crossbill made a visit to Leicestershire in 1849". The late Mr. R. Widdowson writing to me on this subject wrote "a pair of Parrot Crossbills now in the Bickley collection were killed close to Melton". Unfortunately, the Bickley collection specimens are unlabelled.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
Comment Lack adequate details. Not acceptable.
0). Pre 1850 Caithness Near Lyth, obtained, undated; another, caught in a boat, undated.
(R. I. Shearer, Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh 2: 341; Gray, 1871; Harting, 1872; Harvie-Brown & Buckley, 1887).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History R. I. Shearer (1862) in the Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, Vol. II. pp. 334-341, at the meeting held on 22nd January 1862, says: 'I have been induced to gather together a full and authentic list of all the birds hitherto found in Caithness....The Parrot Crossbill was obtained by Mr. G. Auld, of Wick, from some fishermen, in whose boat it alighted whilst at sea, and was kept in confinement for a considerable time.'
Gray (1871: 154-155) says: 'The late Mr. H. Osborne of Wick, mentions in a paper contributed by him to the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, and published in the proceedings of that Society, Vol. II. p.341, that a specimen of this Crossbill was found dead near Lyth, Caithness. It was exhibited at the meeting by Dr. Smith, the Society's secretary. Another specimen, a male, had previously been taken alive in a fishing boat in which the bird alighted when at sea.'
Harvie-Brown & Buckley (1887: 133-134) say: 'Two examples of this species, male and female, are recorded by Mr. Osborne as occurring in Caithness. The male alighted on a fishing boat while some distance at sea off the coast, and having been caught alive, was presented by the fishermen to Mr. George Auld, druggist, Wick, who kept it for some considerable time. The female was picked up dead near a plantation at Lyth, and came into Mr. Osborne's possession through Mr. Mackie of Wick (Osborne MS., 1868), and this bird was exhibited at a meeting of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh on 22nd January 1862. The species has a place in Shearer and Osborne's List, 1862. We ourselves have no great faith in the specific distinction of the Parrot Crossbill.'
Comment This record or records was not mentioned by G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse in a paper titled 'Parrot Crossbills in Britain' in British Birds, Vol. LXXVIII. pp. 482-505, where they listed all the apparently accepted records. Not acceptable.
0). c. 1850 Cumbria River Irthing, two, shot, undated.
(E. Blezard, Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society 1943 (6): 30).
[BOU, 1971].
History Ernest Blezard (1943) in the Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society, Vol. VI. p. 30, says: 'Macpherson gives two Cumberland records of this rare wanderer from north Europe. They refer to two birds shot on the River Irthing, about 1850.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
Comment The other record was in 1865.
0). 1850 Greater London Harrow-on-the-Hill, Middlesex, male, killed, 21st January.
(E. Newman, Zoologist 1850: 2770; Newman, 1866; Harting, 1866; Swann, 1893; Glegg, 1935).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Self, 2014].
History E. Newman (1850) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. VIII. p. 2770, dated 22nd January, 1850, says: 'Through the kindness of Mr. Gardiner [sic], I have just seen a fine male specimen of the Parrot Crossbill, killed yesterday at Harrow-on-the-Hill; of course the bird was in the flesh.'
Harting (1866: 92) quotes from the above source.
Accepted locally for Middlesex by Glegg (1935: 35) who adds: 'Mr. Gardner, the taxidermist.'
Comment Gardner had premises on Oxford Street, London.
0). 1850 Suffolk Lound Gravel-pits, obtained, April.
(Babington, 1884-86).
[Ticehurst, 1932; Payn, 1978].
History Babington (1884-86: 234) says: 'One shot at Lound, April 11, 1850 (Dennis MS. notes in Bewick).'
Ticehurst (1932: 83) says: 'Babington, on Dennis's authority, mentions one shot at Lound on 11th April 1850; this cannot be accepted as correctly identified for certain.'
0). 1851 Kent Doddington, small flock, seen, September.
(Morris, 1851-57; Ticehurst, 1909).
[Ticehurst, 1909].
History Morris (1852 (3): 138) says: 'Mr. Chaffey, of Dodington, Kent, informs me that he saw a small flock of these birds in a larch plantation there in September, 1851.'
