Ruddy Shelduck

Tadorna ferruginea (Pallas, 1764) (61, 0)

Photo © Keith A Naylor

STATUS

Old World. Monotypic.

OVERVIEW

An age old accepted first record of one in Dorset in 1776 was on closer inspection a Cape Shelduck Tadorna cana.

Ten were reared between 1888-92 in Buckinghamshire (Vyse 1892) and are possibly responsible for some of the records that occurred during that period.

A review was carried out in 1999 (British Birds 92: 225-255) detailing the acceptable 1892 records (table 3) which were originally published by F. M. Ogilvie in The Zoologist (1892: 392-398). Ogilvie's records were from Scotland and England dating between 20th June and 26th September. A further review in 2002 by A. H. J. Harrop (British Birds 95: 123-128) was carried out to establish the first acceptable record, which occurred on 20th June 1892. All previous records being rejected due to being escapes or for lack of details. He also found an extra three records from the 1892 invasion, two from Devon and one from Lancashire, that were not mentioned in the first review, but these lacked data and provenance. But in the article it was stated that all other records for 1892 were to be accepted. A certain number of records went unrecorded in these reviews, a flock in Pembrokeshire (accepted as the first for Wales), a number of individuals in southern England, i.e., Dorset, Hampshire, Surrey and Sussex, but the biggest omission is of one shot by a named person in the Borders and stuffed by a named person, verified by a reliable ornithologist and accepted for Scotland (Forrester & Andrews et al. 2007). This record also falls in line with the northern and eastern bias of records quoted in these papers and is an additional acceptable record.

---

RECORDS

1). 1892 Highland Durness, Sutherland, 29 (in 3 separate flocks of 14, 10 and 5), 20th June to first week of July, one (from flock of five) injured, 20th June, kept in captivity, died, 13th July.

(F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398; I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70; A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 123-128; Forrester & Andrews et al., 2007).

History F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 394, says: 'A flock of five, one shot, Durness, Sutherlandshire. These Sheldrakes were reported as "not difficult to stalk". The specimen obtained was very slightly wounded, and an endeavour was made to keep the bird alive. For some ten days it seemed likely the experiment would prove successful, but the Sheldrake then began to pine, and died about July 13th. "In the course of the fortnight after June 20th" three flocks were seen by the observer, who had obtained the above-mentioned Ruddy Sheldrake. The three flocks appeared to keep separate: one consisted of fourteen birds, one of ten, and one of four (i.e. the remainder of the first flock). At the beginning of July they disappeared from the neighbourhood. (Rev. W. C. M. Grant and T. E. Buckley in litt.).'

Accepted nationally as the first for Scotland (Forrester & Andrews et al. 2007).

30). 1892 Suffolk Thorpe Mere, Aldeburgh, eight, seen, 5th July, one shot 5th July, another, shot, 3rd August and a third 8th August, two were adult and one immature, now in the Ogilvie collection, Ipswich.

(F. M. Ogilvie, Field 6th Aug., 1892: 247; F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398; Ticehurst, 1932; British Birds 95: plates 60-62).

History F. Menteith Ogilvie of Sizewell, Leiston (1892) in The Field 6th Aug., Vol. LXXX. p. 247, says: 'A specimen of the Ruddy Sheldrake (Tadorna casarca) has recently been obtained in the neighbourhood of Aldeburgh. The flight and tail-feathers were perfect, and the bird exhibited no outward and visible signs of having escaped from captivity; but, of course, the condition of the feathers is no proof that the specimen in question was not "an escape from some water where ornamental fowl are kept (unpinioned). On the other hand, I have some notes concerning this bird which lead me to think it is a genuine wild bird.

The Ruddy Sheldrake has always been looked at askance by naturalists, and admitted into the British list, as it were, under protest. It is, therefore, of interest to prove, if possible, whether this bird is, or is not, an escaped one. May I then ask, through your columns, for any information which will tend to settle the point. If the bird had escaped, the chances would be in favour of its having come from some water within a comparatively short distance of Aldeburgh, say from those counties which are included under the term East Anglia, since it is most unlikely such a brightly coloured bird would escape its fate for a length of time sufficient to journey across England.

The Ruddy Sheldrake is very commonly kept as an ornamental waterfowl. Will any reader of these lines who has had any of these birds unpinioned, report whether they have recently disappeared?'

[This bird is, possibly, one of a small flock whose appearance has been reported in two other localities, one in Ireland, the other in Scotland, but, unfortunately, without dates. In the current number of The Zoologist, a correspondent writes that he has received a female Ruddy Sheldrake, which was shot out of a flock of twenty, towards the end of June, in Donegal. Another correspondent at Forres, reports that six or eight of these birds have lately made their appearance in a small body near the village of Findhorn. It would be interesting, not only to trace the course of the survivors, but to ascertain, if possible, whether, as surmised, a single flock has come dispersed; if so, where it came from. – Ed.]

F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 394, says: 'A flock of eight: one (male) shot, two more injured. Thorpe Mere, Suffolk. These Sheldrakes were seen, by a most competent observer, coming in from the sea.

When first noticed they were over a mile out, and flying at a considerable height (100-150 yards). They appeared to be steering due N.W., and 'made' land about half a mile north of Aldeburgh, still keeping the same elevation. On seeing Thorpe Mere, however, the flock began to lower, and, after circling round a few times, finally settled on a wet marsh, and began to feed. Having examined them with a glass, and being unable to identify them, the individual in question punted after them, and, getting three together, shot, gathering one and wounding two others. The whole flock, including the two wounded birds, rose and went off in a direction due N. or N. by E. One or other of the wounded ones returned the following day, and remained about the Mere for some weeks, but so wild as to be absolutely unapproachable either by stalking or punting. The remainder of the flock (five) were not seen again in the district.'

Further, p. 395, Ogilvie adds: 'Aug. 3rd. Single bird (female) shot at the evening "flighting" (About 9 p.m.). Thorpe Mere, Suffolk. (F.M.O.). Aug. 8th. Single bird (male). Thorpe Mere, Suffolk. A wounded bird and very wild; was ultimately secured by a well-organised drive. (F.M.O.). (I have little doubt that these last two birds recorded from Thorpe Mere were the two wounded on July 5th).'

Ticehurst (1932: 270) says: 'A flock of eight were seen coming in from the sea off Thorpe, on 5th July 1892, and on seeing Thorpe Mere, the flock finally settled on a marsh and began to feed. One was killed and two were wounded and finally killed on 3rd and 8th August respectively. All three passed into the Ogilvie collection which is now in the Ipswich Museum. Two were adults and one an immature, all in moult.'

38). 1892 Moray & Nairn Mouth of the River Findhorn, Elginshire, five, 6th to end of July, a female shot 6th July, another shot, 19th October.

(Eds., Field 6th Aug., 1892: 247; F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398; J. Brown, Annals of Scottish Natural History 1: 269-270; Harvie Brown & Buckley, 1896; Cook, 1992; I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70; Forrester & Andrews et al., 2007).

