Ross’s Gull
Rhodostethia rosea (MacGillivray, W, 1824) (1, 0)
Photo © Iain H Leach
STATUS
Holarctic. Monotypic.
OVERVIEW
Formerly known as the Cuneate-tailed Gull.
BOU (1971) gave two records for this period, however, the first record after examination of certain facts became one of the "Tadcaster Rarities fraud".
RECORD
1). 1936 Shetland Whalsay, first-winter, caught exhausted, 28th April, died later same day, photo.
(G. T. Kay, British Birds 35: 276; Baxter & Rintoul, 1953; Venables & Venables, 1955; Thom, 1986; Pennington et al., 2005, photo. M. G. Pennington, Shetland Bird Report 2004: 119)
History G. T. Kay (1942) in British Birds, Vol. XXXV. p. 276, says: 'I note from Vol. V. of the Handbook that a Shetland occurrence of Ross's Gull in 1936 has not been recorded. A gentleman who inspected the bird while it was in my possession in that year gave me to understand that this was being done. The facts are as follows. While his boat was fishing between Whalsay and Out Skerries on April 28th, 1936, John Irvine of Saltness (Whalsay) succeeded in catching the gull, in an exhausted condition, with a scoop net, alongside the boat. It died within a few hours, was skinned and set up by a friend of Irvine and later it was sent to me.
Although in immature plumage there is no doubt about its identification, the outstanding features being the very definite wedge-shaped tail and the small bill. In plumage it agrees very well with the plate and description of a 1st winter bird in the Handbook. Quite recently I have been fortunate enough to have a talk with John Irvine about the bird. He knows all sea-birds well and this bird before it was caught attracted his attention by its small size and tern-like flight. After it was caught he was immediately struck by its wedge-shaped tail and small bill and feet.'
[A photograph of the stuffed bird sent to us by Mr. Kay confirms his description. – Eds.]
Pennington (2004: 119) in the Shetland Bird Report, adds: 'The specimen was retained by Theo Kay and on Kay's death it then passed to Johnnie Simpson of Whalsay, who was a relative of the Irvines, who were involved in the original capture. According to Brian Marshall, Whalsay, the specimen eventually disintegrated and no longer survives. But photographs taken by Jack Rattar are held in the Shetland Museum.'
NOT PROVEN
0). 1847 Yorkshire Milford-cum-Kirby, near Tadcaster, killed, February, now at Leeds Museum, photo.
(E. Charlesworth, Proceedings of the Yorkshire Philosophical Society 1: 32; W. M. E. Milner, Zoologist 1847: 1694; Eds., Zoologist 1847: 1782-1783; H. Milner, Zoologist 1847: 1784-1785; W. M. E. Milner, Zoologist 1849: 2588-89; Yarrell, 1856; Yarrell, 1871-85; Eds., Field 7th Nov., 1885: 671; F. J. S. Foljambe, Field 21st Nov., 1885: 742; F. H. Foljambe, Field 28th Nov., 1885: 776; "C.R.G." Field 5th Dec. 1885: 785; Smart, 1886; E. R. Waite, Naturalist 17: 108; Nelson, 1907; Witherby, 1920-24; Mather, 1986; British Birds 98: plate 124)
[Seebohm, 1883-85; BOU (2004), Ibis 146: 192-195; T. Melling, British Birds 98: 230-237, photo].
History W. M. E. Milner (1847) in The Zoologist, 1st series, vol. v, p. 1694, says: 'The next bird I have to mention is, I believe, new to the British Fauna: - the Roseate Gull (Larus rossii), killed on the 22nd December 1846, by Mr. Thomas Robinson, of Saxton, near Aberford, Yorkshire and discovered by Mr. Graham, bird-preserver, York, who brought it to me. The bird has been sent to Mr. Yarrell, who decides that it is Larus rossii, indigenous to America, but so rare there, that Mr. Audubon has never seen a specimen, alive or dead. I have not made an exact measurement, but it appears about the size of the Little Gull, the upper parts of its plumage greyish-white, the breast and belly of a light buffish, or perhaps, more properly, salmon-coloured tint; the bill rather slender, and in the inside vermillion-red; the legs red and the tail forked. This is a very vague description of this extremely rare bird, but should you wish it, I will send you an exact description. I am going to have a drawing of the bird, and lithographs taken from it, one of which I shall be happy to send you, but the description I can send in a few days.'
