Hooded Merganser
Lophodytes cucullatus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Photo © Rob Stonehouse
STATUS
Nearctic. Monotypic.
OVERVIEW
BOU (1971) accepted only one record, namely, the 1830-31 individual from Caernarfonshire. Following a review by BOURC (2001) this record was found to be unacceptable as were all the others which were considered escapes (Ibis 143: 171-175).
NOT PROVEN
0). 1829 Norfolk Great Yarmouth, killed, winter.
(P. J. Selby, Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Natural History Society 1: 292; P. J. Selby, Edinburgh Journal of Natural and Geographical Science 3: 238; Selby, 1833; Paget & Paget, 1834; Jenyns, 1835; Eyton, 1836; J. H. Gurney, jun., Zoologist 1876: 4847; Yarrell, 1871-85; Seebohm, 1883-85).
[A. Newton, Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society 2: 408-409; Gurney, 1884; Southwell, 1890; Witherby et al., 1938-52; Patterson, 1905; Not in BOU, 1971]
History P. J. Selby (1831) in the Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Natural History Society, Vol. I. pp. 292-293, says: 'The other, which we may claim as an acquisition, is, the Mergus cucullatus (Hooded Merganser), upon the authority of a specimen, killed at Yarmouth, in Norfolk, in the winter of 1829. The skin of this individual was lately sent to me by my esteemed correspondent, Mr. Elton, of Redland, near Bristol, to whom it was presented, by a friend, who purchased it as a rare variety, in a fresh state, from the person who actually shot it. From the state of its plumage, it appears to be a young female, the crest not being so full or large, and the white upon the secondary quills less extended than in the skin of an adult female compared with it. From the defective description of the female in Wilson's Amer. Ornithology and other works, I was, at first, in considerable doubt as to the species, and was almost inclined to think it new, or one very nearly allied to Mergus fuscus, of Latham, Pennant's Brown Merganser, which, indeed, I believe to be no more than the young male of M. cucullatus; but a skin of an adult female, sent for comparison by Sir Wm. Jardine, immediately removed all doubt upon the subject, as the only differences observed were such as I have mentioned a little above.
The following is a correct description: - Length, about 18 inches; bill, one inch and a half, rather slender, and not nearly so thick at the base as in the Smew, the serratures broad and flat, it appears to have been of a reddish brown at the base, the tip and nail darker; the chin is greyish white, speckled with greyish brown; and the whole of the face, cheeks, and neck of an uniform greyish brown or mouse colour; the crown of the head darker, and the occipital crest large and semicircular, composed of long lax feathers, of a pale reddish brown tinged with grey; the upper part and sides of the breast deep pearl grey, the margins paler; the upper back and wing coverts are greyish black, the feathers margined with obscure greyish brown; the scapulars and lower back are black; the margins of four or five of the secondary quills are white, and form a small spot or speculum in the middle of the wings; the quills and tail are greyish black; the lower part of the breast, belly, and abdomen, pure white, with a silky lustre; the sides and flanks deep brownish grey j the legs and feet are now reddish brown. The tarsus measures just one inch in length.'
Selby (1833 (2): 383-385) says: 'I am enabled to add this beautiful species to the list of the British Fauna as a rare visitant, upon the authority of a specimen that was killed at Yarmouth, in Norfolk, in the winter of 1829; the skin of which, through the kind attention of an esteemed correspondent, is now in my possession. It appears to be a young female, as the crest is not so fully developed, or the white upon the secondary quills so large, as in the skin of an adult bird of that sex, with which it has been compared. Since this capture, I have been informed that more instances have occurred, all apparently females, or young males in the garb of that sex; the adult male, in his elegant piebald plumage, never having yet been seen in Europe....Plate 58 represents the above-mentioned specimen, of which the description is as follows. Length nearly eighteen inches. Bill, from the forehead to the tip, about one inch and a half long; rather slender, and not so thick at the base as in the Smew; the serratures broad, with sharp edges. The colour of the bill appears to have been orange at the base, and darker towards the tip. Chin greyish-white, speckled with pale broccoli-brown. Crown of the head inclining to liver brown; the occipital crest (which is large and semicircular) passing into pale reddish-brown. Face, cheeks, and neck, pale broccoli-brown, or mouse colour. Breast and sides of the lower part of neck broccoli-brown, deeply margined with pearl-grey. Upper parts of the body brownish-black; the feathers upon the mantle and scapulars being margined with obscure greyish-brown. Outer edges of the exterior webs of the secondaries white, forming a small speculum in the middle of the wing. Under plumage white. The sides and flanks broccoli-brown, with paler margins. Tail composed of fourteen feathers, deep clove-brown, and reaching nearly three inches beyond the closed wings. Legs and feet brown, tinged with red. Tarsus one inch in length.'