History In an Editorial (1892) in The Field 6th Aug., Vol. LXXX. p. 247, says: 'Another correspondent at Forres, reports that six or eight of these birds have lately made their appearance in a small body near the village of Findhorn. It would be interesting, not only to trace the course of the survivors, but to ascertain, if possible, whether, as surmised, a single flock has come dispersed; if so, where it came from.'

James Brown of Forres (1892) in the Annals of Scottish Natural History, Vol. I. pp. 269-270, says: 'A pack of six Ruddy Shelducks appeared near the mouth of the river Findhorn early in July, and fed in the Buckie Loch. If disturbed they generally made out to the sea. One, a female, was shot on 6th July by a salmon-fisher there, and sent to me to be preserved.'

F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. pp. 393-394, says: 'July 6th [1892]. A flock of five: one (female) shot. Mouth of the River Findhorn, Elginshire. The remainder of the flock appeared to have stayed in the neighbourhood till towards the close of July, but had all left by August 1st. (Field, Aug. 6, 1892, and James Brown in litt.). The number of this flock is given in The Field as 'six or eight', but Mr. Brown writes '…also by careful inquiry I find five was the number of the flock of Ruddy Sheldrakes that appeared on the River Findhorn.'

Harvie-Brown & Buckley (1896) Vol. II. p. 106, say: 'Six Ruddy Shelducks frequented the Buckie loch near the mouth of Findhorn river, and one of them was shot by a salmon fisher. This was a female, and was preserved by Brown of Forres (in litt. 13th July 1892). This bird was seen in the flesh by George Sim.

The exact date on which it was shot was 5th July; and Harvie-Brown also had an opportunity of inspecting it after it was stuffed. A second specimen was shot in the estuary near Findhorn on the 19th October 1892, by Mr. W. A. Brown of Dundee – who was punting in the firth and bay of Findhorn – and he gave it to Brown of Forres. It is supposed to be another of the same flock of six originally observed.'

Accepted nationally for Scotland (Forrester & Andrews et al. 2007).

Comment This is one of three Scottish 1892 records that are acceptable under Category B. Other records, of which there are many, are considered most likely to be escapes.

43). 1892 Cumbria River Wampool, Cumberland, two, one shot, 18th July.

(H. A. Macpherson, Field 27th Aug., 1892: 287; H. A. Macpherson, Field 27th Aug., 1892: 329; F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398; Macpherson, 1901; E. Blezard, Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society 1943 (6): 93).

History H. A. Macpherson of Carlisle (1892) in The Field of 27th Aug., Vol. LXXX. p. 287, says: 'With reference to the letter of Mr. Menteith Ogilvie, I am decidedly of opinion that these islands have recently been visited by one or more flights of wild Ruddy Sheldrakes. I regret to add that a bird of this species was shot in the county of Cumberland on July 29. It was not preserved, but the head and some of the feathers are in my possession. I reserve fuller particulars. This much may suffice to encourage your correspondent to clear the matter up.'

H. A. Macpherson (1892) in The Field of 27th Aug., Vol. LXXX. p. 329, says: 'The note which you were so good as to publish in The Field of Aug. 13 regarding a Ruddy Sheldrake killed in Cumberland was impugned by your prefixing the remark 'Ruddy Sheldrake in a so-called wild state'. Whilst entirely sharing your scepticism as to the wild character of most of the Ruddy Sheldrakes killed in the British Isles, I venture to express my belief that the birds which have lately been reported from several different parts of the British Isles were birds that had strayed to us from their breeding grounds in Western Russia. The bird shot in Cumberland was full-winged, and flew as strongly as its companions, for it was one of two.'

[Escaped birds which have been in a state of freedom for some time very quickly recover their natural appearance; and the fact of the bird being found with its flight feathers perfect would not, in our opinion, justify its being regarded, for that reason only, as a truly wild one. – Ed.]

F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. pp. 393-394, says: 'July 17th. Two seen, River Wampool, Cumberland. One shot and thrown away on a manure heap; ultimately rescued in more or less decayed condition, by the Rev. H. A. Macpherson. (Rev. H. A. Macpherson, Field, Aug. 27., 1892, and in litt.).'

Further, p. 396, he adds: '…and the Solway specimen. This latter was exhumed, by the energy of the Rev. H. A. Macpherson, from its unsavoury resting-place, and the remains, though useless for preservation, served to identify it beyond question, and give the Ruddy Sheldrake a place in the county fauna.'

Macpherson (1901 (1): 200) in the Victoria County History of Cumberland, says: 'The spring of 1892 will always be remembered by the present generation of ornithologists as having witnessed a remarkable western movement of this eastern duck.

The irruption affected Great Britain in a very special sense; but the extended wave of migration reached as far north as Iceland, so that the probability of the strangers having escaped from captivity was absolutely negatived. On July 17th, 1892, two birds of the present species attracted the notice of a farmer at Kirkbride, by what he described as their 'grunting' note. They were then swimming together in the waters of the Wampool near the village of Kirkbride; but being disturbed they rose upon the wing and flew away like Common Sheldrakes, flying high and in a straight line; they soon wheeled, however, and circling round dropped quietly back into the river.

Their arrival was notified to John Biglands, who searched for them on the following day. He found them without difficulty, and recognizing that they were strange to him, he shot one of the two. The bird thus obtained was in moult, at least it had been changing the smaller feathers, but the quills were quite perfect. Biglands however thought that the bird was not perfect enough in feather to make a good cabinet specimen.

Accordingly, instead of sending it to me, as was his first intention, he allowed his brother to carry it off to his farmhouse. He there identified the bird to his own satisfaction as a Scaup, his only book of reference being Goldsmith's Animated Nature. Believing rightly that the Scaup was a common duck, this worthy flung his prize upon his manure-heap.

When I arrived it had disappeared, and I was assured that a dog or cat had demolished it, which seemed likely enough. But I persevered. When the whole of the reeking dunghill had been turned over, a final thrust of the pitchfork brought up the remains of a bird, and sure enough it was a Ruddy Sheldrake. It was far advanced in decomposition, but the wing feathers were intact and showed that it had never been in confinement.

We sorrowfully secured the skull and sternum, together with a few feathers, and returned the rotting carcase to the mass of filth from which it had been disinterred for our enlightenment. I must add that I spent many days in searching for the other bird. It frequented the Wampool for about a fortnight after the death of its companion. It then took up its quarters at Crofton Park, where it was shot by Mr. L. S. Cookson. He wrote to me that it was a very fine male in splendid plumage.'

Ernest Blezard (1943) in the Transactions of the Carlisle Natural History Society, Vol. VI. p. 93, says: 'Mentioned in a postscript in Macpherson's Fauna, is the fact of one shot on the River Wampool out of two present, on 18th July, 1892, and which Macpherson said was of wild origin.'

45). 1892 Pembrokeshire Near St David's, flock, one shot, July.

(Mathew, 1894; Lockley, 1949; Donovan & Rees, 1994; Lovegrove, Williams & Williams, 1994).

History Mathew (1894: 68) says: 'One was shot from a flock near St David's in July.'

