Hairy Woodpecker
Leuconotopicus villosus (Linnaeus, 1766)
Photo © Iain H Leach
STATUS
North America to Mexico. Polytypic.
OVERVIEW
Species not admitted nationally (BOU 1971).
NOT PROVEN
0). Pre 1787 Yorkshire Kirklees Hall, near Brighouse, pair, shot, undated.
(Latham, 1787, 1822; Jenyns, 1835; E. Newman, Zoologist 1851: 2988; Clarke & Roebuck, 1881).
[BOU, 1883; Not in BOU, 1971].
History Latham (1787: 108, 1st supp.) says: 'This species has lately been found in the north of England, where it does not appear to be very uncommon. I had the satisfaction of seeing a pair in the collection of the late Duchess Dowager of Portland. Her Grace informed me, that they were sent to her by Mr. Bolton, who shot them not far distant from Halifax in Yorkshire. On comparing the male with one from North America, I observed a flight interruption on the middle of the red band on the hind head; in other points, they were exactly similar.' Later, Latham (1822) Vol. III. p. 390, adds: 'This has been met with in England, but I have only heard of two or three instances of the circumstance; one, in particular, communicated by the late Mr. Bolton, of Stannary, near Halifax, Yorkshire, of a pair being shot among the old trees in the park of Sir George Armitage, Baronet, at Kirklees Hall, where they no doubt had been bred, but the wood being cut down the succeeding winter, the rest forsook the ground, and could not be traced further. The above pair were presented to the late Duchess Dowager of Portland, in whose collection I saw them many years since. These birds answered to the general description in every particular, except in not having the red bar across the back of the head so complete, their being only a patch of that colour on each side of the head.'
Jenyns (1835: 151) says: 'A pair of this species, in the collection of the late Dowager Duchess of Portland, were said to have been shot near Halifax in Yorkshire. It is supposed, however, that this was an error, and that the above locality had been confounded with Halifax in North America, where the species is not uncommon.'
Edward Newman, Editor (1851) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. IX. p. 2988, says: 'Has lately been found in England. Dr. Latham examined a pair which were shot near Halifax, in Yorkshire; and on comparing the male with one brought from North America, could perceive no difference, but in a slight interruption of the red that marked the hind head of the former; a circumstance which I have frequently observed in our own. The two females corresponded exactly.'
Clarke & Roebuck (1881: 38) say: 'Kirklees Hall, near Brighouse, a pair shot, which passed into the collection of the Duchess of Portland (Latham, Gen. Syn., II. 578).'
Not admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883: 77).
0). 1845 Herefordshire Garway, obtained, undated.
(Bull, 1888).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Bull (1888: 93) says: 'This bird, also, is put in parentheses by the Committee of the British Ornithologists' Union, and there it must be left. There is a specimen in the Hereford Museum, labelled "Garway, 1845"; but unfortunately it has no history connected with it.'
0). 1849 Yorkshire Whitby, shot, winter.
(E. T. Higgins, Zoologist 1849: 2496-97; W. F. W. Bird, Zoologist 1849: 2527-28; E. Newman, Zoologist 1851: 2985; W. F. W. Bird, Zoologist 1851: 3034).
[BOU, 1883; Not in BOU, 1971].
History E. T. Higgins of York (1849) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. VII. pp. 2496-97, dated 2nd June, 1849, says: 'Shot near Whitby at the beginning of the year. Sex not determined. Beak narrow, slight and pointed, about as long as the head; a tuft of dirty yellowish white hair-like feathers projecting over each nostril. Crown of head, occiput and nape black. Lore black and white intermixed. A broad white band over each eye, extending to base of skull. Ear-coverts black. A white band from gape passing under the eye, and continued so as to form an almost complete ring round the back of the neck: beneath this is a black band from base of lower mandible to scapulars. Scapulars and upper part of back black: middle of back white, without spots or bars. Upper tail-coverts greyish black. Both sets of wing-coverts black, each feather with two or three roundish white spots on the outer and inner web. Quill-feathers black, slightly tinged with brown, with eight well-defined, rather elongated spots of white on the outer web, and rounded patches of white on the inner web, forming eight distinct bands: third, fourth, fifth and sixth feathers tipped on outer web with white: shafts of feathers black. Four middle tail-feathers black, stiff and pointed: the next on each side black; terminal half-white, occupying a larger space on the outer than on the inner web; two outer feathers on each side white. Legs, toes and claws blackish. Length of specimen 8 inches. From carpal joint to end of wing 4¾ inches. First feather very short; second feather two inches longer than the first and one inch shorter than the third; third, fourth, fifth and sixth feathers nearly the same length, but the fourth and fifth rather the longest in the wing. There is not a trace of red on any part of the bird. The above-described specimen was bought by me as a variety of the Great Spotted Woodpecker; but as soon as I began to examine it, the immense difference between it and the two described British species of black and white woodpeckers was very apparent. The great amount of white, the entire absence of red, and the size being intermediate between our British species, readily distinguish it from the great and little spotted woodpeckers; but not having any books of reference by me, I am unable to determine its species. (Query, what is the Picus medius like?) Now that attention has been called to it, perhaps it will be found to have occurred many times in England. When it came into my possession, portions of the flesh were still adhering to the wing and leg bones and to the head.'