Jenyns (1835: 250) says: 'Chin greyish white, speckled with greyish brown; the whole of the face, cheeks and neck, of an uniform greyish brown, or mouse-colour; crown of the head darker; occipital crest pale reddish brown, tinged with grey; breast grey, the margins of the feathers paler; upper back and wing-coverts greyish black, the feathers margined with obscure greyish brown; scapulars and lower back black; margins of four or five of the secondary quills white, forming a small spot in the middle of the wings; quills and tail greyish black; lower part of the breast, belly and abdomen, pure white, with a silken lustre; sides and flanks deep greyish brown; bill reddish brown at the base, the tip black; legs reddish brown. A single individual of this species, supposed to be a young female of which the above is a description borrowed from Selby, was killed near Yarmouth, in Norfolk, in the winter of 1829.'
Alfred Newton (1874-79) in the Transaction of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. II. pp. 408-409, quoting from the original letter, dated 9th February, 1831, from John W. Elton to P. J. Selby, says: 'I take the liberty of forwarding a bird to you, which does not appear to have been recognized as a British species, and hope you will do me the honour of accepting it. It was killed at Yarmouth in the winter of 1829, and was purchased as a rare bird by the person from whom we have lately obtained it, who had it skinned by a bird preserver of the place. We are unfortunately ignorant of the sex and weight, as we received it in the present state, and its former possessor did not make any observation. I however venture to flatter myself that it may add to the British Fauna, as it appears to differ in many respects from the other Mergi, all of which I have compared with it. When you have leisure I should feel extremely obliged for your opinion concerning it. We also met with a pair of the Tringa pusilla shot at the same place.'
Newton, p. 408, in a footnote, replies as follows: - "This bird was undoubtedly the Hooded Merganser (Mergus cucullatus), first introduced by Selby to the list of stragglers to Britain, and the specimen, bearing Mr. Elton's name on the ticket, is still in the collection at Twizell. In connection with this matter, some things are to be remarked. First, the fact that Elton, who (as his other letters to Selby show) was a diligent collector of birds, should have given this specimen to Selby, when the mere loan of it would have answered the latter's purpose. Secondly, that a specimen of this purely American species should have been obtained by Elton with two of other as purely American species, Tringa pusilla or T. minutella, - the occurrence of which in England had not then been recorded, - said to have been shot at the same place. Thirdly, that the Merganser should have been preserved as a skin, without having been mounted - a most unusual thing of that period; and fourthly, that more than a year had elapsed between the time of the reputed occurrence of the bird and the transmission of its skin to Selby. All these circumstances combined tend to throw some doubt on the statement in the text".'
J. H. Gurney, jun. (1876) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. XI. p. 4847, says: 'Having lately been devoting some attention to the subject of rare and doubtful British birds - a subject in which I already see there is a great deal to be done...I have seen the original specimen which was shot at Yarmouth, and which after passing through several hands was added to the collection of Mr. Selby, at Twizell. It is in the plain "dun diver" dress. It had never been stuffed, and I believe it is now in the magnificent collection of skins at Cambridge. That occurred in 1829. Sixteen others are supposed to have been shot or seen since.'