Accepted locally (Lockley 1949; Donovan & Rees 1994) and nationally as the first for Wales (Lovegrove, Williams & Williams 1994).

46). 1892 Dorset Christchurch Harbour, Hampshire, adult female, shot, August, now at Horniman Museum, London (NH.83.3/131).

(Kelsall & Munn, 1905; Morrison, 1997; Hart MS.; Clark, 2022).

History Kelsall & Munn (1905: 221) say: 'Mr. Hart procured one in Christchurch Harbour in the same month [August, 1892].'

Hart writing in May 1927 states that he shot this cased adult female in Christchurch Harbour in August 1892 and mounted it himself.

47). 1892 Lincolnshire Humberstone Fitties, immature female, shot, 1st September.

(G. H. C. Haigh, Zoologist 1892: 359; F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398; J. Cordeaux, Zoologist 1895: 59; Smith & Cornwallis, 1955; Lorand & Atkin, 1989).

History G. H. C. Haigh of Grainby Hall. Great Cotes (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 359, says: 'A Ruddy Sheldrake, Tadorna casarca, was brought to me on September 1st by H. Stubbs, a wildfowler. It had been killed the same morning from a pool of water on Humberstone "fitties" by a Cleethorpes gunner, to whom Stubbs gave a couple of Mallards in exchange. The bird is apparently in immature plumage, and probably a female. A stormy S.W. wind had been blowing during the previous night.'

Admitted by F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 395, in the review of the invasion.

J. Cordeaux (1895) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XIX. p. 57, adds this record to his Humber district Fauna.

Lorand & Atkin (1989) say: 'A female was shot by a Cleethorpes gunner at Humberstone Fitties on 1st September and was verified by F. Stubbs.'

48). 1892 Norfolk Snettisham, immature male, washed up on the beach, 13th September.

(J. G. Tuck, Field 24th Sep., 1892: 473; F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398; J. H. Gurney, jun., Zoologist 1892: 401; C. Morley, Hardwicke's Science Gossip 29: 20-21; J. H. Gurney, jun., Zoologist 1893: 152-153; Riviere, 1930; Taylor, Seago, Allard & Dorling, 1999).

History Julian G. Tuck from Hunstanton (1892) in The Field of 24th Sep., Vol. LXXX. p. 473, says: 'A male Ruddy Sheldrake, apparently a bird of last year, was picked up dead, but quite fresh at high-water mark at Snettisham, near Hunstanton, on Sept. 13. I examined it in the hands of a local taxidermist just after it had been set up. It had evidently been shot, fallen into the sea, and been carried ashore by the wind and tide. Possibly some reader of this note may remember shooting at a bird of this kind, either on the Norfolk or the Lincolnshire side of the Wash; the shot marks indicate that the bird was flying from left to right, and not at a great elevation. My opinion is quite in accordance with that expressed by Messrs. Ogilvie and Macpherson - namely, that the Ruddy Sheldrakes met with this year are genuine migrants, and not escaped birds; and when it is considered that they have been recorded from localities widely apart, that they have been observed in flocks, and that no one has reported the loss of even one bird of this species from private waters, there seems to be a good case in favour of this theory. My books of reference are at home, and, from memory, I cannot say whether the Ruddy Sheldrake has had hitherto an unquestioned place in the list of the birds of Norfolk; if not, this occurrence is of special interest.'

F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 395, says: 'Sept. 13th. One (male) picked up dead on Snettisham Beach, Norfolk. (J. H. Gurney in litt. and Field, Sept. 24, 1892). ("Last month two Ruddy Sheldrakes, or birds supposed to be such, were seen on Holkham Lake, which is not very far from Snettisham". J. H. Gurney in litt. Sept. 18, 1892).'

J. H. Gurney, jun., of Norwich (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 401, says: 'A young male Ruddy Shelduck was washed ashore, on the 13th, at Snettisham, near Lynn, and there is every reason to regard it as a valid addition to the list of Norfolk birds, though, by a coincidence, Snettisham is the same parish in which an escaped Ruddy Shelduck, belonging to the late Mr. Coldham, was shot in 1869 (see Zoologist, p. 1909).'

C. Morley (1893) in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, Vol. XXIX. p. 20, says: 'Mr. G. Smith of Yarmouth writes me that a young "Ruddy" was washed ashore at Snettisham on the 13th of last September, and evidently looks upon this as the first certain record of the bird having been taken in Norfolk.'

J. H. Gurney, jun., of Norwich (1893) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVII. pp. 152-153, says: 'Col. Fielden informs me that the supposed Ruddy Shelducks at Holkham (Zool., 1892, p. 395) were certainly some other birds. There is no doubt, however, about the Snettisham Ruddy Shelduck, which shows two incipient black tips where the collar ought to be. It is now in my collection. The threadbare tertials referred to (p. 397) are no indication of confinement, for I have seen them in a wild Ruddy Shelduck in Egypt; but they are scarcely apparent in the Norfolk bird.'

Riviere (1930: 148) says: 'On 13th September, 1892, a young male was found washed up on the beach at Snettisham.'

Accepted locally (Taylor, Seago, Allard & Dorling 1999).

49). 1892 Co. Durham No locality, small flock, one shot, 23rd September.

(Tristram, 1905; Temperley, 1951; Bowey & Newsome, 2012).

History H. B. Tristram (1905 (1): 185) in the Victoria County History of Durham, says: ‘The only recorded occurrence is the appearance of a small flock in the interior of the County, one of which was shot and brought to Mr. Cullingford for preservation on September 23rd, 1892.'

Temperley (1951) adds: 'It is stated in the Handbook of British Birds that: "Many occurred June to September, 1892, various parts Ireland, in Cumberland, Berwick, Sutherland, Morayshire, Lincs., Norfolk and Suffolk; flocks ten to fifteen and even twenty in some places". In the light of this report on the 1892 influx, this Durham record does not appear so unique as at first sight. It is unfortunate that more details are not now forthcoming.'

Accepted locally (Bowey & Newsome 2012).

50). 1892 Cumbria Crofton Hall, near Wigton, Cumberland, male, shot, 26th September.

(L. Sawrey-Cookson, Field 22nd Oct., 1892: 613; F. M. Ogilvie, Zoologist 1892: 392-398).

History L. Sawrey-Cookson of Broughton Tower, Lancs. (1892) in The Field of 22nd Oct., Vol. LXXX. p. 613, says: 'When staying at Crofton Hall, near Wigton, on Sept. 26, I shot a male Ruddy Sheldrake on the large pond in the park. It is now in the hands of Peter Spicer, Leamington, for preservation.'

F. Menteith Ogilvie (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 394, recording the record in square brackets, says: 'Since these lines were written, Mr. L. Sawrey Cookson, of Broughton Tower, Lancashire, has reported (Field, 22nd Oct., 1892) that on Sept. 26th, when staying at Crofton Hall, near Wigton, Cumberland, he shot a male Ruddy Sheldrake on the large pond in the lake.'

51). 1892 Sussex Crumbles Pond, near Eastbourne, 1st and 3rd October; presumed same, 12th October.

