• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Upton Warren (25 Viewers)

I think the point is Mike, that the three records to date are unsatisfactory when compared with G W Egret , B W Teal etc. At least we know they were 100% the species in question. Know don't' get pedantic on me!Des.

Couldn't agree more Des, I've never been hugely happy that Marsh Tit is on the list. For a bird so scarce on and around the reserve you would (IMHO) need a good description for it to be added. Whether any such description accompanied any of the three old records I can't say.

The problem is, I think, that with Willow being the default species at Upton any report of Marsh should have needed something more than just "I saw one at Upton Warren". This is the problem with taking a county-wide view of a species that is locally scarce, i.e. no-one really raised an eye-brow when one was reported in the early '70s, which created a precedent for the two reports in the '80s. As I mentioned above, I don't know if any notes were submitted, but I believe that the observer credibility (if my memory and info as to their identity are correct) relating to two of them would probably have been enough.

Granted the default species these days is Marsh and the problem is proving Willow (but it was always the opposite at Upton). However this is often difficult, even with photos, unless the bird in question is both in view and seen to be the bird emitting the call.

Perhaps we need a BBRC-style review ;), although if there is nothing to review that might be difficult.
 
It was short and to the point - we agreed to disagree. However if he (or anyone else concerned about the lack of vegetation on the islands at the Flashes) reads the Forum I thought I would go into a little more detail behind why this is a long-standing work item in March. I forgot to add that the activities of both work parties are discussed with and agreed by the Trust as part of the reserve's overarching Management Plan.
 
Couldn't agree more Des, I've never been hugely happy that Marsh Tit is on the list. For a bird so scarce on and around the reserve you would (IMHO) need a good description for it to be added. Whether any such description accompanied any of the three old records I can't say.

The problem is, I think, that with Willow being the default species at Upton any report of Marsh should have needed something more than just "I saw one at Upton Warren". This is the problem with taking a county-wide view of a species that is locally scarce, i.e. no-one really raised an eye-brow when one was reported in the early '70s, which created a precedent for the two reports in the '80s. As I mentioned above, I don't know if any notes were submitted, but I believe that the observer credibility (if my memory and info as to their identity are correct) relating to two of them would probably have been enough.

Granted the default species these days is Marsh and the problem is proving Willow (but it was always the opposite at Upton). However this is often difficult, even with photos, unless the bird in question is both in view and seen to be the bird emitting the call.

Perhaps we need a BBRC-style review ;), although if there is nothing to review that might be difficult.

There are a couple of other species falling into this category - not a submission species for the county but very rare locally at UW - such as Hawfinch and Corn Bunting which make claims hard to substantiate. Despite several claims over the years Hawfinch does not form part of the reserve's list.
 
There are a couple of other species falling into this category - not a submission species for the county but very rare locally at UW - such as Hawfinch and Corn Bunting which make claims hard to substantiate. Despite several claims over the years Hawfinch does not form part of the reserve's list.

Was going to mention Hawfinch. Don't think it's a county description species, but it possibly ought to be away from known haunts, i.e. Wyre/Raggedstone Hill, in the way that Cetti's is (was?) away from Upton. Corn Bunting is firmly on the list from the '70s & '80s and the multi-observed records from the '90s. However any sightings these days would need the same sort of submission notes that are needed for Marsh Tit unless it too was multi-observed, or unequivocally photographed.
 
There are a couple of other species falling into this category - not a submission species for the county but very rare locally at UW - such as Hawfinch and Corn Bunting which make claims hard to substantiate. Despite several claims over the years Hawfinch does not form part of the reserve's list.

Phil. Is Corn Bunting on your wish-list for Upton?


Des. :smoke:
 
Phil. Is Corn Bunting on your wish-list for Upton?


Des. :smoke:

It would be nice - would need that sort of bird if I am ever going to make it into the UW200 club. There was a report a few years ago (2008?) which I took at face value in compiling the annual report as there was no way of proving / disproving the sighting.
 