Later, Gurney (1884: 6) says: 'The Ortolan Bunting, Eagle Owl, and Pelican, it is thought may have escaped from confinement; while the Eastern Golden Plover, Wilson's Petrel, Harlequin Duck, and Hooded Merganser may not have been really killed in Norfolk.' Further, p. 47, placing the record in square-brackets, he adds: 'Reasons for excluding Selby's Hooded Merganser, said to have been killed at Yarmouth, are given in the Norwich Naturalist Transactions (Vol. II. p. 408).'
Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 509, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'We are indebted to Selby for the first notice of the Hooded Merganser as a straggler to Britain; the skin of a female bird said to have been obtained at Yarmouth, in Norfolk, during the winter of 1829, having been sent to Selby by Mr. Elton, of Redland, Bristol. The occurrence was recorded in the Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham and Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Vol. I. p. 292, and also in the third volume of the Edinburgh Journal of Natural Geographical Science, page 238, by Selby, who was informed that other instances of the capture of birds of this species had occurred. A note by Prof. Newton in the Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society, II. p. 408, tends, however, to cast a doubt upon the supposition that this example was really killed in British waters.'
Admitted nationally as the first for Britain (Seebohm (1885 (3): 621).
Southwell, Editor (1890 (3): 228) in Stevenson's Birds of Norfolk, says: 'The Hooded Merganser (Mergus cucullatus, Linn.), a North American species, has until recently always been accorded a place in the list of Norfolk birds, and that without hesitation, on the strength of an undoubted specimen of Mergus cucullatus, sent by Mr. J. W. Elton to Selby, who informed him that it was killed at Yarmouth in the winter of 1829. The bird in question is still in the collection at Twizell with Elton's name upon it, but there are circumstances which render the origin of the specimen doubtful ; and it has been expunged from all the county lists published since 1877. Full reasons for this step will be found in a foot-note appended to a copy of the original letter from Elton to Selby, accompanying the bird, and printed in the Trans. of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society (II. p. 408).'
Patterson (1905) adds: 'Subsequent inquiries have failed to substantiate the record, or trace the specimen.'
Comment Imported. Not acceptable.
0). 1830-31 Caernarfonshire Menai Straits, first-winter male, obtained, winter..
(Eyton, 1836; Yarrell, 1871-85; Seebohm, 1883-85; Forrest, 1907; Jones & Dare, 1976; Lovegrove, Williams & Williams, 1994: 103).
[BOURC (2001), Ibis 143: 171-175].
History Eyton (1836: 75) says: 'One specimen has also occurred to ourselves, killed in the Menai Straits, near Bangor, in the winter of 1830-31, which we think is an immature male, as the feathers of the crest are longer and more numerous than in the female.'
Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, and (Seebohm (1885 (3): 621).
Forrest (1907) says: '...is in the collection of Mr. T. C. Eyton and was described and figured in his Rarer British Birds at page 75.'
0). Pre 1838 Norfolk No locality, adult male, obtained, undated.
(E. Blyth, Wood's Naturalist 3: 413; C. R. Bree, Field 14th Dec., 1867: 504; J. H. Gurney & T. Southwell, Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 4: 264; Yarrell, 1871-85; Southwell, 1890).
[Gurney, 1884].
History Edward Blyth (1838) in Wood's edition of The Naturalist, Vol. III. p. 413, says: 'Mr. Hoy informs me that a beautiful male Hooded Merganser (Mergus cucullatus), in thoroughly mature plumage, has been secured in the county of Norfolk; being the first known instance of this bird occurring in its adult garb in Britain.'
C. R. Bree (1867) in The Field of 14th Dec., Vol. XXX. p. 504, on the Hoy Collection, says: 'Under the Anatidae are...Hooded Merganser, under the name of "Crested Smew" (176), doubtless the specimen recorded as obtained by Mr. Hoy in the Naturalist.'
Gurney (1884: 47) placing the record in square-brackets, says: 'But Norfolk has another claim upon this species, for Hoy's specimen, recorded by Yarrell, is stated to have been Norfolk-killed. (Vide the continuation of Maund and Holl's Naturalist, Vol. III. p. 413).'
Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 509-510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds.
Gurney (1884: 6) says: 'The Ortolan Bunting, Eagle Owl, and Pelican, it is thought may have escaped from confinement; while the Eastern Golden Plover, Wilson's Petrel, Harlequin Duck, and Hooded Merganser may not have been really killed in Norfolk.'
Seebohm (1885 (3): 621) says: 'Yarrell adds two alleged occurrences on unsatisfactory evidence which it is not necessary to quote. An adult male is said to have been shot in Norfolk about the year 1838 (Blyth, Naturalist, III. p. 413).'
J. H. Gurney, jun., & T. Southwell (1884-89) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. IV. p. 428, say: 'The only other claim we can advance, and that a slender one, is in behalf of J. D. Hoy's adult male, recorded by the late Edward Blyth, and believed to have been obtained in Norfolk at a date prior to 1838 (Naturalist, Vol. III. p. 413), considered by Bree to be still in the Hoy collection (cf. The Field, December 14th, 1867).'
Southwell, Editor (1890 (3): 228-229) in Stevenson's Birds of Norfolk, says: 'It is only right, however, to mention that there is a second candidate for insertion in the list of Norfolk birds....In this, as in the previous case, the species is a certainty, and the only room for doubt is as to its origin. It will be observed that Hoy was very explicit with regard to the sex and age of the bird, and, although he does not actually state that it was in his own collection, the inference is that it was so. That such a bird was in the collection of the late Mr. Hoy we have the evidence of Dr. Bree, who, when describing a visit to Stoke Nayland (Field, 14th December, 1867, p. 504), speaks of a "Hooded Merganser, under the name of Crested Smew," which, he remarks, was "doubtless the specimen recorded as obtained by Mr. Hoy in the Naturalist". It thus seems, I think, more than probable that the bird in Mr. Hoy's collection was a genuine Norfolk killed specimen.'
Comment Lacks adequate details. Not acceptable.
0). 1838 East Glamorgan No locality, killed, winter.
(D. S. W. Nicholl, Zoologist 1889: 171; Lovegrove, Williams & Williams, 1994).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History D. S. W. Nicholl of Cowbridge (1889) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XIII. p. 171, says: 'Mr. L. L. Dillwyn, M.P., informs me that a Hooded Merganser was killed during the hard winter of 1838, but he omitted to state where.'
0). Pre 1841 Caithness No locality, obtained, undated.
(Sinclair, 1841; Shearer & H. Osborne, Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh 2: 340; Gray, 1871; Harting, 1872; Yarrell, 1871-85; Manson, 2004).
[Seebohm, 1883-85; Not in BOU, 1971].
History Gray (1871: 398-399) says: 'I insert this species on the authority of the late Mr. Sinclair's catalogue of the 'Birds of Caithness,' originally published in the statistical account of the parish of Wick in 1841, and afterwards reprinted with remarks by Mr. Shearer and the late Mr. H. Osborne, in the Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh. The specimen obtained is still in the collection, which I believe has not yet been dispersed. Mr. Shearer, in his joint contribution, which was read at a meeting held on 22nd January, 1862, merely observes, in connection with the species, that it is "very rare".'
Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'As regards Scotland, in the late Mr. Sinclair's Catalogue of the 'Birds of Caithness', published in 1841, mention is made of a specimen, which, according to Mr. R. Gray, is still in the collection formed by that gentleman, and now at Thurso.'
Seebohm (1885 (3): 633) says: 'An example supposed to have been obtained in Caithness some time before the year 1841 (Gray, B. of West of Scotl., p. 398) can scarcely be accepted as evidence of the occurrence of this bird in Scotland.'
Manson (2004: 44) says: 'There was a bird in Dr. Sinclair's collection, marked "Very rare". There are no reliable Scottish records for this American species.'
Comment Lacks adequate details. Not acceptable.
0). 1845 Avon Bristol, Somerset, adult male, undated, now at University of Oxford Museum.