(R. Morris, Sussex and Hants. Naturalist 1: 13; Walpole-Bond, 1938).

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 371) says: '1892: One on the Crumbles Pond, near Eastbourne, on at any rate October 1st (R. Morris, 'Private Notes' and Sx. and Hants. Nat., I. p. 13) and 3rd (Diplock) - perhaps the same bird each time; on October 12th, one on the Crumbles again (R. Morris, 'Private Notes' and Sx. and Hants. Nat., I. p. 13).'

52). 1892 Borders Earlston, Berwickshire, female, shot, 4th October.

(Bolam, 1912; Witherby et al., 1940-52; Murray, 1986; Forrester & Andrews et al., 2007).

History Bolam (1912: 369) says: 'One was killed at Earlston, on 4th October, 1892. It was a female, and was shot by Mr. David Grieve, and stuffed by Mr. James Chisholm of Kelso, who informed me about it. It showed no indication of ever having been in captivity, and was no doubt a genuine wild bird.'

Accepted as the third Scottish record (Forrester & Andrews et al. 2007).

53). 1892 Sussex Beachy Head, seen, 8th October.

(F. Wise, Sussex and Hants Naturalist 1: 4; Walpole-Bond, 1938).

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 371) says: 'One off Beachy Head on 8th October was shot at and missed.'

54). 1892 Sussex Beachy Head, three, seen, 12th October.

(R. Morris, Sussex and Hants Naturalist 1: 13; Walpole-Bond, 1938; James, 1996).

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 371) says: '1892: Three off Beachy Head on 12th October.'

57). 1892 Surrey Ripley, two, shot, 22nd October.

(Bucknill, 1900; Wheatley, 2007).

History Bucknill (1900: 227) says: 'On October 22, 1892, two were shot at Ripley by a labourer. One was eaten, but the other, a female, was taken to and preserved by Mr. Bradden, of Guildford, and is now in the Charterhouse collection.'

59). 1892 Sussex Selsey, three, shot, late October.

(Walpole-Bond, 1938; James, 1996).

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 371) says: '1892: Three (these were obtained) on the Selsey Marshes towards the end of the month (H. George, in litt.).'

NOT PROVEN

0). 1776 Dorset Bryanston, shot, winter, now at Great North Museum: Hancock, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

(G. T. Fox, Zoological Journal 3: 496; Selby, 1833; Yarrell, 1845; Yarrell, 1871-85; Saunders, 1899; F. L. Blathwayt, Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Antiquarian Society 55: 190; Morrison, 1997; Green, 2004).

[Fox, 1827; Mansel-Pleydell, 1888; Palmer, 2000; A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 124].

History G. T. Fox (1828) in the Zoological Journal, Vol. III. p. 496, says: 'A specimen of this bird was found in the Allan Museum, where it came to Newcastle. After much conjecture respecting its history and synonymy, the evidence of its capture in England was satisfactorily established by the discovery of Mr. Allan's MS. catalogue, where it is recorded as having been shot at Mr. Portman's seat at Bryanston in Dorsetshire, in the severe frost of 1776.

Two birds of this species had evidently been once in the possession of Mr. Pennant, as Brown's figures were made from them. I may however venture to say, that the specimen belonging to the Newcastle Museum, and which has lately been exhibited to the Linnean Society, is unique as a British killed one. Mr. Bewick has engraved a figure of it in his new edition, under the name of Ferruginous Duck, conceiving from its colour, that it might be the bird described by Pennant under that name, but which is now generally admitted to have been the Anas Nyroca or Castaneous Duck of Montagu.'

Selby (1833 (2): 293) says: 'The only British specimen of this rare and handsome duck, previous to the one from which the present figure and description are taken, is now in the Newcastle Museum, and its authenticity has been clearly established by Mr. Fox, in his Synopsis of that part of the collection formerly known as the Allen or Wycliffe Museum.

This bird was shot, it appears, at Bryanstone, near Blandford in Dorsetshire, the seat of Mr. Portman, in the severe winter of 1776; the same frost of which season, as Mr. Fox remarks, produced the Red-breasted Goose (also in that collection), a bird of equal rarity, and, like the present one, a native of the eastern parts of Europe.'

Yarrell (1845 (3): 231, 2nd ed.) says: 'G. T. Fox of Durham, appears first to have noticed this bird as British, from an example in the Museum at Newcastle, which had formerly belonged to Marmaduke Tunstall Esq., this was believed to have been killed at Bryanstone, near Blandford in Dorsetshire, the seat of Mr. Portman, in the severe winter of 1776; the same frost of which season, as Mr. Fox remarks, produced the Red-breasted Goose, also in that collection, a bird of equal rarity, and, like the present one, a native of the eastern parts of Europe.'

Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 348, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds.

Mansel-Pleydell (1888) says: 'Selby (1833) does not appear to show how or from whom he obtained it; Fox (1827) was unable to pronounce it a British-killed specimen.'

Gurney (1921: 229) in Early Annals of Ornithology lists the first record for Britain as occurring in 1776 (Tunstall).

Admitted locally by F. L. Blathwayt (1934) in the Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. LV. p. 190, under 'A Revised List of the Birds of Dorset', Prendergast & Boys (1983) and Morrison (1997).

Palmer (2000) adds: '...it was recorded by Pennant and was lost at the museum for 50 years until refound in 1995 and identified as a Cape or South African Shelduck Tadorna cana.'

Comment By looking at the woodcut in Bewick, which he took from Tunstall's collection in the Wycliffe Museum, you will see that it is identifiable as a Cape Shelduck. Misidentified. Not acceptable.

Green (2004) in the Birds of Dorset, has still accepted it locally, presumably unaware of this development.

0). 1831 Orkney Sanday, shot, October.

(Baikie & Heddle, 1848; MacGillivray, 1837-52; Gray, 1871; Yarrell, 1871-85).

[I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70; A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 123-128].

History Gray (1871: 361-362) says: 'Has been met with twice within Scottish limits. One of these specimens was shot in the island of Sanday, in Orkney, by Mr. Strang, in October, 1831, as noticed by Messrs. Baikie and Heddle at page 74 of their Natural History of Orkney.'

Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 348, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'In Scotland a Ruddy Sheld-Duck is stated by Messrs. Baikie and Heddle to have been killed at Sanday, in Orkney, in October 1831.'

0). Pre 1833 County unknown Locality in southern England, killed, undated.

(Selby, 1833; Jenyns, 1835; Yarrell, 1845).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Selby (1833 (2): 293-294) says: 'The specimen from which the present figure is taken was killed in the south of England, and was kindly forwarded to me by Mr. Gould, for the purposes of this work, and is now in my collection, having been presented to me by the gentleman into whose possession it passed from Mr. Gould.…Plate 48.