Ticehurst (1909: 170-171) says: 'Morris states that he was informed by Chaffey that he had seen a small flock in a larch plantation at Doddington in September, 1851.'
Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.
0). c. 1852 Shropshire Oswestry, two, obtained, undated.
(J. Rocke Zoologist 1865: 9781; Zoologist 1867: 543; Harting, 1872; W. E. Beckwith, Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society 1891: 313; Forrest, 1899).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History J. Rocke of Shropshire (1865) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXIII. p. 9781, says: 'I have only seen two specimens of this bird, obtained near Oswestry.'
W. E. Beckwith (1891) in the Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, series 2, Vol. III. p. 313, says: 'Although the Committee of the British Ornithologists' Union do not, in their List of British Birds, published in 1883, include Shropshire among the counties where this rare visitor has been found, there is strong evidence of its having occurred here on more than one occasion....Next we have Rocke's note that he had "seen two specimens of this bird obtained near Oswestry". This was about the year 1852; but as both birds were purchased by Henry Shaw, and eventually placed in the Clungunford collection, their identity cannot be questioned.'
Forrest (1899: 121) says: 'Mr. Rocke saw two obtained near Oswestry, and one killed near Shifnal in 1862.'
0). 1855 Hampshire Breamore, twelve, one shot, 28th November.
(Wise, 1863; Harting, 1872).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Wise (1863: 315, 1st ed.) says: 'Mr. Rake informs me that one was killed at Breamore, Nov. 28th, 1855, out of a flock of a dozen, and that a few days afterwards several more were killed.'
Comment Mr. Rake also misidentified a Spotted Eagle - for a White-tailed Eagle.
0). 1857 Gloucestershire Cheltenham, male, shot, 7th June.
(W. V. Guise, Morris and Bree's Naturalist 8: 116).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History W. V. Guise (1858) in Morris and Bree's edition of The Naturalist, Vol. VIII. p. 116, dated 2nd March, 1858, says: 'The occurrence of this rarely-observed bird deserves notice. The fact was communicated to me by Nathaniel Skelton, an observant naturalist and accomplished bird-preserver, residing at Cheltenham, in a letter, from which I annexe the following extract:- "In April last (1857), there was a small flock of seven Crossbills about this neighbourhood. I found them several times, and killed four. On Sunday, June 7th, I heard a Crossbill calling in an apple tree. I saw it was a very fine red bird, quite alone. I went round to the fir trees in this neighbourhood to look for it five mornings following very early, and at last found it: it was alone as before. I killed it, stuffed it, and put it away, and in the course of two or three months after, I took it out and put it on the table with those killed in April, when I saw it was a larger bird, and on consulting Yarrell's History, it proved to be the "Parrot Crossbill". From this it would seem that the note is very similar to that of the Common Crossbill: on that point Yarrell is silent.'
0). 1858 Sussex Chailey, Brighton, two: one obtained 20th March, the other, 27th March, both now at Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery (Acc. No. 1962Z10.570 & 571).
(Watson, 2010).
[BOU, 1971].
History Watson (2010) in detailing the J. L. Auden collection in the Birmingham Museum lists two specimens that were shot by a gardener at Chailey, Brighton, Sussex, one on 20th March 1858, the other on the 27th, adding that they were bought by J. B. Nichols from the collection of H. Collins on 8th July 1889, formerly in W. Yarrell's collection. They were restuffed by Swaysland. No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species.
Comment As Yarrell died on 1st September 1856 it would appear that the provenance of this record is suspect. Not acceptable.
0). 1858 Sussex Bognor Regis, caught alive, 2nd November.
(Anon., Zoologist 1859: 6329; Newman, 1866; Borrer, 1891; Walpole-Bond, 1938).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Anon. (1859) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XVII. p. 6329, undated, says: 'I saw this bird, "in the meat", at Mr. Swaysland shop; it had been caught the day before (Monday, November 2, 1858), at Bognor, by a bird-catcher, in clap-nets: the bird bit his fingers so much that he dared not place it among the newly caught Goldfinches, and was therefore obliged to kill it. It had a very large beak, with the cross not so nearly so much developed as in Loxia curvirostra; there was a little yellow on the head. It was curious to find such a bird, apparently a long way from any of its appropriate food.'