(W. Baker, Proceedings of the Somersetshire Archaeological & Natural History Society 1: 146; Harting, 1872; O. V. Aplin, Zoologist 1886: 335).
[A. G. Knox, British Birds 94: 61-73].
History Oliver V. Aplin of Great Bourton, Oxfordshire (1886) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. X. p. 335, says: 'In the University Museum at Oxford there are examples of two rare British Birds, of which I can find no mention in the Handbook of British Birds or the last edition of Yarrell's British Birds; it may therefore be worth while to place them on record in the pages of the Zoologist....An old male Hooded Merganser, placed on a stand with two females, has a label at the foot, "Adult male. Bristol, 1845. Rev. S. A. Pears". This bird also came from the Ashmolean Museum (where it was labelled as at present), and it seems that nothing more is known of it. The Rev. Stuart Adolphus Pears was, at the date of the donation, a fellow of Corpus Christi College. To the keeper of the Museum I am indebted for these particulars, which have been kindly communicated by Mr. G. A. Rowell, who remarks in reference to the Merganser, "Probably no one now living has the least knowledge on the subject.".'
Comment Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971). Not acceptable.
0). Pre 1849 Sussex Burton Park, Petworth, shot, undated.
(Yarrell, 1871-85).
[Walpole-Bond, 1938].
History Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'The Author heard of an example in the collection of Mr. Anthony Ralph Biddulph, of Burton Park, Petworth, Sussex, said to have been shot near that place; but Mr. A. E. Knox makes no mention of it in his standard work on the Birds of Sussex.'
Walpole-Bond (1938 (3): 48-49) says: 'There was once an idea, promulgated long, long ago (1843) (Yarrell's, Hist. Brit. B., 1st ed., Vol. III. p. 283, where Burton is misspelt Benton) that a dataless American Hooded Merganser in the collection of Mr., afterwards Sir, Anthony Biddulph had been shot near his seat, Burton Park, Petworth. Biddulph himself, however, did not foster the theory (cf. B. Sx., p. 363), and there is no doubt, I think, that the report was unfounded. In any event, for many years past the "record" has been studiously avoided by writers of standard works on British ornithology.'
Comment Lacks adequate details. Not acceptable.
0). 1853 Fife/Lothian Firth of Forth, three, seen, 5th May.
(Colquhorn, 1866; Eds., Ibis 1867: 239; Gray, 1871; Harting, 1872).
[Seebohm, 1883-85; Not in BOU, 1971].
History In an Editorial (1867) in The Ibis, Vol. IX. p. 239, they say: 'In Mr. Colquhoun’s Sporting Days we find two ornithological facts which require record here. The first is the observation by the author himself of three examples of Mergus cucullatus (pp. 20, 21) in the Firth of Forth, on the 5th May, 1853, as he has kindly informed us.'
Gray (1871: 399-400) says: 'In the Ibis for 1867 (Vol. III. n.s. p. 239) the editor, Professor Newton, in noticing a little work entitled Sporting Days, by John Colquhoun, states that he had been informed by the author that he had seen three Hooded Mergansers in the Firth of Forth on the 6th May, 1853, On referring to the book itself, I find that Mr Colquhoun, after telling of his triumph in leaving secured four Eider ducks, gives the following particulars: - "Could I have foreseen that ere the day closed another of these much admired Eiders would have deprived me of a shot at the rarest sea bird I ever detected in the Firth, I might not have regarded them so complacently. Having landed to search one of the homeward islands, a male Eider was asleep on a promontory which flanked a tiny bay. A ledge of rocks parallel to both made the stalk after fowl, either in this creek or on the promontory, very easy. Neglecting (contrary to my wont) to examine the bay, I gave my whole notice to the unsuspecting drake, struck him badly at the sitting shot, and brought him down dead with the other. Before I could rise from my hiding, three little sea-fowl swam rapidly into view from the bay. They never saw me, and seeming more surprised than frightened, never attempted to fly. The leader had a hood like a hoopoe, and in the centre of the hood a white star, the Hooded Merganser! It was a tempting and mortifying moment to watch the little trio, within such fair distance at first, quickly paddle out of reach long before I was "shotted'.' Leaving the Eider where he fell, we "were soon in full chase; but the American strangers had, on second thoughts, betaken themselves to their wings when I ran to warn the men to bring the boat, and I have never fallen in with this rare mergus before or since. When we returned to pick up the dead drake, the fishermen, far from sympathising with my chagrin at losing such a prize, were firmly convinced that the Eider ought to be ample consolation, and was by far the most valuable "fule" of the two".'
Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds. However, Seebohm (1885 (3): 633) says: '...nor can the alleged occurrence of three examples in the Firth of Forth, which were seen but not obtained on the 5th of May 1853 (Newton, Ibis, 1867, p. 39).'
0). 1854 Dorset Christchurch Harbour, Hampshire, adult male, shot, winter, now at Horniman Museum, London (NH.83.3/164).
(A. P. Morres, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 22: 106; Kelsall & Munn, 1905; Hart MS.; Clark, 2022).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Kelsall & Munn (1905: 245) say: 'A very fine adult male is in the Hart collection at Christchurch, which was shot in the neighbourhood by Aaron Chief, in the winter of 1854.'
Edward Hart writing in April 1927 states that this cased adult male was shot by Aaron Chief in Christchurch Harbour in the winter of 1854. It was presented to me by Mr. W. Locke on his 80th birthday, but it is not known who it was mounted by.
Comment Not in BOU, 1971.
0). Pre 1863 Yorkshire Benton Park, Leeds, undated.
(Morris, 1863-67).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Morris (1863-67 (7): 97, reissue) says: 'One at Benton Park, the seat of Anthony Ralph Biddulph, Esq.'
Comment Lacks adequate details. Confused with earlier Sussex record. Not acceptable.
0). 1864 Meirionnydd Near Barmouth, two: adult male and immature, shot, undated, both now at Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery (Acc. No. 1924Z18.4082 and 1924Z18.4083).
(Dresser, 1871-81; H. E. Forrest, British Birds 10: 24; Lovegrove, Williams & Williams, 1994; Watson, 2010).
[Witherby et al., 1938-52; Not in BOU, 1971; Pritchard, 2012].
History H. E. Forrest (1916) in British Birds, Vol. X. p. 24, says: 'Recently when on a visit to Birmingham I went through the natural history museum, and amongst Mr. Chase's loan collection of birds I noticed a case containing two Hooded Mergansers - a beautiful adult male and an immature bird. According to the label they were obtained in North Wales. I wrote to Mr. Chase for details and he replied as follows: "The Hooded Mergansers were presented to me in 1882 by the Rev. Walter Earle, of Yarlet Hall, near Stafford. He informed me by letter that they were shot near Barmouth by a former pupil of his, Sir William Clayton, by a clever right and left. These birds are mentioned by Dresser in the Supplement to his Birds of Europe, Vol. IX. page 296. In my opinion the birds are an adult male and immature male". Although recorded by Dresser, the above seem to have been overlooked by Howard Saunders and later writers on British birds.'
Watson (2010) in detailing the R. W. Chase collection in the Birmingham Museum lists this specimen and quoting from his Notebooks adds that these were presented to me by the Rev. Walter Earle of Yarlet Hall, Staffs. He informed me by letter that they were shot nr. Barmouth by a former pupil of his, Sir William Clayton, from whom he had the birds in the year 1864. A clever right and left. The birds in question are mentioned by Dresser (who went into details) in the Supplement to his Birds of Europe, Vol. IX. p. 296.
Comment Lacks adequate details. Not acceptable.
0). Pre 1866 Yorkshire Leeds, pair, obtained, undated.
(Gould, 1862-73; Clarke & Roebuck, 1881).
[Seebohm, 1883-85; Not in BOU, 1971].
History Clarke & Roebuck (1881: 59) say: 'Leeds, a pair obtained, in the collection of Mr. W. Christy Horsfall (Gould, Birds of G. Britain, Part 10, 1866). These specimens I have been unable to trace.'
Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, says: 'According to Gould, the collection of Mr. W. Christy Horsfall, of Horsfall-Low Hall, near Leeds, contained a pair said to have been shot in the vicinity; but Mr. W. Eagle Clarke states that he is unable to trace these specimens.'
Seebohm (1885 (3): 633) says: 'The statement that a pair were killed in the neighbourhood of Leeds (Gould, B. of Great Brit., pt. 10) is unaccompanied by any details of capture or proof of correct identification, and may be dismissed as more than doubtful.'
Comment Not known to have been seen by a competent authority. Not acceptable.
0). Pre 1868 Suffolk No locality, undated.
(Morris, 1863-67).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Morris (1863-67 (7): 97, reissue) says: 'One Suffolk.'
Comment Lacks adequate details. Not acceptable.
0). 1870 Kent Sheerness, Sheppey, two, killed, March.
(G. F. Mathew, Zoologist 1870: 2182; J. H. Gurney, jun., Zoologist 1876: 4847; Harting, 1872; Yarrell, 1871-85).
[G. F. Mathew, Zoologist 1876: 4958; Seebohm, 1883-85; Not in BOU, 1971].
History Gervase F. Mathew of the Royal Naval Barracks, Sheerness (1870) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. V. p. 2182, dated 12th May, 1870, says: 'A friend of mine shot a fine pair of Garganeys, about the middle of March last, near here; and also about the same time a magnificent pair of Hooded Mergansers, the male of the latter species being in splendid plumage.'
J. H. Gurney, jun. (1876) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. XI. p. 4847, says: 'Having lately been devoting some attention to the subject of rare and doubtful British birds - a subject in which I already see there is a great deal to be done - I am interested, and at the same time perplexed, to find a record of the death of a pair of Hooded Mergansers near Sheerness, in the Zoologist for June, 1870. I trust I shall not be considered as arrogating to myself any special knowledge over and above Mr. G. F. Mathew, if I intimate a doubt as to these birds being correctly named. I have no wish to act the critic, but I do respectfully wish that he would make further investigations, so as to satisfy me and other readers as to what the birds were. I have seen the original specimen which was shot at Yarmouth, and which after passing through several hands was added to the collection of Mr. Selby, at Twizell. It is in the plain "dun diver" dress. It had never been stuffed, and I believe it is now in the magnificent collection of skins at Cambridge. That occurred in 1829. Sixteen others are supposed to have been shot or seen since.'
Gervase F. Mathew (1876) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. XI. p. 4958, replies: 'I must apologise to Mr. Gurney for having left his question concerning the occurrence of this species at Sheerness in March, 1870, so long unanswered. The birds in question were merely the common Red-breasted Merganser, the male being in fine breeding plumage. I am sorry such a mistake should have occurred, and can only attribute it to a slip of the pen, for I never noticed the error myself, and am much obliged for attention having been called to it, and hope the Editor will pardon me for not having observed and corrected it before.'
Admitted by Howard Saunders (1884-85 (4): 510, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, who must have overlooked the retraction. Seebohm (1885 (3): 633) adds: '...whilst the assertion that a pair were shot near Sheerness in March 1870 (Mathew, Zoologist, 1870, p. 2182) was contradicted by the writer himself six years afterwards (Mathew, Zoologist, 1876, p. 4958).'
Comment Misidentified. Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971). Not acceptable.
0). 1884 Shetland Whale Firth, Yell, adult male, shot, July.
(I. D. Pennie & J. M. Gunn, Scottish Naturalist 63: 196-197; Baxter & Rintoul, 1953).
[Not in BOU, 1971; A. G. Knox, British Birds 94: 65-66].
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 f the following specimens in his collection, and there is no reason to doubt that they are all genuine Scottish-taken birds. Hooded Merganser Mergus cucullatus. Adult male, shot in Whale Firth, island of Yell, Shetland, in July 1884.'