Figure of the natural size. Length about twenty-three inches. Forehead, cheeks, and chin pale ochreous-yellow. Region of the eyes, crown of the head, and nape of the neck greyish-white. Neck, as far as the collar, ochreous-yellow, tinged with orange. Collar about half an inch in width, black, glossed with green. Breast, mantle, scapulars, and under parts of the body gallstone-yellow, tinged with orange, being deepest upon the breast. The feathers upon the upper parts of the body have their margins paler, and the ends of the long tertials pass into sienna-yellow. Lesser and middle wing-coverts white; secondary quills green, glossed with purple, and forming a large speculum; greater quills black. Lower part of the back, upper tail-coverts, and tail, black, glossed with green. Bill, legs, and feet, black.'

Jenyns (1835: 229) says: 'Mr. Selby has figured a second individual which was killed in the South of England, and which is in his own collection.'

Yarrell (1845 (3): 231, 2nd ed.) says: 'Mr. Selby mentions a specimen, now in his collection, killed in the south of England, which was at first lent to him by Mr. Gould to figure from.'

Comment Lacks a precise date and locality for a scientific record. Not acceptable.

0). 1834 Suffolk Iken, near Orford, shot, undated.

("W.B.C." Loudon's Magazine of Natural History 7: 151; Yarrell, 1845; Gould, 1862-73; Yarrell, 1871-85; Babington, 1884-86).

[Gurney, 1876; Babington, 1884-86].

History "W.B.C." (1834) in Loudon's Magazine of Natural History, Vol. VII. p. 151, says: 'Ferruginous Duck or Ruddy Goose (Anas rutila, Fauna Suecica) was shot, a few days since, at Iken, near Orford [on the coast of Suffolk]. It is in the possession of Mr. Manning, chemist, Woodbridge. (Ipswich Journal, Jan, 11, 1834.'

Yarrell (1845 (3): 231, 2nd ed.) says: 'In January 1834, a specimen was shot at Iken, near Orford, on the coast of Suffolk, which passed into the possession of Mr. Manning, of Woodbridge.'

Gurney (1876: 224) in a footnote, says: 'Nine supposed occurrences of the Ruddy Shelduck in Great Britain are quoted in Harting's Hand List, four of which I believe would not stand a proper sifting, viz., those said to have been killed at Orford.'

Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4: 348, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds.

Babington (1884-86: 244) in a footnote states that Mr. J. H. Gurney, jun., informed him that he and Mr. H. Stevenson were of the opinion that it was a Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca.

Comment Misidentified. Not acceptable.

0). Pre 1840 Caithness No locality, shot, undated.

(Wilson, 1842; Gray, 1871; Yarrell, 1871-85; Manson, 2003).

[Gurney, 1876; Harvie-Brown & Buckley, 1887; I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70; A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 123-128].

History Wilson (1842) says: '…After transacting our fishery and other business we accompanied Mr. Eric Sinclair, Surgeon, to examine his beautiful and extensive collection of birds, obtained by him exclusively in the county of Caithness. The local museums are extremely interesting, and of great value as illustrating the geographical distribution of species…As examples of the rare species, we may select the following…Ruddy Shelduck.'

Gray (1871: 361-362) says: 'Has been met with twice within Scottish limits…the other was shot in Caithness, and is still preserved in the collection of the late Mr. Sinclair of Wick.'

Gurney (1876: 224) in a footnote, says: 'Nine supposed occurrences of the Ruddy Shelduck in Great Britain are quoted in Harting's Hand List, four of which I believe would not stand a proper sifting, viz., those said to have been killed at Caithness.'

Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 348, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'According to Mr. R. Gray, one shot in Caithness-shire is still preserved in the collection which belonged to the late Mr. [E.S.] Sinclair of Wick.'

Harvie-Brown & Buckley (1887: 188) placing the record in square brackets, say: 'Included in Dr Sinclair's collection. Seen by Wilson in Dr Sinclair's cabinet with the rest of the collection "obtained by him exclusively in the county of Caithness" (Voyage, Vol. II. pp. 178-180).'

Locally, Manson (2003) adds: 'This specimen was in Dr Sinclair's collection but without date or locality.'

0). 1864 Lincolnshire Near Ashby, Epworth, obtained, January.

(S. Hudson, Zoologist 1864: 9046; E. Newman, Zoologist 1864: 9121; S. Hudson, Zoologist 1864: 9290-91).

[Gurney, 1876; A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 123-128].

History S. Hudson (1864) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXII. p. 9046, says: 'In the last week of January a fine specimen of the Ruddy Shieldrake was taken in Capt. Healey's decoy, near Ashby.'

E. Newman, Editor (1864) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXII. p. 9121) says: 'In Mr. Hudson's communication (Zool. 9046) these two birds [Ruddy Shelduck and Spotted Sandpiper] are recorded as having occurred at Epworth, and the record has induced several communications expressing doubts. It has always been my endeavour to avoid the offence which is frequently given quite unintentionally by the mode in which such doubts have been expressed, and I will therefore, instead of printing the communications I have received on this subject, invite Mr. Hudson to give us further information on the two birds mentioned, first offering a few words on the species in question. The Ruddy Shieldrake is one of the very rarest of our occasional visitors, and a specimen of the Common Shieldrake may possibly have been mistaken for it.'

Samuel Hudson of Epworth (1864) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXII. pp. 9290-91, dated 15th July 1864, with his reply says: '…In October, 1863, I went over to Captain Healey's decoy, situated on the eastern bank of the River Trent, about six miles from Epworth; and on looking over his collection of stuffed birds, &c., I was shown a case containing a pair of ducks (Anas rutila). I asked who named them, and was told Mr. Waterton, of Walton Hall, while on a visit to Mr. Healey some years ago. I have never seen specimens of the same species before. I was told they had only taken four specimens in the decoy during the last fifty-two years, namely three females and one male; therefore, on the occurrence of the fourth specimen, this season, I recorded the fact in The Zoologist, not doubting Mr. Waterton's authority. My esteemed friend Mr. Thomas Alliss, of York, who visits Epworth every two or three months, expressed a wish to see a specimen of the Ruddy Shieldrake: he seemed astonished at the form of its bill, and said he could not believe it to be a genuine specimen of Anas rutila: he could not tell what the duck really was, never having seen the same species before; but on coming to Epworth again, a short time since, he said he had seen a male specimen of Anas rutila (not British) at Mr. Storrs, birdstuffer, of Doncaster, and requested me to go and see it, and I am sorry I have not yet had time to do so: he said it was very different from our specimen.'

Gurney (1876: 224) in a footnote, says: 'Nine supposed occurrences of the Ruddy Shelduck in Great Britain are quoted in Harting's Hand List, four of which I believe would not stand a proper sifting, viz., those said to have been killed at Epworth.'

Comment Misidentified. Not acceptable.

0). 1864 Suffolk Near Blackstakes, seen, undated.

(Hele, 1870; Yarrell, 1871-85).

[Gurney, 1876; Babington, 1884-86].

History Hele (1870) says: 'Another specimen has been reported as having been seen since, namely, in 1864. From the description given, and the knowledge of my informant, I have no doubt it was an individual of this species. It was observed, in company with several common Shieldrakes, near Blackstakes.'

Gurney (1876: 224) in a footnote, says: 'Nine supposed occurrences of the Ruddy Shelduck in Great Britain are quoted in Harting's Hand List, four of which I believe would not stand a proper sifting, viz., those said to have been killed at Blackstakes.'

Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 348, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: '...and from the description given, Mr. Hele believes in the reported occurrence of another in that county in 1864.'

Babington (1884-86: 244) says: 'One reported as seen in 1864 in company with several Common Sheldrakes near Blackstakes. Mr. Hele has no doubt from the description given, and the knowledge of his informant, that it was an individual of this species (Hele, Ald., p. 150 and Dresser, B. of Europe, VI. p. 462). Nevertheless, it requires confirmation.'

Comment Not known to have been seen by a competent authority. No identification details for this sight record. Not acceptable.

0). 1868 Outer Hebrides Lochboisdale, South Uist, adult male, shot, June, now at Wick Museum.

(D. Pennie & J. M. Gunn, Scottish Naturalist 63: 197; Bannerman, 1957; Cunningham 1983).

[A. G. Knox, British Birds 94: 65-66; I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70].

History I. D. Pennie & J. M. Gunn (1951) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. LXIII. pp. 196-197, say: 'The Carnegie Museum, Wick, contains a good collection of birds, among which are several specimens of more than a passing interest. We have recently had the opportunity of handling the whole collection, which it appears has not been critically examined for many years, if at all, and we feel that attention should be drawn to some of the specimens for which full data are available.…The "Mackay Collection", which was presented to the museum in 1916, consists mainly of ducks collected in the north and west of Scotland by Eric Sinclair Mackay, who carried on business as a barrel manufacturer in Wick, and later as manager of a curing station in Lochboisdale, South Uist, and as a fishcurer in Shetland until 1886. In the Carnegie Library, Wick, is a bound manuscript volume of Mackay's notes entitled 'Notes on Caithness Bird Life', which were originally published as a series of articles on the John o' Groat Journal. We have verified from his notes the correctness of the labels of the following specimens in his collection, and there is no reason to doubt that they are all genuine Scottish-taken birds.

Ruddy Sheld-duck Casarca ferruginea. Adult male, shot at Lochboisdale, South Uist, in June 1868.'

Comment On the evidence available, the Mackay ducks would seem to be suspect (A. G. Knox, British Birds 94: 65-66). Not acceptable.

0). 1869 Norfolk Snettisham, adult male, killed, 26th March.

(T. Southwell, Hardwicke's Science Gossip 1869: 160).

[T. Southwell, Hardwicke's Science Gossip 1869: 184].

History T. Southwell (1869) in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, Vol. V. p. 160, in the July issue, says: 'I have much pleasure in recording the occurrence of the Ruddy Sheldrake in Norfolk. On the 26th of March last an adult male was killed on the Snettisham beach by a Mr. Wright, in whose possession it now is. This is the first instance of its occurrence in this county on record.'

T. Southwell (1869) in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, Vol. V. p. 184, dated 3rd July, 1869, says: 'I regret to say there is a probability of the Ruddy Sheldrake, recorded by me at the same time, being an escaped bird, one having been lost by a gentleman some miles from Snettisham a few days before. I examined the bird in question myself soon after it had been set up; it was a male in fine plumage, and presented not the slightest appearance of ever having been in confinement. The escaped bird was purchased with a female, which died before the male escaped, in Leadenhall market, and is said to have been received from Russia.'

Comment Known escape. Not acceptable.

0). 1869 Nottinghamshire Newstead Abbey, two, seen, undated.

(Sterland & Whitaker, 1879).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Sterland & Whitaker (1879: 55) says: 'Two of these rare birds were seen by Mr. Webb on his lake at Newstead Abbey in 1869, but they were very wild.'

Comment No identification details for this sight record. Not acceptable.

0). 1872 Angus & Dundee Barry, undated.

(Crighton, 1976).

[I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70].

History No further details in Crighton (1976).

Comment Lacks adequate supporting details. Not acceptable.

0). Pre 1875 Northumberland Boulmer, killed, undated.

(Bolam, 1912; Kerr, 2001).

[Bolam, 1912; K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Bolam (1912: 369) says: 'There was a preserved specimen in the possession of a relative of the writer, at Boulmer, which had been killed there sometime prior to 1875, but considering it only an escape, no particular note of the date was kept.'

0). 1877 Angus & Dundee Barry, undated.

(Crighton, 1976).

[I. J. Andrews & K. A. Naylor, Scottish Birds 23: 70].

History No further details in Crighton (1976).

Comment Lacks adequate supporting details. Not acceptable.

0). 1881 Angus & Dundee Forfar, shot, April.

(Harvie-Brown, 1906).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Harvie-Brown (1906: 231, 232) says: 'One was caught in a rabbit-hole at a certain place on the sand dunes of Forfar (auct. Mr. McAndrew, viva voce to Col. Drummond Hay), and this was verified by a Mr. Marshall, birdstuffer, Arbroath, who said he had had two or three of the same species "three or four years before" (i.e. prior to the above). And another was shot in the same neighbourhood in April 1881, also by the same Mr. McAndrew, junior, plumber, Carnoustie, and also stuffed by the said Mr. Marshall (vide Trans. and Proc. Perth Soc. Nat. Sciences, Vol. I. p. 10, for both of these records).

But I may add that it may well be desirable to take any notes made by the said Mr. Marshall with a pinch of salt; because as I am aware, he was rather fond of springing small surprises upon his customers.'

0). 1884 Sussex The Midrips, four, one shot, 8th September.

(T. Parkin, Zoologist 1884: 469; Yarrell, 1871-85; Saunders, 1899; Ticehurst, 1909; Harrison, 1953).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Thomas Parkin of The Vicarage, Halton, Hastings (1884) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. VIII. p. 469, says: 'A Ruddy Shelduck was killed on September 8th, by John Southerden, at the Midrips in Romney Marsh, Kent, about twelve miles from Rye. It was brought, for preservation, to Mr. Bristowe [sic], naturalist, of Silchester Road, St. Leonards-on-Sea. I have seen the bird. Bristowe [sic] informed me that it was a male, but the black band round the neck is entirely absent, and it has the head of a light buff, which all point to its being a female. Can it be an immature male?'

Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 348, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, and later in his Manual (1899, 2nd ed.).

Accepted locally (Ticehurst 1909: 344) and Harrison (1953) who quoting The Zoologist 1884: 469, as his source, says: 'One was shot by Mr. John Southerden from a party of four on 8th September 1884 at The Midrips.'

Comment Locality is in Sussex (Sussex Bird Report 1953: 5). Because of Bristow's involvement with the 'Hasting Rarities' fraud, it is safer to reject this record. Not acceptable.

0). Pre 1885 Surrey Farnham, found dead, undated.

(Bucknill, 1900; Wheatley, 2007).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Bucknill (1900: 227) says: 'There is a male in the Charterhouse collection, which was found dead in a ditch at Farnham by a workman and presented to Mr. Stafford by a Mr. James Knight.'

Locally, Wheatley (2007) adds that it was before 1885.

Comment Lacks a precise date for a scientific record. Not acceptable.

0). 1885 Oxfordshire Port Meadow, shot, March.

