Northern Goshawk by Peter Cairns

Garganey by Jack Bucknall

Which records should be included?

The most frequent question about the work of the RBBP is which records to include, and it is clear that some records get missed because of uncertainties about what to include; we sometimes spot them in county bird reports. We recognise that we have not been entirely clear in our guidance over the years, but there is a firm commitment to make our records as consistent as possible, across counties and across years, including our archive.

Here are three examples to help with some common questions. We concentrate on records which might relate to Possible or Probable Breeding – Confirmed Breeding records are much more clear-cut as they will always relate to a nest or a brood or some other indication like an adult carrying food for young.

Migrant wildfowl such as Garganey.
Garganey are difficult because they tend to occur on passage in the same habitats that they breed in. As county recorder you will know whether there is a history of breeding in your area – if not, then a record is only really appropriate for RBBP if a pair remains at a site for over a week and are still present in mid-May (although, as with all scarce species, there is always the first time!). But in counties where Garganey are a frequent breeder, and where there may be many potential sites, suitable records should be identified by date. As a rule, assume passage has stopped by mid May, and then look at pairs present after then. Sites where there is a pair for up to a week from that cut-off date onwards can be classed as Possible Breeding. If they stay longer then there is an indication of a ‘territory’, or if there is then only a male visible and he remains for a while, in all likelihood this is a case of a male ‘guarding’ a sitting female. Both of these can be classed as Probable Breeding. If in any doubt, summarise the numbers and dates and submit these details for each site, and we can discuss the cases if necessary via email.

‘Resident’ wildfowl such as Pochard.
In some areas, Pochard is both a winter visitor and a breeding bird. They are normally relatively late breeders and care needs to be taken not to include pairs early in the season before they move on. Again, this is where your local knowledge can come in, determining when winter birds have departed and leaving what we assume is the breeding population. You will only want to include counts from sites where breeding does or has recently occurred, as other sites may be places where local breeding birds gather before they disperse to the actual breeding sites. Then you could look at the range of counts from the remaining sites from May to July and base your estimate of probable breeding pairs on the maximum number of females recorded; any additional males can be included as possible breeding pairs (as females may already be out of sight on or near nests). Of course you are dependent on your observers counting the sexes separately; if they don’t, estimates are much more difficult. This might be an area where you could improve the quality of your data by requesting separate counts.

Singing passerines.
If you look at RBBP reports from before the early 2000s you will see that any singing passerine (on the RBBP list) was reported, even when the record was from a coastal site known to attract migrants. Such records are not generally included now, but care must still be taken as species such as Marsh Warbler may breed in such situations. However, as a general rule, we only report singing passerines if they occur in potential breeding habitat and if they hold a territory for at least five days, Our advice in these situations is not to report birds which occur for only a day or so at sites where they are likely to be passage, or where intensive searching indicates they did not linger. Report other birds, but provide dates and other potentially useful information so that the details are maintained on our database. We will log the records but will report them according to our current philosophy.

Common Quail by Abbie Marland

Other tips for compiling your annual returns.

There are a number of common omissions or points of apparent confusion that often crop up. For some reason, Quail is often overlooked – we don’t necessarily expect Quail to be recorded in most counties, so we’re unlikely to ask you if there are no records, but sometimes we notice records listed in county bird reports which were not reported to us in the excel sheets. Even a bird singing on one date should be reported, because often the sites they are found at are not revisited at the right time to hear them again, and by including all records of singing Quail or birds actually seen in breeding habitat our reports are consistent in what is measured (we accept some records will be of passage birds moving through, but in many cases we don’t really know; the exceptions are birds at well-watched coastal observatories). Sometimes other species seem to be missing from lists: examples we have noticed are Little Egret, Willow Tit and Long-eared Owl.

When assigning the number of pairs of a species at a site, remember this is generally based on the usual atlas definitions of a breeding ‘pair’. One individual in breeding habitat at the right time of year can be classed as a possible breeding ‘pair’, just as a singing male in breeding habitat equates to one possible breeding ‘pair’; only if the evidence really points to there only being one individual at the site should this not be the default. Thus a single Willow Tit or Lesser Spotted Woodpecker in habitat any time from February to July counts as a possible breeding pair. This is as good as it gets for some elusive species like these, especially in under-watched areas! The implication of this is that the ‘Singles’ column should ONLY be used for sites genuinely only occupied by one bird, so it is particularly useful for raptors like Peregrine, where the record is relevant to breeding status of the species.

Monk Parakeet by Max Hellicar

And don’t forget the non-natives!

It is now more widely known that RBBP also reports on the rarer non-native breeding species, such as Black Swan, Red-crested Pochard, Golden Pheasant and Monk Parakeet. In the last two years, we have included a short summary of records of these species as an appendix to our main report, but this is not a comprehensive review as we have found that some counties overlook or forget to send us their records along with their annual submissions. To ensure the most complete review, we would ask you to encourage your observers to report all non-native species every year. All records are potentially of interest for your own reports, but for RBBP purposes some records are more useful than others. For waterfowl, we are looking especially for records of pairs (not only confirmed breeding records) – there are pairs of the most numerous non-natives Black Swan, Muscovy Duck and Red-crested Pochard out there and they all should be logged and reported to RBBP. For rarer or more elusive species, such as Ruddy Duck, Eagle Owl and pheasants, even records of single birds can be useful to track their status. For other gamebirds, such as Indian Peafowl and Helmeted Guineafowl, we are looking for indications of actual breeding (nests, chicks etc.) or signs of potential breeding (such as a female disappearing off into undergrowth), not wandering individuals or birds associated with stately homes which do not appear to be breeding. Monk Parakeet is very localised but counts of birds at nesting colonies and/or occupied nest holes are what we are looking for. In fact, are there any Monk Parakeets left out there – or have they all been destroyed? With all non-native species though, if in doubt – report it anyway!

Remember to mention RBBP in your county bird reports.

We recommend that all annual county bird reports make reference to the RBBP stating that appropriate records are shared with RBBP for all the reasons listed above. Species on the RBBP list which breed or potentially may breed within a recording area could also be marked as such to help raise awareness of the importance of recording these species. These comments may help encourage local birdwatchers to make that extra effort to record their observations of RBBP species and, most importantly, submit them to recorders. Working with the RBBP to collate these data is one of the most important jobs of the county recorder.