In an Editorial (1847) in The Zoologist (1847) 1st series, Vol. V. pp. 1782-1783, quoting from Edward Charlesworth (Proc. Yorks. Phil. Soc.) it says: 'A short time since I was shown by Mr. Graham (the very excellent bird-preserver in Spurriergate), a beautiful gull which had been shot near Tadcaster, and its characters not agreeing with those of any species appearing in Mr. Yarrell's History of British Birds, with the permission of its owner, and of William Milner, Esq., of Nun Appleton, to whom the opportunity of purchasing the specimen had been promised, I sent it to Mr. Yarrell, stating at the same time, that if the gull were new or rare as a British bird, any information on the subject would be highly acceptable for publication in the Proceedings of this Society. From Mr. Yarrell's acknowledgement (dated Ryder Street, St. James's, March 23rd, 1847) of the receipt of the bird, and obliging reply to my inquiries, I make the following extract: - The sight of the gull enables me to send you so many references to this species that any remarks from me will be superfluous, beyond noticing that, as far as I am aware, it is not only a very rare bird, but also quite new to our British Catalogue. This last remark may require explanation, because Mr. William MacGillivray includes this species in his Manual of British Ornithology, with the remark that "this species has once occurred in Ireland". - Vol. II. p. 254.
I remember some years ago to have seen a notice in print, that this bird had been once taken in Ireland, but from the countries visited or known to the writer of that notice, and from the circumstance that this species had only occurred in high northern Latitudes, I came to the conclusion that the printer had made a mistake of one letter, and that for Ireland, we ought to read Iceland. Add to this, that the birds of Ireland have been carefully worked out by Mr. Thompson, of Belfast, who is one of the best authorities for Irish birds, and this species is not included by him in his Fauna of Ireland.'
W. M. E. Milner of Nunappleton (1849) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. VII. pp. 2588-89, adds: 'I may, perhaps, be allowed to add, that this is now the third addition to the list of British Birds which has been made by the zeal and activity of Mr. Graham, the Larus rossii and Otis macqueenii having first come into his hands.'
Howard Saunders (1882-84) in Yarrell's British Birds, 4th ed. Vol. III. p. 580, was aware of the differing stories of who killed the bird. Further on pp. 582-583, he adds: 'The Yorkshire specimen killed in February, had the bill black; eyes with a narrow line of dark feathers around them; head, whole of the neck and breast, delicate rose-colour, mixed or clouded with french-grey; wings and back french-grey; outer web of the first primary, only, dark grey; the shafts bluish-grey; upper tail-coverts, tail-feathers, and all the under surface of the body, delicate rose-colour; under surface of the wings french-grey; the shafts of the primaries white; central pair of tail-feathers the longest; the remainder graduated, forming a wedge-shaped tail; legs, toes, and interdigital membranes vermilion; the claws black. The whole length of the bird is about fourteen inches; wing, from the anterior bend to the end of the first primary which is the longest, ten and a half; bill, from the point to the feathers on the top, three-fourths of an inch; length of the tarsus one inch and a quarter.'
Seebohm (1885 (3): 305) says: 'The claim of Ross's Gull to a place in the British list rests upon a single example, which is surrounded with some doubt. The alleged occurrence was first made known to British ornithologists by Mr. Charlesworth in 1847 (Proc. Yorks. Phil. Soc., I. p. 33). Sir William Milner also recorded it in the same year (Zoologist, p. 1694), and stated that the bird had been killed on the 22nd of December, 1846, by a Mr. Robinson of Saxton; but Mr. Henry Milner furnished the following particulars (Zoologist, 1847, p. 1784, footnote), which are quite at variance with those previously given. He states that the bird was killed, in February 1847, by a Mr. Horner, of Mitford in the parish of Kirby, in Yorkshire. These conflicting statements probably both originated with Graham, the York birdstuffer, through whose hands the bird passed, and who may have purchased the skin from a Hull whaler.'
In an Editorial (1885) in The Field of 7th Nov., Vol. LXVI. p. 671, under 'Ross's Gull in Greenland', they say: 'We have no faith in the oft-quoted statement that one was obtained many years ago in Yorkshire.'