Newman (1866) in Montagu's British Birds says: 'This bird was caught by a birdcatcher in clap-nets at Bognor on 2nd November 1859 and was seen in the flesh at Mr. Swaysland's shop in Brighton.'
Accepted locally (Borrer 1891; Walpole-Bond 1938 (1): 110).
Comment Swaysland has been discredited (A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 112: 89-98). Not acceptable.
0). Pre 1859 Greater London/Kent Eltham, shot, undated.
(Ticehurst, 1909).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; Self, 2014].
History Ticehurst (1909) says: 'Collingwood states (1859) that a female "once" been shot by a Mr. Wollaston at Eltham.'
0). Pre 1859 North-east Scotland Near Banff, male, seen, undated.
(T. Edward, Zoologist 1859: 6631).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Thomas Edward of Banff (1859) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XVII. p. 6631, says: 'While walking, one morning, round the fern-hill (whin-hill), and just as I reached the south side, I was rather surprised at hearing the voice of what I knew to be a stranger in that quarter, and in fact within our limits altogether. On looking to a low, bare wall, about three or four yards in front of me, I beheld, in all his pride and beauty, a male Parrot Crossbill. This is the only instance, to my knowledge, of its occurrence with us.'
Not in the review of the accepted species by G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse (1985) in British Birds, Vol. LXXVIII. pp. 482-505.
0). 1861 Essex Lambourne, three, (male, immature male and a female), killed, 20th September.
(H. Doubleday, Zoologist 1861: 7759; BOU, 1883).
[Glegg, 1929; Cox, 1984; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Henry Doubleday of Epping (1861) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XIX. p. 7759, dated 21st September, 1861, says: 'Three specimens of the Parrot Crossbill were killed yesterday, at one shot, by a boy at Lambourne, about four miles from Epping, - a male in fine red plumage, another male in yellow plumage, and a female. This is the first occurrence of this species in this neighbourhood, so far as I am aware. The Common and White-winged Crossbill I have shot here.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883).
Christy (1890: 126) adds: 'At his sale [Doubleday's] in 1871, two of these Parrot Crossbills, with a couple of Quails were sold for 33 s. to Mr. Smee.'
Locally, the record was placed in square brackets (Glegg 1929: 28-29).
0). 1861 Suffolk Sizewell, obtained, November.
(Hele, 1870).
[Ticehurst, 1932; Payn, 1978].
History Hele (1870: 98) under 'Crossbill' says: 'Nov. 1861, Obtained a specimen from Sizewell Belts. I followed this individual by its peculiar note, and found him perched on the top branch of a fir tree. We had much difficulty in securing this bird from the singular tenacity with which it held to the bough. I am since informed this is an example of the Parrot Crossbill.'
Ticehurst (1932: 83) says: 'One obtained by Hele in Sizewell Belts near Aldeburgh in November 1861; this cannot be accepted as correctly identified for certain.'
0). 1862 Shropshire Near Shifnal, first-year female, killed, February.
(W. E. Beckwith, Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society 1891: 313; Forrest, 1899).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History W. E. Beckwith (1891) in the Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 2nd series, Vol. III. p. 313, says: 'And lastly comes the specimen killed at Shifnal, in February, 1862, which was shown to the late Thomas Bodenham in the flesh, and at once purchased for his collection.
This was a female, apparently a bird of the year, and was pronounced by Gould to be an undoubted example of this species. It passed, on Mr. Bodenham's death, into the possession of Mr. Thomas Dickie, of Pembroke.
These instances, I think, justify the Parrot Crossbill being retained in our county avi-fauna; but it should be remembered that there is a large Parrot like form or race of L. curvirostra which nearly resembles this bird, and too much care cannot be taken in submitting supposed specimens of this rare species to competent authorities for identification.'
Forrest (1899: 121) says: 'Mr. Rocke saw two obtained near Oswestry, and one killed near Shifnal in 1862.'
Comment Perhaps this record should be accepted.
0). 1862 Clyde Wemyss Bay, several, one obtained, spring.
