Tree Swallow
Tachycineta bicolor (Vieillot, 1808)
Photo © By Virginia State Parks staff - Blue BirdUploaded by AlbertHerring, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=29355840
STATUS
North America. Monotypic.
OVERVIEW
Species not admitted nationally during the period covered (BOU 1971).
NOT PROVEN
0). 1850 Derbyshire Near Derby, shot, undated.
(J. Wolley, Zoologist 1853: 3806-07; A. Newton, Proceedings of the Zoological Society 1860: 131-132; A. Newton, Zoologist 1860: 7145-46; Yarrell, 1871-85; Smart, 1886; Whitlock, 1893; W. B. Alexander & R. S. R. Fitter, British Birds 48: 9; L. P. Williams, British Birds 86: 188).
[BOU, 1883; Hartert et al., 1912; BOU, 1915].
History J. Wolley (1853) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XI. pp. 3806-07, dated 5th February, 1853, says: 'The notice of the supposed occurrence of the Rufous Swallow at Penzance (Zool. 3753), reminds me that I ought not any longer to delay recording in your pages, the supposed appearance of an individual of an American species of swallow at Derby, in 1850. I say supposed appearance, because, though I have not much doubt that the bird was really shot at Derby, there is nevertheless quite a possibility of mistake. Some months ago, my friend Mr. John Evans of Darley Abbey, sent for my inspection, and afterwards kindly presented to me, the skin of a sort of swallow whose name he had not been able to ascertain, of which he gave me the following account: One day he called at the shop of Mr. Cooke, a birdstuffer and museum keeper at Derby, in the summer of the year 1850, he was shown the skin of a bird which had been lately shot at the Siddals (the name of some common land, I believe, in the suburbs of Derby), with eleven Sand Martins, with which this had been considered to make a twelfth; in skinning them, Mr. Cooke had remarked that it was not like the others, and he thought it a variety, but asked Mr. John Evans his opinion about it. That gentleman did not know what it was, but he bought the skin for one shilling, and has had it in his possession from that time till he gave it to me some months ago, as I mentioned before. Mr. Cooke is since dead. The circumstance of his having skinned the birds himself, makes it appear improbable that he should have made a mistake, and Mr. John Evans assures me that he does not think there were any foreign skins about. I should add, that I believe there is no possibility of error since the skin came into Mr. John Evans' possession. The bird now before me is very like the House Martin, and not much like the Sand Martins in whose company it was said to be found. When compared with the former bird, the only difference seen at first is the continuous dark colour of the back, instead of their being white over the tail. On a further examination, the legs are found to be quite naked below the knees, instead of downy as in our martin. These characters are I believe sufficient to refer it to the well-known American species called Hirundo or (Chelidon) bicolor, and I find my skin to agree with the several specimens in the British Museum.
It is useless to give a particular description unless in comparison with a skin of the House Martin, one of which I do not happen to have at hand. It is enough to say that the whole of the upper surface has a deep metallic green gloss, approaching to purple in some lights, except the tail and flight feathers, which are dull black; the whole under surface is white except the tail and wings, which are of an ordinary neutral tint, whilst on this aspect the greater part of the shafts of the primaries is white. The occurrence of a specimen of a second species of American Swallow in England is no more than any one, who had satisfied himself of the reality of the former event (the occurrence of the Purple Martin), would be prepared to expect. No kinds of land bird once driven out to sea seem better qualified for arriving safe at this side of the Atlantic than the swallows; but it is a question whether even these could accomplish it without the assistance of ships, of which land birds at sea are so often seen by sailors to make use. Also they probably require strong and long continued west winds to lessen the duration of their exertion and their fast; and still it appears likely that they have a chance of surviving only when their misfortune happens at the time of their migrations, when doubtless nature has prepared them for extraordinary endurance of hunger and fatigue. And after all, what a very few are lucky or unlucky enough to reach our inhospitable shores!'
Alfred Newton of Elvedon (1860) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XVIII. pp. 7145-46, dated 28th February, 1860, quoting fully from the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, says: 'I venture to send for exhibition a skin of the North American Hirundo bicolor of Vieillot, which was formerly the property of my late very good friend Mr. John Wolley, and which there can be little doubt was obtained from a bird killed in this country, though Mr. Wolley, with that admirable caution which distinguished him in recording the reported occurrence (Zoologist, 1853, p. 3806), was careful to mention that there was "a possibility of mistake" in the matter.
