White-throated Needletail
Hirundapus caudacutus (Latham, 1801) (2, 0)
Photo © By Masami Kuroda - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59021670
STATUS
Central and Eastern Palearctic. Polytypic.
OVERVIEW
Formerly known as Needle-tailed Swift.
Only the two records below were admitted (BOU 1971).
RECORDS
1). 1846 Essex Great Horkesley, 6th to 8th July when shot, now at Chelmsford Museum (Acc. No. D7003).
(E. Newman, Zoologist 1846: 1492-1496; E. Newman, Zoologist 1863: 8329; Newman, 1866; J. E. Harting, Field 21st Oct., 1871: 340; BOU, 1883; D. Seth-Smith, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 39: 90; Witherby, 1920-24; H. F. Witherby, British Birds 22: 46-47; Glegg, 1929; Hudson & Pyman, 1968; Cox, 1984; Wood, 2007).
History Edward Newman (1846) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. IV. pp. 1492-1493, says: 'On the 17th of July, I received through the kindness of Mr. Catchpool, a specimen of this remarkable bird, which had been shot in the neighbourhood of Colchester, and to which allusion has been made some months since, on the wrapper of The Zoologist.
The bird has been excellently stuffed by Mr. Hall, of the City Road, and is now returned to Mr. Catchpool, after having been examined by our eminent ornithologists, Mr. Yarrell, Mr. Doubleday, and Mr. Fisher, the last-mentioned of whom has most obligingly supplied me with the following description and figure.
Length 8 inches. From the carpal joint to the end of the wing 8½ inches. The first and second quill-feathers nearly equal in length. and the longest in the wing. The wings, when closed, extend full three inches beyond the spines of the tail. The length of the gape from the tip of the under mandible (which appears to be rather the longest) ⅞ of an inch. Length of the tarsus ⅝ of an inch, and of the middle toe to the end of the claw ¾ of an inch. The toes placed three before, and one behind, the latter being however situated not in the middle, but on the inner side of the shank. The beak short, very broad at the base, and black. Irides, [see Gould]. Front and upper part of the eye, bordered by a line of stiff-black, bristly feathers, Forehead greyish white, crown of the head. back of the neck, upper tail-coverts, and upper side of the tail-feathers, shining brown, beautifully varied with purple and green reflections; back greyish brown, lightest in the centre; primary and secondary wing feathers dull brown, lightest on the inner web; wing-coverts darker; the innermost feathers of the greater wing-coverts being more or less white on the inner web, and the whole wing being varied with reflections of purple and green. The tail in form, almost square; the feathers ten in number, the shaft of each being carried beyond the web, and forming a short, sharp spine, which, in the central feathers, rather exceeds ⅛ of an inch in length, and gradually diminishes towards the outside. The chin, throat, and under tail-coverts white; breast, belly, and under surface of the tail-feathers clove brown; flanks dark brown, spotted with white; legs, toes, and claws dark brown.
It was shot about 9 p.m. on the 8th of this month (July) by a farmer's son, named Peter Coveney, in the parish of Great Horkesley, about four miles from Colchester; he saw it first on the evening of the 6th - he tells me it occasionally flew to a great height, was principally engaged in hawking for flies over a small wood and neighbouring trees; being only wounded, it cried very much as it fell, and when he took it up, clung so tightly to some clover (it was in a clover lay) as to draw some stalks from the ground; it is evidently nearly allied to the swallow, and its late feeding would perhaps show some affinity to the goat-sucker, the protruding shafts of the tail-feathers are singular.'
E. Newman (1863) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXI. p. 8329, says: 'The only record of the occurrence of the Spine-tailed Swallow (Acanthylis caudacuta) in Britain is by myself, in The Zoologist for 1846 (Zool. 1492).
The specimen in question was shot at Great Horkesley, near Colchester, was sent in the flesh to the late Thomas Hall, birdstuffer of the City Road, and while there was examined by the late Mr. Yarrell, by the late Mr. Edward Doubleday, by Mr. W. R. Fisher, and by myself. It was then stuffed and returned to the owner, Mr. Catchpool, of Colchester.
It is the best authenticated record of any single straggler that has yet appeared in the British list. I think, however, that I was in error in giving this bird too hastily the name of "Australian" Spine-tailed Swallow, which has led our superficial ornithologists to regard its simple history with doubt, so easily are non-practicals misled by a name. It must be candidly admitted that sufficient pains were not taken at the time either to identify it with, or separate it from, the Spine-tailed Swallow of China, Nepal, or other parts of Asia.'
