Recent work by a number of people perfectly exemplifies what the research for the Birds of Durham Heritage Project is revealing, and sometimes, not revealing. Put simply, research is a process that doesn’t always provide something concrete, other than the fascination of the research itself. Chris Bell of the Durham Bird Club’s Records Committee, has been looking into the history of some of the rare herons of the county. His in-depth research revealed an old, possibly the first ever record, of Little Bittern for the county; predating the previously published records by some 80 years. The story is complex and reveals how detailed research takes up time, but sometimes reveals not what you hoped for. Writing to Keith Bowey, Chris Bell, wrote “I’ve already discovered ‘one to sort out’ regarding Little Bittern for instance. Taken from British Birds Rarities Committee (BBRC) records: ‘10th May 1812 - Blaydon. Adult male (shot). Specimen now at Hancock Museum’. This record is not listed at all by Temperley, which is strange as it would be the first county record, and it has been accepted by BBRC. I know Blaydon is right on the Tyne and perhaps the bird was shot on the Northumberland side and is listed as Durham by BBRC in error? I've asked Mark Newsome [County Durham Recorder] to ask the Northumberland Recorder about this. We could have a look at the specimen, though I doubt the label would tell us anything?” In reply, Keith Bowey wrote: “Fascinating one this; we didn't pick this one up when we wrote Birds of Gateshead way back in 1993, and if it was shot at Blaydon, it would (almost certainly) have been in the marshes at ‘Strothers’ (as it was then called) the remnants of which is now Shibdon Pond. You say you got this one from BBRC records, which publication? I am really intrigued by this record as I am such a Gateshead bird-nerd, but this is exactly the sort of thing that I think we may turn up on a repeat basis, for a number of species. Great stuff.” The trail continues. Mark Newsome the Durham County recorder wrote to Tim Dean, Northumberland County Recorder, “Just after a bit of help and research into old records. Very old, in fact.... Chris Bell has identified a possible discrepancy with Little Bittern records. The first county record listed by BBRC is in 1812, shot at Blaydon (specimen in Hancock Museum). However, Temperley (1951), which has always been the standard work for Durham's bird history, does not mention this bird at all. But he does mention that there have been ‘several records for Northumberland and Yorkshire, some of them just outside the county boundaries’. What we're wondering is if BBRC are wrong and the bird at Blaydon was actually on the north side of the Tyne (i.e. a Northumberland specimen), or if BBRC are actually correct and the 1812 bird is in fact the first for Durham, contra Temperley. Any ideas? Has the 1812 Little Bittern ever been detailed in a Northumberland avifauna?” In reply to Mark, Tim Dean answered: “My normal source for old records is 'Northumbrian Birds' by Ian Kerr who diligently went through all the old references. He quotes Bolam 1912 'The Birds of Northumberland & the Eastern Borders' who referred to a bird shot at Blagdon (not Blaydon) in May 1810. This presumably would be the Blagdon just south of Stannington in Northumberland. This may be where the confusion has arisen and why Temperley did not mention it for Durham.” So, all is resolved, but nothing changes. Super detection work by Chris to find the previously unknown record for ‘Blaydon’ (Durham) that, through liaison between Mark and Tim has been shown not to exist, but it does exist for ‘Blagdon’ (Northumberland). The summary , diligent work by Chris, Mark and Tim, across county boundaries, revealed no extra records of Little Bittern for County Durham and that BBRC got it wrong and George Temperley got it right.
... posted by Keith Bowey, Chris Bell, Mark Newsome
... posted by Keith Bowey, Chris Bell, Mark Newsome