(Radford, 1966; Brucker, Gosler & Heryet, 1992).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Locally, both Radford (1966) and Brucker, Gosler & Heryet (1992) record this record with no further details.

Comment Lacks adequate supporting details. Not acceptable.

0). 1885 Kent/Sussex The Midrips, three, one female, shot, April; one of same, Newenden, obtained a few days later.

(Ticehurst, 1909; Harrison, 1953; Taylor, Davenport & Flegg, 1984).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Ticehurst (1909: 344-345) says: 'The following April a female was obtained from a flock of three at the same locality [The Midrips] by Mr. Fred Austin, of Lydd, in whose possession it remains. This bird was stuffed by Mr. Bristow, of St. Leonards, who informs me that, two days after receiving it , he had another one sent to him for preservation that had been shot at Newenden.'

Harrison (1953) says: 'A female was shot in the April of 1885 by Fred Austen in the same locality, one of a party of three; while yet another was obtained at Newenden three day later.'

Comment The Midrips is in Sussex (Sussex Bird Report 1953: 5). Harrison (1953) mentions no earlier reference, so I can't help wondering if he has confused this record with the four from the previous year. Bristow was involved with the Hastings Rarities fraud.

0). 1885 Essex Dedham, obtained, undated.

(Glegg, 1929).

[Glegg, 1929; K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Glegg (1929) says: 'Dr. H. Laver records having seen, in the hands of Ambrose, on 14th March 1885, one which had been taken at Dedham. This bird was stated to have been identified by Mr. Harting, but there is something mysterious about it, as Mr. Harting makes no mention of it in the second edition of his Handbook, nor is it referred to by Christy.'

0). 1886 Suffolk Aldeburgh, female, shot, 8th July.

(N. F. Hele, Field 24th Jul., 1886: 123; Babington, 1884-86; Ticehurst, 1932; BOU, 1971).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History N. Fenwick Hele of Rowley House, Aldeburgh (1886) in The Field of 24th July, Vol. LXVIII. p. 123, says: 'The following uncommon birds have come to hand during the present summer: …also a female Ruddy Sheldrake (Tadorna rutila), killed on Thorpe Mere, July 8, 1886.'

Babington (1884-86: 275) in a postscript, says: 'Mr. Hele informs me that a very beautiful specimen of a female Ruddy Sheldrake was shot at Aldeburgh on July 8, 1886, and has come into his possession.'

Ticehurst (1932: 269) says: 'A female was shot on 8th July, 1886, at Aldeburgh; now in the Hele collection.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

0). 1887 Cheshire & Wirral Puddington Marsh, Dee Estuary, killed by a dog, March, now at Grosvenor Museum, Chester.

(Dobie, 1893; Hardy, 1941).

[Coward & Oldham, 1900; Forrest, 1907; K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Dobie (1894) says: 'A specimen killed by a dog near Chester (I believe in a pit at Puddington), in March, 1887, is now in the Grosvenor Museum. It may have been an escaped bird.'

Coward & Oldham (1900: 160) placing the record in square brackets, say: 'There is no evidence that the Ruddy Shelduck has ever occurred in Cheshire in a wild state. The bird in the Grosvenor Museum, Chester, which was caught by a dog near that city in March 1887, had in all probability escaped from captivity.'

Forrest (1907) placed the record in square brackets as it may have been an escape.

Comment Probable escape. Not acceptable.

0). 1888 Gloucestershire River Severn, near Stonebench, male, shot, 1st March.

(Witchell & Bishop Stragnell, 1892).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Witchell & Bishop Stragnell (1892: 104) say: 'A male was shot on the Severn, near Stonebench, March 1, 1888. This was evidently an escaped, and is in the possession of Mr. H. C. Emerton.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

0). 1888 Dumfries & Galloway Solway Firth, shot, summer.

(W. Hastings, Transactions of the Dumfries & Galloway Natural History Society 6: 128).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History W. Hastings (1887-90) in the Transactions of the Dumfries & Galloway Natural History Society, Vol. VI. p. 128, says: 'Another very rare bird in this country is the Ruddy Shieldrake. I had one sent me last summer, shot in the Solway. It is much of the same size as the Common Shieldrake, but very differently marked, being of a bright bay colour all over, and described as being met with to the north of the Baltic breeding in rabbit holes, in the sand hills, much the same as the Common Shieldrake. I can find no account of it ever having been met with in this country.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

0). 1888-92 Buckinghamshire Stoke Park, near Slough, ten, undated.

(H. H. Vyse, Zoologist 1892: 359-360).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History H. Howard Vyse of Stoke Place, Slough (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. pp. 359-360, says: 'During the past four years no less than ten Ruddy Sheldrakes have been hatched and reared at Stoke Park, near Slough. Of these only two were caught and pinioned; the rest flew away usually when the frost and snow came.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

0). 1890 Sussex Harting, female, shot, 12th September, now at Booth Museum (BoMNH 204034).

(H. D. Gordon, Field 20th Sep., 1890: 462; H. Langton, Zoologist 1890: 395; Booth, 1901; James, 1996).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History H. D. Gordon of Harting Vicarage, Petersfield (1890) in The Field of 20th Sep., Vol. LXXVI. p. 462, says: 'A fine example of the Ruddy Sheldrake was procured in the parish of Harting last week, and is now at Mr. Pratt's, Brighton, for preservation.'

Herbert Langton of Brighton (1890) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XIV. p. 395, says: 'Messrs. Pratt and Sons, of Brighton, have just stuffed a female Ruddy Shelduck (Tadorna rutila), which was shot at Harting, near Petersfield, on Sept. 12th. The bird belongs to the Rev. H. D. Gordon, of Harting Vicarage, and is in very fair plumage. I hope you think it worth recording in The Zoologist, as I suppose there is a chance of its being a wild bird.'

Booth (1901: 203, 3rd ed.) says: 'Case 318. This beautiful species is a very rare visitor to England from the south. The specimen in the case was obtained in September, 1890, by the late Rev. H. D. Gordon at Harting, in the extreme west of Sussex, and presented to this Museum by his widow on his death in 1897.'

The first acceptable record by the BOU was in June 1892.

James (1996: 150) adds: '...shot on 12th September 1890 and in the Booth Museum, Brighton (BoMNH 204034).'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

0). 1892 Hampshire Burley Manor, New Forest, female, seen, 28th March to 11th April.

(The Times April, 1892; R. J. Ussher, Zoologist 1892: 335; Kelsall & Munn, 1905).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255; Clark & Combridge, 2009].

History In an Editorial reply to R. J. Ussher (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 334, they say: 'On the 28th March last a Ruddy Sheldrake made its appearance on a piece of water at Burley Manor, Ringwood, Hants., and was described in a letter to The Times, dated "Burley Manor, April 12th", by Mr. W. C. Esdaile, who did all he could to protect it while it remained in his neighbourhood.'

Kelsall & Munn (1905: 221) say: 'The late Mr. W. C. Esdaile, of Burley Manor, in the New Forest, wrote to The Times on April 12th, that a female specimen visited his lake on March 28th, and remained there a fortnight with the other wild-fowl.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

Comment In a review of past records in Hampshire this was found to be unacceptable (Clark & Combridge (2009).