Newman (1866: 332) adds: 'The singular hypothesis has been started that this bird was sent over in the flesh from Australia, in order to deceive Mr. Catchpool: the bird was carefully examined by the late Mr. Yarrell, Mr. W. R. Fisher, Mr. Hall, Mr. Doubleday, and myself, without detecting any trace of deception: the ingenious hypothesis of its importation in the flesh must therefore be dismissed.'
Admitted by J. E. Harting (1871) in The Field of 21st Oct., Vol. XXXVIII. p. 340, and nationally in the first List of British Birds (BOU 1883: 75).
Christy (1890: 145) adds: 'The specimen is now in the possession of Mr. Catchpool's son, Mr. Thos. K. Catchpool, of Leicester.'
D. Seth-Smith, Editor (1919) in the Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club, Vol. XXXIX. p. 90, at the 240th Meeting of the Club held on 14th May 1919 at Pagani's Restaurant, London, says: 'Mr. Charles Chubb exhibited the first British captured example of the Needle-tailed Swift (Chaetura caudacuta), which was taken in the parish of Great Horkesley, about four miles from Colchester, Essex, in the month of July, 1846.
It was originally in the possession of Mr. Thomas Catchpool, of Highfields, Lexton [Lexden] Road, Colchester. After his death it became the property of his son, Mr. Thomas K. Catchpool, of Leicester, later at "Ronceval", Wanstead, London, where he died in December 1915, leaving his collection to Mr. T. C. Pettifor Catchpool.'
H. F. Witherby (1928) in British Birds, Vol. XXII. pp. 46-47, in a Review of W. E. Clarke's 3rd ed. of Saunders's Manual of British Birds, says: 'For years Howard Saunders's Manual was the standard authority for British ornithology until his last (1899) edition became too out of date to be so regarded. The present edition we fear falls short in the accuracy sustained in Saunders's own two editions....There are many details in the book to which we take exception, and there are also certain records which do not appear to have been published previously, and it must suffice to refer here to a few of these items....Among the few quotations in the book that from The Zoologist, under Needle-tailed Swift, contains two mistakes, the year and page being given as 1847 and 1496 instead of 1846 and 1492.'
Locally, Glegg (1929) adds that the bird is now at Chelmsford Museum. It was accepted locally (Hudson & Pyman 1968: 68; Cox 1984: 189) and by Wood (2007: 57) who states it was donated by the Catchpool family to Chelmsford Museum (Acc. No. D7003) in 1919, and is still on display (2004).
2). 1879 Hampshire Near Ringwood, shot, 26th or 27th July, now at Natural History Museum, Tring (Acc. No. NHMUK 1914.3.17.1).
(Anon., Proceedings of the Zoological Society 1880: 1-2; G. B. Corbin, Zoologist 1880: 81-85; Eds., Field 10th Jan., 1880: 78; BOU, 1883; Kelsall & Munn, 1905; Witherby, 1920-24; Clark, 2022).
History Anon. (1880) in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society, pp. 1-2, at a meeting held on 6th January 1880, says: 'Prof. Newton, M.A., F.R.S.,V.-P., drew the attention of the meeting to a specimen of Chaetura caudacuta (the "Needle-tailed Swallow" of Latham, Synops. Suppl. II. p. 259), which had been intrusted to him for exhibition by Mr. Gr. B. Corbin, of Ringwood, near which place it had been shot on the 26th or 27th of July last.
About the middle of that month Mr. Corbin saw one evening two strange birds flying over the river Avon in company with Swifts, and in the course of the following week had better opportunities of observing at least one of them.
A few days after Mr. Corbin held in his hand the bird now exhibited, which had been shot in the meantime, and was, he had no doubt, one of those he had previously watched. Prof. Newton stated that this example was the second of the species known to have been obtained in this country - the first having been shot in July 1846, near Colchester (Zool., p. 1492), and examined, before it was skinned, by the late Mr. Yarrell and other naturalists of authority.
The species was described by Latham from a specimen procured in New South Wales; and for a long time Australia was thought to be its habitat. By degrees ornithologists learned that it was only a regular visitant to that country from its real home in Eastern Siberia, where it was first discovered by Steller, while Pallas, not knowing it was identical with Latham's Hirundo caudacuta, redescribed it (Zoogr. R.-As. I. p. 541) under the name of H. ciris.
It has since been recorded from Nepal, Sikkim, and Bhutan, and is said to breed in the Himalayas; but the examples which have reached England have most likely made their way hither from Siberia.
It is no Swallow, but a Swift, belonging to the genus of Cypselidae, to which, in 1826, the name Acanthylis (properly Acanthyllis) was applied by Boie, and Chirtura by Stephens - a genus which differs from Cypselus in the structure of its foot and in the spine-like tips of its rectrices.'