(Gray, 1871; Harting, 1872; Eds., British Birds 9: 214-215; McWilliam, 1936).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Gray (1871: 154) says: 'I have a very characteristic specimen of the Parrot Crossbill now before me, which was killed at Wemyss Bay, on the shore of the Firth of Clyde, in the spring of 1862. It was one of a flock observed by a country lad and his companion, and was knocked down with a stone which one of them was induced to fling at the birds on account of their tameness.'
In an Editorial (1916) in British Birds, Vol. IX. pp. 214-215, says: 'A very useful series of articles is contributed by Messrs. J. Robertson and T. Thornton Mackeith on this subject to the Scottish Naturalist (1915, pp. 124-7, 244-50, 268-75).
The authors give a brief account of the status of each species in narrative form, but authorities for the statements are seldom quoted, so that it is difficult to say what is new in their list. We note the following, which seem to us of special interest. A Parrot Crossbill mentioned as killed in Wemyss Bay in 1862 should be critically examined.'
Comment This record was not mentioned by G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse in a paper titled 'Parrot Crossbills in Britain' in British Birds 78: 482-505 where they listed all the apparently accepted records. Not acceptable.
0). 1862 Dorset Grove Wood, Christchurch, Hampshire, two, adult males, shot, March, now at Horniman Museum, London (NH.83.3/23).
(Yarrell, 1871-85; J. E. Harting, Zoologist 1889: 415; Hart MS.; Clark, 2022).
[BOU, 1971].
History Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 209, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'Mr. Bond possesses three examples, [one 1842], and two obtained near Christchurch twenty years later.' Admitted by the BOU (1883) in their first List of British Birds.
J. E. Harting (1889) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XIII. p. 415, on Frederick Bond's bird collection, says: '...in whose collection they now are (Case 130), with a pair of the Parrot Crossbill, Loxia pityopsittacus [sic], from Christchurch, Hants, March, 1862, and an adult male of the last-named species shot near Lymington, Hants, in March, 1843, out of a flock of eleven birds.'
Edward Hart writing in April 1927 states that these two adult males cased with four others of the species (?) were all shot by me in Grove Wood, Christchurch and mounted by me.
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1863 Suffolk Brandon, seven, five males and two females) killed, 24th October.
(T. Huckett, Zoologist 1863: 8845; Gould, 1862-73).
[Stevenson, 1866: 239-240; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Thomas Huckett (1863) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXI. p. 8845, undated, says: 'Seven specimens of the Parrot Crossbill, five of them males and two females, were received by Mr. J. A. Clark for preservation, having been killed near Brandon, in Suffolk, on the 24th of October, 1863.'
Stevenson (1866 (1): 239-240) on examining these birds, found them to be Common Crossbills Loxia recurvirostra.'
Comment Misidentified. Not acceptable.
0). 1865 Cumbria Newby Cross, Carlisle, three, shot, December.
(E. Blezard, Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society 6: 30).
[BOU, 1971].
History Ernest Blezard (1943) in the Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society, Vol. VI. p. 30, says: 'Macpherson gives two Cumberland records of this rare wanderer from north Europe. They refer to...three birds shot at Newby Cross, Carlisle, in December, 1865.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
Comment The other record was about 1850.
0). 1866 Yorkshire Flamborough, female, shot, August.
(W. W. Boulton, Zoologist 1867: 543; Cordeaux, 1872; Clarke & Roebuck, 1881).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History W. W. Boulton (1867) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. II. p. 543, dated 6th November, 1866, says: 'Parrot Crossbill. August 4. I have this day received, in the flesh, the first specimen of the Parrot Crossbill I have known to be shot in this neighbourhood: it was shot by Mr. Bailey, of Flamborough, and on dissection proved to be a female. The larger bulk of the bird, when compared with the common species, the longer bill and more deeply forked tail - all sufficiently indicated the rarer species.'
Cordeaux (1872: 57) says: 'A single specimen, a female, of this rare northern Crossbill was shot by Mr. Bailey, of Flamborough, on the Headland during the first week of August 1866, and was received in the flesh by Mr. Boulton, who mentions the circumstance of its capture in The Zoologist for 1867, p. 543.'
Accepted locally (Clarke & Roebuck 1881: 32).
0). 1868 Surrey No locality, immature female, shot, 13th July.
(Anon., Zoologist 1868: 1376).