0). 1892 Suffolk Near Ipswich, female, shot, late March.

(C. Morley, Hardwicke's Science Gossip 29: 20-21).

[A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 123-128].

History C. Morley (1893) in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, Vol. XXIX. pp. 20-21, says: 'Another specimen of the Ruddy Sheldrake was undoubtedly shot near Ipswich the end of last March, probably on the River Orwell, as it was seen in the flesh by Dr. Taylor, who states that it was offered for sale to him, and at the time was dripping from the beak; it has since been lost sight of, and all attempts to discover its present whereabouts have failed.

Mr. Kerry of Harwich says he neither saw nor heard of such a bird being taken in the district. I would be much obliged if readers of Science Gossip, throughout the country would kindly communicate with me via Dr. Taylor's admirable journal, if they have seen or heard of specimens of this rare and almost extinct bird during the past year. Readers dwelling in and about Ipswich are invited to view the specimen, a female in a very fine state of preservation, in the Ipswich Museum.'

Not accepted in the second review (A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 123-128).

Comment The first acceptable record in Great Britain was of one on 20th June 1892.

0). 1892 Devon Mouth of Taw Estuary, Braunton, three, shot, June.

(H. A. Evans, Zoologist 1892: 427; D'Urban & Mathew, 1895; Moore, 1969).

[A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 124].

History H. A. Evans of Westward Ho! (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 427, says: 'I am informed by Mr. Rowe, of Barnstaple, that three specimens of the Ruddy Sheldrake were killed on the Taw, near Braunton, in June last, by a man called Petherick. The date is of interest in connection with Mr. Ogilvie's paper in the last number.'

D'Urban & Mathew (1895: 196, 2nd ed.) recording the record in square brackets, say: 'In the severe winter of 1890-91, a specimen of the Ruddy Sheldrake, which we can only consider to have strayed from some ornamental water, where it had been frozen out, was obtained at Braunton, in North Devon. A man fired at it and wounded it, and several days later it was picked up dead, and carried to Mr. Rowe, the Barnstaple bird-stuffer, from whom it passed to the Museum at Westward Ho! College.'

A. H. J. Harrop (2002) in British Birds, Vol. XCV. p. 124, says: 'In a review of the species the Committee was unable to find any supporting descriptions.'

Comment D'Urban & Mathew's statement is presumed to relate to this record.

0). 1892 Hampshire Near Lymington, shot, August.

(Kelsall & Munn, 1905; Clark & Combridge, 2009).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Kelsall & Munn (1905: 221) say: 'In the following August [1892] a specimen was shot by Mr. Vores, of Lymington, in the neighbourhood of that town, and is still in his possession.'

Clark & Combridge (2009) say: 'We find this to be still acceptable even though it was not published in the review by Ogilvie. As Ogilvie only checked a limited source of journals, we believe it to be overlooked.'

A. H. J. Harrop (2002) in British Birds, Vol. XCV. p. 124, says: 'In a review of the species the Committee was unable to find any supporting descriptions.'

0). 1892 Devon Woolacombe Sands, some, shot, September.

(F. H. C. Gould, Zoologist 1892: 426).

[A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 124].

History F. H. Carruthers Gould of Buckhurst Hill, Essex (1892) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVI. p. 426, says: 'At Barnstaple, last September, I saw at the birdstuffers some Ruddy Sheldrakes, which had been obtained in the neighbourhood of Woolacombe Sands, North Devon.'

A. H. J. Harrop (2002) in British Birds, Vol. XCV. p. 124, says: 'In a review of the species the Committee was unable to find any supporting descriptions.'

0). 1892 Cheshire & Wirral Ditton, Widnes, Lancashire, shot, 9th October.

(C. Oldham, Zoologist 1905: 107-108; Hardy, 1941).

[Oakes, 1953; A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 95: 124].

History Charles Oldham of Knutsford (1905) in The Zoologist, 4th series, Vol. IX. pp. 107-108, says: 'On October 9th, 1892, after a westerly gale and an abnormally high tide which flooded the marshes of the Mersey Estuary, and drowned many cattle and sheep, a Ruddy Sheldrake was shot by Mr. James Mercer on some flooded meadows at Ditton, near Widnes.

Mr. Mercer, who has kindly allowed me to examine the bird, says that it was very wild, and that he had some trouble to get within shot of it. As the Ruddy Sheldrake is kept on ornamental waters, suspicion not unnaturally attaches to most of the birds shot in this country. In view, however, of the wariness of the Ditton example, and the fact that it was obtained in 1892 - a year memorable for the incursion of this species into Britain and Western Europe - there can be little doubt that it was really a wild bird; and the occurrence is perhaps sufficient to warrant this belated notice.'

Oakes (1953: 219) says: '...also suspected of being an escape.'

A. H. J. Harrop (2002) in British Birds, Vol. XCV. p. 124, says: 'In a review of the species the Committee was unable to find any supporting descriptions.'

Comment Escape. Not acceptable.

0). 1892 Cornwall Helford River, shot, undated.

(J. Clark, Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall 15: 208; J. Clark, Victoria County History of Cornwall 1906; Penhallurick, 1969).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History J. Clark (1902) in the Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall, Vol. XV. p. 208, under 'The Birds of Cornwall', says: 'At least one specimen shot on the Helford River in 1892, the year of the great invasion.'

J. Clark (1906 (1): 340) in the Victoria County History of Cornwall, says: 'One shot on Helford River in 1892, the year of the great invasion.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

Comment Lacks a date for a possible first for Britain. Not acceptable.

0). 1892 Dorset Lodmoor, Weymouth, two, shot, undated.

(Prendergast & Boys, 1983; Morrison, 1997; Green, 2004).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History Locally, Prendergast & Boys (1983) and Morrison (1997) can add no further details.

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

Comment Still acceptable in the latest county avifauna (Green 2004), but then he still counts the 1776 record as well, which has long been rejected. Lacks a precise date for a scientific record. Not acceptable.

0). 1892 Gloucestershire Near Gloucester, obtained, undated.

(C. Morley, Hardwicke's Science Gossip 29: 20).

[K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255].

History C. Morley (1893) in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, Vol. XXIX. p. 20, says: 'Mr. H. W. Marsden states that a specimen from near Gloucester once came into his possession.'

Not accepted in the review (K. E. Vinicombe & A. H. J. Harrop, British Birds 92: 225-255).

0). 1892 Herefordshire Holme Lacy, shot, undated.

(C. Morley, Hardwicke's Science Gossip 29: 20; Hutchinson, 1899; Walker & Smith, 1975).

[Gilbert & Walker, 1954].

History C. Morley (1893) in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, Vol. XXIX. pp. 20, says: 'Mr. H. W. Marsden states that one was taken or seen in Hereford, which was probably an 'escape'.

Gilbert & Walker (1954: 38) record this species in square brackets but state that Hutchinson (1899) reported one shot at Holme Lacy in 1892.