F. J. Savile Foljambe of Osberton, Worksop (1885) in The Field of 21st Nov., Vol. LXVI. p. 742, says: 'In your notice about Ross's Gull you mention its occurrence in Yorkshire as being unauthenticated. I perfectly recollect the bird having been killed at Tadcaster. I believe the late Mr. Graham, of York, had it in the flesh, and sent it to my relative, the late Sir William Milner, of Nun Appleton, whose collection is now at Leeds, having been lent to the town by the present baronet. I believe there is another British killed specimen at Newcastle.' [It is precisely because the bird was obtained of a dealer that its alleged history has been doubted. If we mistake not, two contradictory stories were published about it, and it is a significant fact that the species has not been heard of in this country before or since. - Ed.]
F. H. Foljambe (1885) in The Field of 28th Nov., Vol. LXVI. p. 776, says: 'The following extract from Gould's Birds of Great Britain, I think, ought to be sufficient evidence as to the specimen being what it professes to be: "Ross's Gull was killed by Horner, Lord Howden's gamekeeper, in February, 1847, in a ploughed field near the hamlet of Milford-cum-Kirkby, in the parish of Kirkby. Its flight resembled, according to Horner's account, the flight of any other gull, and it did not seem shy". My impression is, that it was brought in the flesh to Sir Wm. Milner. According to Gould, the other specimen is in Dublin, not Newcastle.'
[Sir William Milner's version, published in The Zoologist, page 1694, and presumable derived from Graham, the bird-stuffer, is, that the bird in question was killed on Dec. 22, 1846, by a Mr. Saxton. Upon this point, as well as upon the reported Irish specimen, see the fourth volume of the new edition of Yarrell's British Birds, pages 579, 580. In Mr. A. G. More's recently published List of Irish Birds, there is no mention of any specimen of this gull. - Ed.]
"C.R.G." of Acomb, York (1885) in The Field of 5th Dec., Vol. LXVI. p. 785, says: 'Referring to Mr. Foljambe's letter in The Field of the 21st ult., concerning the specimen said to have been obtained in Yorkshire, I may state that my brother (Rev. Wm. Garwood, of Staveley, Yorks.) writes me that he remembers, in his egg-collecting days, seeing this identical bird in the flesh at Mr. Graham's shop when it was at Spurriergate, York; it was afterwards in Jubbergate, now spoiled to Market Street.'
Smart (1886: 70) says: 'The bird is given place by both these gentlemen [Saunders and Seebohm] in their respective works; they point out however irreconcilable accounts of the Yorkshire bird, the sole occurrence. Mr. Seebohm says these conflicting statements probably both originated with Graham, the York bird-stuffer, through whose hands the bird passed, and who may have purchased the skin from a Hull whaler', and 'its breeding grounds are still unknown; and its nest and eggs still remain a tempting prize in the mysterious icy north.'
Nelson (1907 (2): 665-667) says: 'In a later communication from Mr. Henry Milner, of Nun Appleton, it is stated that: - Ross's Gull was killed by Horner, Lord Howden's head-keeper in February, 1847, in a ploughed field near Milford-cum-Kirby (Zoologist 1847: 1784). Mr. Foljambe, a relative of Sir William Milner's, stated that Graham had the bird in the flesh and confirmed it as killed by Horner, in February 1847.
Considerable scepticism has since prevailed with regard to the reliability of Graham's assertion that the bird was obtained in Yorkshire, and it has been surmised that Sir W. Milner was imposed upon by the professional bird-stuffer; but the fact that the specimen was in winter plumage is proof of the reliability of his statement, as at the time of its occurrence that phase of plumage was unknown. Important evidence bearing upon the authenticity of the record is, however, brought to light in The Field on 7th November 1885, an editorial note is appended to an account of Ross's Gull in Greenland, to the effect that "No faith is to be placed in the oft-quoted statement that one was obtained in Yorkshire".
A fortnight afterwards a letter appeared as follows:- "In your notice about Ross's Gull you mention its occurrence in Yorkshire as being unauthenticated. I perfectly recollect the bird having been killed at Tadcaster. I believe the late Mr. Graham of York had it in the flesh, and sent it to my relative, the late Sir W. Milner of Nun Appleton, whose collection is now at Leeds, having lent to the town by the present Baronet". (F. J. Saville Foljambe, Osberton, Worksop, 14th November.) (It is precisely because the bird was obtained of a dealer that its alleged history has been doubted. If we mistake not, two contradictory stories were published about it, and it is a significant fact that the species has not been heard of in this country before or since. - Ed.) (Field 21st November 1885).