G. B. Corbin (1880) in The Zoologist , 3rd series, Vol. IV. pp. 81-85, in the March, 1880, issue, says: 'So far as I am aware, but a single occurrence of this species in the British Islands has been hitherto recorded. In July, 1846, a specimen shot at Great Horkesley, near Colchester, was forwarded (in the flesh) for preservation to the late Thomas Hall, birdstuffer, of the City Road, and while in his hands was examined by Messrs. Yarrell, Doubleday, and Edward Newman, and was recorded in The Zoologist for that year.
The rarity of its visits to Western Europe is hardly to be wondered at, seeing that its true home is in Eastern Siberia, whence it migrates into India, Persia, China and Australia, where it is found as a winter visitant. Its powers of flight must be truly marvellous to enable it to traverse the vast intervening space which separates these countries from the British Islands. I have now the pleasure to record its recent occurrence in Hampshire.
The unusual abundance of Swifts in many localities during the summer of 1879 has been the subject of remark in these pages, and in this neighbourhood they were extremely numerous.
On the evening of July 27th I saw two strange birds flying about over the river in company with Swifts; but they kept a long way off, so that I could see nothing very peculiar about them, except that they appeared to be larger than the rest of the company, and their flight, although resembling that of their fellows, was somehow different.
My curiosity was awakened, and the next evening I was at the same place watching for the strangers, but the dull cold weather prevented my seeing them. In the course of a week, however, I had the gratification of seeing one so near that the white throat, the white under the tail, as well as the pale patch on the back, were plainly visible. I noticed then that it sought its food indiscriminately amongst the Swifts, Swallows, and Martins, and was not particular about confining itself to one stratum of atmosphere as the others species did; for it is well known that if Swifts and other species are feeding at the same time they seldom mingle with each other, or occupy the same height in the air. I also observed that the bird in question often had a sort of poising flight, reminding one of the Nightjar, but at other times it had an equal, if not superior, dash of wing to the Common Swift; and I could well understand this when, a few days later, I held in my hand what I believe was one of the two birds I had seen, for its length of wing, coupled with its superior weight, would give it such an impetus as I have described.
It was killed about the 26th or 27th July, whilst flying over the river, about two miles from where I first observed it, and what I suppose was its mate, but the man who shot it did not see another like it.
Altogether this interesting stranger is a handsome bird. It measured seven inches and three-quarters from its beak to the end of the spines of its tail, and the wings when closed extended nearly three inches beyond them. The wings themselves measure eight inches from the carpal joint to the tip of the longest quills; the two outer quills are of equal length, and the longest in the wing. The beak is short and black, rather broad at the base, and the nostrils are somewhat large; from the tip of the beak to the inside of the gape it measures three-quarters of an inch. Its eyes, which were of a very dark brown hue, appeared sunken, in consequence of the feathers of the head seeming to overhang them; and this appearance was not due to the bird having got stale, for it was quite fresh when I had it, and the eyes were bright and life-like. Its legs are short, toes rather long, and the claws very much curved, and a peculiarity about the foot is that the hind toe is not situated at the back of the leg, but on the inside, so that the outer and hind toes seem to be in line with each other. Legs and toes brown; claws paler. The forehead and throat, as well as the under-tail coverts, are white; and there is a broad irregular line of the same colour extending from the tail to the thigh. The head, neck, wings, and tail are black or very dark brown, with very beautiful shades of green and purple in different lights. In the centre of the back is a very pale patch, almost white in the middle, but shading off to a pale brown as it reaches the dark tail and brown breast, and under parts. The inside webs of the quill-feathers of the wing are also of a pale brown or grey; in fact the two or three nearest the body are quite white, and were visible when the bird was flying, and even conspicuous when the wings were closed. The chief characteristic feature in the bird is that from whence it takes its name - viz., the spines of its tail. The feathers of the tail are almost of equal length and ten in number, the shaft of each being prolonged beyond the webs nearly a quarter of an inch in the six middle ones, but not quite so long in the other four. The needle-like spines, which end in a sharp point, are stiff, black, and shining, like the shafts, of which they are a continuation.
The weight of the bird was just under three ounces, and the body was plump and well-conditioned, indicating that it had been living well. I examined the stomach, and found it contained a comparatively large mass of insect remains, amongst which portions of the common wasp were very conspicuous, the hard horny thorax of two of these creatures being intact.
Amongst the mass also were the two fore-wings of some moth, so doubled and rubbed that I could not recognise the species at first, but on a closer inspection I have not much hesitation in saying they belonged either to Leucania pallens or L. impura; and as these two species of moths naturally inhabit a damp or marshy situation, I am probably correct, although, as far as my experience goes, they seldom fly in the daytime, and yet I suppose the bird must have taken them on the wing like the rest of the food.
