« AnteriorContinuar »
N three occasions only has the Aquatic Warbler been recognised in England. One taken at Hove, near Brighton, in October, 1853, is in the collection of Mr. Borrer;' a
second, in my possession, was killed near
Loughborough, in the summer of 1864; a third, believed to have been obtained near Dover, is in the Dover Museum.” This bird resembles the Sedge Warbler in size and general appearance, but, in addition to the light stripe over each eye, it differs in having a light stripe down the centre of the forehead; this, being very distinct, furnishes a good means of identifying it readily. The species has been figured by Dr. Bree in his “Birds of Europe,”
to which work the reader may be referred for further information and a more detailed description. I may supplement his remarks, however, by saying that Lord Lilford found it common in Corfu in May, and at Nice in August and September;' and that Mr. T. Drake met with it in March in Tangier and Eastern Morocco.” Now that its occasional presence in this country has been detected, ornithologists should look out for it between April and September, and scrutinize every Sedge-bird they see, on the
1. Cf. Newton, P. Z. S., 1866, p. 210. * “Ibis,” 1867, p. 468. * Cf. J. H. Gurney, jun., “Zoologist,” 1871, p. 2521.
chance of meeting with the rarer species.
THE MARSH WARBLER.
N appearance this bird resembles the common Reed Warbler, just as the Aquatic Warbler resembles the Sedge-bird. It is one of the plain-backed species, and similarity in
appearance as well as in habits causes it doubt
* “Ibis,” 1860, p. 232. * “Ibis,” 1867, p. 426.
less to be overlooked or mistaken for the
* The specific name arundinacea, which is commonly applied to this species, belongs properly to the Great Reed Warbler, the Turdus arundinaceus of Linnaeus.
Cambridgeshire. He says: “My attention was first attracted to this species some time since, during a visit to our fens, by the marked difference in the song of a bird somewhat similar in appearance to the true S. arundinacea (i.e., strepera); it was louder, clearer, and sweetertoned than that of the last-named. Its mode of flight, too, was more undulated and quicker. It was more shy and timid, continually retreating to the thickest covert. Never, so far as my experience goes, does it emit notes similar to the syllables ‘chee-chee-chee” so common to S. arundinacea.” Another specimen of this bird was obtained in Cambridgeshire by the late James Hamilton, jun., of Minard, during the summer of 1864, and was exhibited at a meeting of the Natural History Society of Glasgow in February, 1865, as recorded by Mr. E. R. Alston in the “Zoologist,” 1866, p. 496. In the same year, Mr. Robert Mitford gave an account (“Zoologist,” 1864, p. 9109) of a Reed Warbler which he found nesting in lilac trees in his garden at Hampstead, and which at the time was thought to differ specifically from S. strepera, and possibly to be S. palustris. In the summer of 1863 Mr. Mitford had found four pairs of this bird breeding in gardens under similar circumstances, and in July, 1865, he shot two of the same birds, both males, and found, as he says, “two nests similar in structure, and similarly situated to those of the previous year in my garden, from both of which the young had evidently flown only a few days previously. The birds were not in good order, but just beginning their moult. I so arranged the matter that at the time I shot these birds I received from Romney Marsh fresh-killed specimens of the true Reed Warbler, shot in the reeds of the fen ditches; and in comparing the two birds in the flesh together, I have little hesitation in saying that the inland warbler is not our Reed Warbler. I will not enter into the chief points of difference at present, as I hope next May to get a specimen or two in finer