[Bucknill, 1900; BOU, 1971].
History In an Editorial [Signature omitted] (1868) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. III. p. 1376, under 'Common Crossbill in Surrey', they say: 'On Sunday, the 12th of July, my attention was directed to a fine male Crossbill, one of a flock which had been observed during that and two previous days in the grounds of a relative. I watched the male feeding on the fir-cones for some time, and, as the flock were considered to be doing mischief, the order went forth for their execution. On the following day the gardener procured five, viz. the old male and female, two young males of last year, and one female of this year, which, from the strength of its bill, general size and stoutness, would appear to be a young Parrot Crossbill, supposing Loxia pityopssittacus [sic] a good species and not merely a variety of L. curvirostra.'
Bucknill (1900: 122-123) says: 'In the summer of 1868 a young female was shot among some Common Crossbills in Surrey, and recorded with them in the Zool., 1868, p. 376....Neither of these accounts [another in 1831] can be regarded as wholly satisfactory, but must be included for what they are worth.'
Comment Not known to have been seen by a competent authority. Not acceptable.
0). 1868 Highland Near Lochend, Inverness, Inverness-shire, female, shot, 5th December.
(Gray, 1871; BOU, 1883).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Gray (1871: 155) says: 'Mr. Edward Hargitt of London, communicated to me an occurrence of a female bird, shot near Lochend, Inverness on 5th December 1868.'
Admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883).
Comment This record was not mentioned by G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse in a paper titled 'Parrot Crossbills in Britain' in British Birds 78: 482-505 where they listed all the apparently accepted records. Not acceptable.
0). 1869 Suffolk Melton, male, shot, January.
(A. Clark-Kennedy, Zoologist 1869: 1700; Harting, 1872).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History Alexander Clark-Kennedy of Little Glemham (1869) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IV. p. 1700, dated January, 1869, says: 'I am informed that a male of this species was shot at Melton lately, but I have not yet seen it.'
Comment Not known to have been seen by a competent authority. Not acceptable.
0). 1874 Dorset Grove Wood, Christchurch, Hampshire, two adults: male and female, shot, 28th November, now at Horniman Museum, London (NH.83.3/23).
(Hart MS.; Clark, 2022)
[BOU, 1971].
History Edward Hart writing in April 1927 states that this pair of adults cased with four others of the same species (?) were shot on 28th November 1874 in Grove Wood, Christchurch and mounted by me.
0). 1874 Borders Near Jedburgh, flock, undated.
(A. O. Forrest, Field 16th May 1874: 469).
[BOU, 1971].
History A. O. Forrest of Jedburgh (1874) in The Field of 16th May, Vol. XLIII. p. 469, says: 'This district has also been visited by a flock of Parrot Crossbills, being the second occurrence of the kind within forty years.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1880 Perth & Kinross Murthly, several seen and shot, undated.
(Buchanan White, Proceedings of the Perthshire Society of Natural Sciences 1: 182; H. M. Drummond Hay, Proceedings of the East of Scotland Union of Naturalists' Societies 1886: 31; H. M. Drummond Hay, Scottish Naturalist 8: 361).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 483].
History Buchanan White (1884) in the Proceedings of the Perthshire Society of Natural Sciences, Vol. I. p. 182, says: 'Dr Buchanan White said that he had received the following note from Mr. J. G. Millais regarding the Parrot Crossbills and other rare birds which were reported in the newspapers to have been recently obtained by that gentleman in Perthshire:— "With reference to the Parrot Crossbills, I was lucky enough to obtain five of tbem - two old birds, and three young. They had evidently bred somewhere in the fir-woods of Murthly, as the old hen had all the feathers worn off her breast, showing that she had undoubtedly been sitting on eggs quite lately. The young themselves, although I do not think they had been out of the nest more than a month, had beaks larger than the largest specimen of the Common Crossbill. There was a flock of about 20 of them".
Mr. Millais added that he would present to the Museum a specimen of the Parrot Crossbill, and also the Reeve recently shot by him at Murthly....Dr. White mentioned that, though it was stated in the newspaper paragraph referred to that the Parrot Crossbill had not been noticed in Scotland before, this was not the case, as it had occurred in at least four places. It had not before, however, been proved to breed in Britain.'