[I have shown this description to two eminent ornithologists, neither of whom has decided on any species to which it can refer. - E. Newman.]
W. F. W. Bird of Bedford Row, London (1849) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. VII. pp. 2527-28, dated 2nd July, 1849, replies: 'The woodpecker described by Mr. Higgins (Zool. 2497) is the female of the Hairy Woodpecker (Picus villosus). Mr. Higgins's description is so clear and full that I have not the slightest doubt about the bird; and I can only ascribe its non-recognition by the two eminent ornithologists who have seen the description, to the fact that Mr. Higgins has laid no particular stress on the loose-webbed or hairy feathers that grow down the middle of the back. To these, and to the "tufts of hair-like feathers" or bristles which clothe the nostrils, the bird owes its name; and these, colour apart, are its principal specific distinguishing marks. In the male bird the occiput or back of the head is scarlet. The Hairy Woodpecker is a native of North America, and is very common in the orchards there, where it does good service. This is not, however, the first time that it has been claimed as a denizen of Britain. Many of our naturalists, who wrote at the end of the last and the beginning of the present century, state that it has been seen in Yorkshire, and elsewhere in the north of England; and Lewin gives the authority of a "Mr. Bolton, who met with it at Halifax". But Mr. Yarrell altogether ignores it, and other modern English ornithologists only refer to the reports for the purpose of doubting them. About three years ago I received from Worcestershire the skin of a woodpecker, then unknown to me: it was sent by a relative, to whom it had been given for me, as a "mighty rare bird". I handed it to my friend Mr. W. R. Fisher, and on his showing it to Mr. Yarrell and some other high authorities, they at once made it out to be P. villosus, and desired proof that it was English. This proof I endeavoured to procure; but as I could not get my Worcestershire friends to see any importance in the inquiry, I was compelled to let the matter drop. I hope Mr. Higgins will be more successful, and that we may now, with certainty, include this species in our English fauna. I confess that, even before this recent capture, I have always thought that P. villosus had quite as much right to be considered an English bird as its congener, P. martius; although it is very singular that it has never been seen on the continent of Europe, as many other woodpeckers - strangers to our coasts - dwell there.'
Accepted locally (Clarke & Roebuck 1881: 38).
Not admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU (1883: 77).
Comment Not admitted later (BOU 1971). Not acceptable.
0). 1882 Oxfordshire Between Hook Norton and Chipping Norton, shot, undated.
(O. V. Aplin, Zoologist 1882: 69).
[Aplin, 1889; Not in BOU, 1971].
History O. V. Aplin (1882) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. VI. p. 69, says: 'A short time back I bought of the birdstuffer here a skin of a Woodpecker, the history of which he gave as follows: - It was shot between Hook Norton and Chipping Norton, in this county, about five years ago. He skinned it in a great hurry, being then engaged in other business, and put it away till he should have time to attend to it. It was forgotten, and remained lost till a month or two ago, when, on turning out some old boxes, he came across it. He thought at the time he skinned it that it was a variety of Dendrocopus major, not being acquainted with the rarer Woodpeckers. As I was not sure of the species myself, I sent the skin to Mr. Harting, who very kindly examined it, - submitting it also to Prof. Newton, - and decided that it was a skin of the Hairy Woodpecker, Dendrocopus villosus (Linn.), remarking, however, that considering how easily foreign skins are now-a-days obtained, and how easily they may get mixed up if not immediately labelled, he could not help thinking that some mistake had probably been made in the present instance. Of course some doubt must rest on the skin in question being really that of the specimen killed near Chipping Norton; but the birdstuffer is so certain that it is the identical specimen, and so clear in the history of it, that I hardly like to let it pass unrecorded. He, moreover, states that he never had any foreign specimens of the larger Spotted Woodpeckers in his possession.'
Not accepted locally as the record was placed in square brackets (Aplin 1889: 212-213).
Comment Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971). Not acceptable.