I think that perhaps some members of the Society will view this specimen with a certain amount of interest; but, apart from this, my object in its exhibition is mainly to draw the attention of naturalists to a matter which is every day becoming of greater consequence to those ornithologists who chiefly occupy themselves with the Avifauna of any one district. I refer to the occurrence within particular limits of strong examples of exotic species. It is not only "British bird" students who find in these alien immigrants a great cause of perplexity. To whatever country we go, we are, perhaps before we have well ascertained the number of the bona fide species, puzzled by some wanderer turning up exactly where he was least wanted. In my own opinion, the ornithologist must accept his position with all its responsibilities; he chooses to study a class of beings, some of whom, for all sublunary purposes at least, are blest with almost infinite powers of locomotion. He must, therefore, not complain if in the course of a morning's walk here in England, an Australian Swift flies in his face, or he picks up a dead Crossbill of a Transatlantic species; and he must invoke no Deus ex machina in the shape of an auxiliary-screw clipper or a careless aviary-keeper to account for the incident. Facts like these hardly admit of a doubt, and force themselves day by day more and more upon the notice of the thoughtful naturalist. For some time, indeed, European ornithologists have been accustomed to regard the properly authenticated appearance of an exotic species, which there may be good reason to suppose have reached our shores without intentional human aid, as sufficient ground for including it in the list of our birds. But as observers have of late so largely increased, so have these occurrences been more frequently noticed; and it seems absolutely necessary to prescribe some limit to prevent our really native species from being outnumbered by these foreigners. The difficulty is to know where to draw the line; and to this point I would invite the careful consideration of naturalists. It may be all very well to "call Thalassidroma toilsoni and Mergus cucullatus European birds; but because a single individual of Regulus calendulus or Dendroica virens has reached the Old World, it is absurd to include either of those species in its Fauna. I cite these instances, because they are all from that continent whence most of our occasional visitants arrive; so much so, that one is almost driven to the conclusion that there is no primá facie reason why examples of the greater number of birds of Eastern North America should not, favente zephyro (the prevailing strong wind in Western Europe), make their appearance on our shores in course of time. Then, on the other hand, the last two additions to the list of so-called "British birds" have been from the opposite quarter. Are Syrrhaptes paradoxus and Xema ichthyaetus to take their places in the books elucidating British Ornithology by the side of the Red Grouse and the Peewit Gull? It appears to me that we gain nothing by deferring a decision on the subject, and I trust that these remarks will not be deemed unnecessary by those who are competent to deal with the matter".'
Newman (1866: 201) in Montagu's British Birds, says: 'Mr. Newton exhibited the specimen at a meeting of the Zoological Society of London, and read a short memoir thereon, which appeared in the Proceedings, under date of February 28th, 1860, and subsequently in the Zoologist for 1860, p. 7145. No doubt has been thrown on the authenticity of this specimen as British, but the accidental occurrence of a purely North American bird in England gives it no claim to be added to our list.'
Alfred Newton (1876-82 (2): 363, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, in a footnote, says: 'The supposed occurrence at Derby, in 1850, of another American Swallow Tachycineta bicolor, was recorded by Wolley (Zool., p. 3806), and though he, with his usual caution, was careful to remark that there was "a possibility of mistake" about the matter, there can be little doubt of the truth of the story told to him. The species at first sight somewhat resembles our House Martin, but is easily distinguished by wanting the white rump and the feathered legs of that bird. Wolley's specimen was exhibited to the Zoological Society, February 28th, 1860, and is now in the Museum at Norwich.'
Not admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883: 43).
Smart (1886: 39) says: 'The two last authorities [Newton and Seebohm] express no certain opinion upon the occurrence which John Wolley recorded. I believe it was purchased by Cooke, a dealer in Derby, by him skinned and sold to Mr. Evans of Darley Abbey; by whom it was given to Wolley. Newton says: "And though he with his usual caution was careful to remark that there was a "possibility of mistake" about the matter there can be little doubt of the truth of the story told to him".'
W. B. Alexander & R. S. R. Fitter (1955) in British Birds, Vol. XLVIII. p. 9, say: 'This bird was shot from among Sand Martins (Riparia riparia) and reported by John Wolley, who with Newton believed in its authenticity, though from the 1883 BOU 'List' onwards it has always been square-bracketed. There seems no real reason why it should not be regarded as a genuine migrant. Moreover, since our Sand Martin is identical with the American Bank Swallow, some of the Sand Martins it was flying with could have been transatlantic migrants too.'
Comment A Red-eyed Vireo was also recorded near Derby in 1859. Not acceptable.