H. M. Drummond Hay (1886) in the Proceedings of the East of Scotland Union of Naturalists' Societies, p. 31, says: 'Parrot Crossbill. (1880). Several of these birds were seen and shot by Mr. Millais at Murthly, where they were supposed to be breeding. One of these, a female, he kindly presented to the Museum of the P. S. N. S., Tay Street, Perth.'
H. M. Drummond Hay (1885-86) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. VIII. p. 361, in the Report of the East of Scotland Union, admits this record.
0). 1884 Perth & Kinross Five-mile Wood, Stanley, three: male, obtained, 11th November, two females, obtained, 22nd December.
(Harvie-Brown, 1906).
[BOU, 1971].
History Harvie-Brown (1906: 125) says: 'Mr. Marshall claims to have got specimens of the Parrot Crossbill, shot in the Five-mile Wood, near Stanley. One in his collection bears the authentication label, "Five-mile Wood, Stanley, 11th November 1884", by Mr. James Leish - male; and two females got in the same locality, 22nd December 1884, by John Gow.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1887-88 Breconshire No locality, two, killed, winter.
(Phillips, 1899; Ingram & Morrey Salmon, 1957; Peers & Shrubb, 1990).
[Massey, 1976; G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505; British Birds 79: 680].
History Phillips (1899: 62) says: 'Two killed by Capt. Swainson. Although this bird is not considered by modern authorities as entitled to subspecific rank, yet as it is distinguished from the last named bird by its very much larger bill, I have thought best to record it as above.'
Locally, Massey (1976: 67) says: 'The report of two shot in the winter of 1887-88 is unreliable', but Peers & Shrubb (1990) say: 'These two were killed by Captain Swainson in the winter and identified by E. C. Phillips.'
Comment Probably misidentified. Not acceptable.
0). 1888 Devon Marley, near Exmouth, male and immature male, shot, January.
(W. S. M. D'Urban, Zoologist 1888: 105-106; Pidsley, 1891; Eds., Zoologist 1891: 234; Moore, 1969).
[G. P. Catley & D. Hursthouse, British Birds 78: 482-505].
History W. S. M. D'Urban of Exmouth (1888) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XII. pp. 105-106, says: 'I have had an opportunity of examining two specimens of the Parrot Crossbill, shot out of a large flock at Marley, near Exmouth, during the first week of the current month (January, 1888).
Their large size and thick beaks at once attracted my attention, and, having carefully measured them, I have no doubt of their being examples of Loxia pityopsittacus [sic].
Their dimensions agree exactly with those of this species given in Yarrell's British Birds (4th ed. Vol. II. p. 210). Their bills at the base are quite one-fifth of an inch higher than those of some half-dozen specimens of L. curvirostra which I have measured, and coincide perfectly in form and size with that of a specimen of L. pityopsittacus [sic], said to have been obtained in Kent, forming part of the collection of Mr. Bower Scott, of Chudleigh, now in the Royal Albert Museum, Exeter. They are both in fine red plumage, though one has some bright yellow feathers sprinkled over it.'
Pidsley (1891: 45) says: 'I have examined two undoubted Parrot Crossbills, shot in a plantation near Exmouth, in 1888; a male and a female, submitted to me by Mr. Seward the local taxidermist.'
In an Editorial (1891) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XV. p. 234, there is a review of Pidsley (1891) The Birds of Devonshire, in which it is said, "The author does not seem aware that the so-called Parrot Crossbill, which he regards as a distinct species (p. 45), is now generally regarded as merely a large-billed race of the Common Crossbill (c.f. Saunders, Manual, p. 194). It was Mr. D'Urban who pointed out to Seward, the taxidermist that the crossbills were sent to him from Exmouth, in January, 1888, belonged to this race (c.f. Zoologist, 1888, p. 105).'
0). 1901 Dorset Grove Wood, Christchurch, Hampshire, two, adult males, shot, 5th December, now at Horniman Museum, London (NH.83.3/23).
(Hart MS.; Clark, 2022)
[BOU, 1971].
History Edward Hart writing in April 1927 states that these two adult males cased with four others of the same species (?) were shot on 5th December 1874 in Grove Wood, Christchurch and mounted by me.