From the fact of wasps forming part of the diet, it seems that even stinging insects are not objected to, but possibly anything of the kind on the wing is readily taken by this bird, and when the mouth is open it would be capable of securing an insect of considerable size.
That this bird was a general feeder is quite certain, for, besides what I have mentioned, there were several wing-cases of some small Coleoptera in the stomach. I am unable to say what became of the other bird I saw on the evening when I first observed them, but that it was one of the same species I am sure.'
[This specimen, now carefully figured by Mr. F. W. Harris, we have had the pleasure of examining, and it was exhibited by Professor Newton at a meeting of the Zoological Society on the 6th January last....It is remarkable that, with the exception of the specimens observed in England, none are recorded to have been met with in Europe. - Ed.]
In an Editorial (1880) in The Field of 10th Jan., Vol. LV. p. 41, he says: 'At the meeting of this [Zoological] Society held on Jan. 6, Professor Flower in the chair, Professor Newton exhibited, on behalf of Mr. G. B. Corbin, a specimen of Acanthyllis or Chaetura caudacuta - the Needle-tailed Swift - shot near Ringwood, in Hampshire, on July 27, 1879; remarking that it was the second example of this species which had been obtained in England.'
Admitted in the first List of British Birds (BOU 1883: 75).
Seebohm (1884 (2): 303) says: 'The second example was shot near Ringwood in Hampshire in July 1879, and was exhibited at a meeting of the Zoological Society of London on the 6th of January, 1880, when I had an opportunity of examining it (Corbin, Zoologist, 1880, p. 81, pl. I).'
Locally, Kelsall & Munn (1905: 101) say: '...The specimen is still in Mr. Corbin's possession'. However, Clark (2022) adds that on Corbin’s death it was bequeathed in 1914 to the NHM.
NOT PROVEN
0). Pre 1863 Essex No locality, obtained, undated.
(C. R. Bree, Field 23rd Nov., 1878: 667; C. R. Bree, Field 30th Nov., 1878: 701).
[BOU, 1971].
History C. R. Bree of Colchester (1878) in The Field of 23rd Nov., Vol. LII. p. 667, says: 'We have apparently another British specimen of this bird. Mr. Tomalin, the solicitor of Northampton, has a specimen which was bought out of a collection of British Birds and presented him. It was stuffed by Mr. Morris of Leyton (Low), in this county.
Upon inquiry I find Mr. Morris has been dead fifteen years, and so there is great difficulty in discovering whether the bird was stuffed from a skin or recent specimen.
Mr. Tomalin has kindly sent me the specimen; anyone may see it during the next few weeks while inquiries are made which may be much assisted by the publicity thus given. Though rather smaller, it is in every respect identical with Mr. Catchpool's well-known specimen, killed at Great Horkerly [sic] in 1846, stuffed by Hall of the City Road, and carefully examined by several learned naturalists in the flesh, being what Mr. Newman calls (Zoologist, 1863) the best authenticated straggler we are in possession of.'
C. R. Bree of Colchester (1878) in The Field of 30th Nov., Vol. LII. p. 701, says: 'Ambrose, my bird stuffer, after a careful examination, expresses an opinion that Mr. Tomalin's Spine-tailed Swift has not been set up from a skin; and I believe artists know pretty well how to distinguish between the two.'
Comment Lacks a precise date and locality for a scientific record. Not acceptable.
0). 1931 Fair Isle No locality, seen, 6th August.
(G. Stout, Scottish Naturalist 52: 38; Eds., British Birds 26: 27; Williamson, 1965; Dymond, 1991).
[Thom, 1986].
History George Stout of Fair Isle (1932) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. LII. p. 38, says: 'We did not have many birds on Fair Isle this autumn, owing to too much westerly wind, but I observed a few unusual visitors.
On 6th August, when we had a large migration of Swallows, Martins and Swifts, I observed at close range a Needle-tailed Swift. I was first struck by the large size of the bird in relation to the other swifts; then later he came closer and once or twice passed within 20 yards of where I was standing and I had a clear view of all the characteristics of the bird.'
In an Editorial (1932) in British Birds, Vol. XXVI. p. 27, they say: 'Mr. George Stout (Scot. Nat., 1932, p. 38) states that on August 6th, 1931, during a large migration of Swallows, Martins and Swifts at Fair Isle, he observed a Needle-tailed Swift (Chaetura caudacuta). He was first struck by the large size of the bird, and later saw it closer (within 20 yards) and "had a clear view of all the characteristics of the bird".
It would have made the observation more interesting had Mr. Stout, who is a first-class observer, given these characteristics in detail as seen by him.'
Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.