In the following week another important communication was published:- "Referring to Mr. Foljambe's letter...concerning the specimen said to have been obtained in Yorkshire, I may state that my brother (Rev. W. Garwood of Staveley, Yorkshire) writes me that he remembers, in his egg collecting days, seeing this identical bird in the flesh at Mr. Graham's shop when it was in Spurriergate, York". (C.R.G.[arwood], Acomb, York, Field 5th December 1885.)
Mr. Saunders who has seen the specimen, pronounces it to be in the winter plumage (Field, February 1875, p. 196). Mr. Charlesworth also gave a very detailed report in the Proceedings of the Yorkshire Philosophical Society, page 33. In the Zoologist 1847 pp. 1784-1785 in a footnote, it says: 'Its capture is authenticated in the following memorandum, received from Henry Miller, Esq. (Nun Appleton). "Ross's Gull was killed by Horner Lord Howden's head keeper in February last (1847), in a ploughed field, near the hamlet of Milford-cum-Kirby, in the parish of Kirby: its flight resembled, according to Horner's account, the flight of any other gull, and it did not seem shy".'
Comment In a review of this record it was found to be unacceptable due to its connection with David Graham, the York Taxidermist, whereby various species were stated to have been taken in Britain but were found to be imported and now known as the "Tadcaster rarities fraud" (BOURC (2004), Ibis 146: 192-195).
0). 1852 Sussex Pevensey, adult male, obtained, early in the year
(J. B. Ellman, Zoologist 1852: 3388; Newman, 1866)
[F. E. Sawyer, Brighton and Sussex Natural History Society Report 22: 99-111].
History J. B. Ellman of Pentonville (1852) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. X. p. 3388, dated 19th February, 1852, says: 'I have recently received a very beautiful adult male specimen of this bird, which was shot by my friend Mr. Vidler, of the above place, who kindly presented it to me. Since the publication of the 2nd edition of The Rambles, in 1850, twelve additional species of birds have been obtained in the county; nine of these are in my possession.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1854 Shetland No locality, shot, summer
(H. L. Saxby, Zoologist 1861: 7426; Gray, 1871)
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Henry Saxby of Shetland (1861) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XIX. p. 7426, dated 27th February, 1861, says: 'The supposed example of L. rossii mentioned by Mr. Crotch was shot by me seven years ago, but, under the impression that it was merely a variety of some other species, I foolishly suffered it to be lost. However, I made a few rough observations upon the singularity of its plumage, but having left my note-books in England I am at present unable to throw further light upon the subject.'
Gray (1871: 473) says: 'On the authority of Dr. Saxby, who states that in Shetland, in the summer of 1854, he shot a gull, which, although unknown to him at the time, and unfortunately lost, was without doubt an example of this very rare species. Its description and measurements are still in the note book which he carried at the time.'
Professor Newton (Ibis 1865) says: '...there are not more than five specimens of this bird existing in scientific collections.'
Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1934 Shetland Whalsay, 28th April
(Venables & Venables, 1955)
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Venables & Venables (1955) state there are three further sight records: Whalsay, 28th April 1934. (Bruce and Grierson: 1899 et seq.). Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1936 Shetland Scalloway, Mainland, 3rd to 5th September
(Shetland News 5th Sept., 1936; Venables & Venables, 1955)
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Venables & Venables (1955) state there are three further sight records: Scalloway, 3rd to 5th September 1936. (Shetland News 5th Sept., 1936). Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1938 Shetland Whalsay, 6th September
(Venables & Venables, 1955)
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Venables & Venables (1955) state there are three further sight records: Whalsay, 6th September 1938. (Bruce and Grierson: loc. cit.). Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
0). 1948 Shetland Lerwick, Mainland, 18th December
(Venables & Venables, 1955)
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Venables & Venables (1955) state that John Irvine's brother Lawrence, who was present at the capture of the 1936 specimen, saw an exactly similar bird on 18th December 1948 which followed the boat from Bretheren into the north entrance of Lerwick Harbour. Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