Comment On the evidence available, the Mackay ducks would seem to be suspect: not acceptable (A. G. Knox, British Birds 94: 65-66).
0). Pre 1889 North-east Scotland No locality, shot, undated.
(Smiles, 1889).
[Sim, 1903].
History Sim (1903: 153) recording the record in square brackets, says: 'In the list of birds given in Smiles's Life of a Scottish [sic] Naturalist, p. 414, Edward says: "I was told by an old gunner and bird-stuffer that he had shot a specimen of this species, but I cannot vouch for its accuracy." "Very rare visitant; one in Banff Museum, shot at Strathbeg." (Serle). It seems strange that if the specimen here referred to was killed at Strathbeg, Edward takes no notice of it, seeing he was for so many years caretaker at Banff Museum. Beyond the above, there is no evidence, so far as I know, of the Hooded Merganser ever having occurred in "Dee".'
Comment Not acceptable.
0). 1889 Lincolnshire Ferriby Sluice, male, undated, now at Yorkshire Museum, York.
(Denton, 1995).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Denton (1995) in his Birds in the Yorkshire Museum, under 'Uncased Mounts', says: 'This single male, from Ferriby Sluice, Yorkshire, in 1889, had been cased previously. With the chances of this individual being an escape from captivity or even fraudulently labelled are high, no attempt has been made to submit the details to the relevant authorities.
Comment Ferriby Sluice is a hamlet in Lincolnshire.
0). 1891 Sussex Rye Harbour, adult male, killed, 15th January, now at Booth Museum, Brighton.
(Griffith, 1927; Walpole-Bond, 1938).
[Not in BOU, 1971].
History Walpole-Bond (1938 (3): 49) says: 'On January 15th, 1891, an adult drake was killed at Rye Harbour. It was promptly acquired by a local taxidermist, named Gasson, but whether at the time he was aware of its great value - for this is an extremely rare wanderer to the four seas - is not known. Be that as it may, nothing further is heard of the specimen until 1918, when it passed into the keeping of Sir Harpur Crewe. On his death in 1924, the Dyke Road Museum, Brighton, made an addition to its trophies, but three more years elapsed before the bird, for the first time, found its way into print (Cat. B. Dyke Rd. Mus., B'ton, 5th ed., 1927, p. 255).'
0). Pre 1892 Devon No localities, two, obtained, undated.
(F. Gosden, Land And Water).
[D'Urban & Mathew, 1892].
History D'Urban & Mathew (1892: 247-248) placing the record in square brackets, say: 'In Land and Water, some years ago, Mr. Frank Gosden, a fishmonger of Exeter, recorded the occurrence of two Hooded Mergansers, but we have good reason to believe the birds referred to belonged to the last species.'
0). Pre 1892 Devon Torridge, Bideford, female, shot, undated.
(D'Urban & Mathew, 1892).
[D'Urban & Mathew, 1892].
History D'Urban & Mathew (1892: 247-248) placing the record in square brackets, say: 'The Rev. H. A. Macpherson obligingly called our attention to a specimen he had been informed was in the Museum of Westward Ho! College, which was shot by one of the college boys on the Torridge, near Bideford, and was supposed to be a female Hooded Merganser.
At our request Mr. H. A. Evans, of Westward Ho! College, kindly sent the bird to us for examination, and we at once detected it to be a young female Smew.'
0). 1909 Gloucestershire Near Cheltenham, obtained, March, now at Booth Museum, Brighton.
(Witherby et al., 1940-52).
[Witherby et al., 1940-52; Not in BOU, 1971].
History Witherby et al. (1940-52) say: 'Single birds also said to have been taken near Cheltenham (Gloucester) March, 1909.'
0). 1911 Caernarfonshire Menai Straits, male, seen, March.
(Witherby et al., 1940-52).
[Witherby et al., 1940-52; Not in BOU, 1971; Lovegrove, Williams & Williams, 1994].
History Witherby et al. (1940-52) say: 'Single male also said to have been seen Menai Strait, March, 1911.'