Today I had a conversation with a gentleman in the main Flashes hide regarding the clearance of the islands (undertaken at the March work party).
My experience of such "gentlemen", is that they're normally vocal until identified. Although some seem not to worry about who hears their incessant diatribe and mouth off ad nauseam wherever and whenever they like (you know who you are).
Mike and Phil, I know you both well enough to realise that the gentleman's identity won't come from you, but wouldn't it be nice if said gentleman was to voice his concerns in this thread. Yeah, I realise it's unlikely, but...
 
Last edited:
It would be nice - would need that sort of bird if I am ever going to make it into the UW200 club. There was a report a few years ago (2008?) which I took at face value in compiling the annual report as there was no way of proving / disproving the sighting.

There's a seat and a pint waiting for you Phil. No membership card required, just a list of the 200 birds with dates.



Des.
 
There's a seat and a pint waiting for you Phil. No membership card required, just a list of the 200 birds with dates.



Des.

OK Mr Evans ;) Do I get a nice certificate? If so I will ask Garry Bagnell who prints his T-shirts so I can get one made up to mark the occasion.
 
My experience of such "gentlemen", is that they're normally vocal until identified. Although some seem not to worry about who hears their incessant diatribe and mouth off ad nauseam wherever and whenever they like (you know who you are).
Mike and Phil, I know you both well enough to realise that the gentleman's identity won't come from you, but wouldn't it be nice if said gentleman was to voice his concerns in this thread. Yeah, I realise it's unlikely, but...

In all fairness Sy I cant recall seeing this chap before. I am all for people having their own views and opinions but they need to understand that we undertake work through neccessity and good reason based on years of knowledge and observation, rather than selective choice or visual amenity. If we could avoid clearing the islands, removing encroaching reeds, strimming grass etc it would make the work parties much lighter work!
 
Hi folks,

A few pics from a session at the Moors and Flashes this morning:t:

Male Green Woodpecker with a brief appearance.
Very obliging Water Rail from the East hide.
Couldn`t find a Chiffcaff by Hen Bpook but there were 2 Goldcrests flitting in the conifer.
One of our thirteen summer vistors.

ChrisB :)
 

Attachments

  • green wood 2 copy.jpg
    green wood 2 copy.jpg
    239.6 KB · Views: 93
  • rail 7 copy.jpg
    rail 7 copy.jpg
    230.7 KB · Views: 87
  • goldcrest 1 copy.jpg
    goldcrest 1 copy.jpg
    207.1 KB · Views: 124
  • avo 3 copy.jpg
    avo 3 copy.jpg
    114.5 KB · Views: 92
In all fairness Sy I cant recall seeing this chap before. I am all for people having their own views and opinions but they need to understand that we undertake work through neccessity and good reason based on years of knowledge and observation, rather than selective choice or visual amenity. If we could avoid clearing the islands, removing encroaching reeds, strimming grass etc it would make the work parties much lighter work!

One thing to remember Phil, is that all the new islands are 'shingle' islands and were always meant to be as such. Prior to the 'old' islands being shingled they were bramble covered, where coot, moorhen and reed bunting nested. I know which type of island I would prefer and that is the same as the waders depend on.
The other thing to remember is that by the end of the season many of the islands will be covered in vegetation anyway.:t:John
A no brainer really
 
Hi folks,

A few pics from a session at the Moors and Flashes this morning:t:

Male Green Woodpecker with a brief appearance.
Very obliging Water Rail from the East hide.
Couldn`t find a Chiffcaff by Hen Bpook but there were 2 Goldcrests flitting in the conifer.
One of our thirteen summer vistors.

ChrisB :)

Not sure I have ever seen a Goldcrest photo from UW before; what a little stonker Chris :t:
 
SAILING POOL
2 Tufted Duck (pair), 14 Mallard, 4 Coot, 5 GC Grebe, 4 Cormorant, 1 Grey Wagtail - hopefully Gert will post a picture or two later
Education Reserve: Chiffchaff singing, treecreeper, redpoll siskin
FLASHES
13 Avocet, 2 Oystercatcher, 2 Curlew, 1 Greylag Goose, 4 Teal, 11 Coot, 6 Moorhen, 16 Mallard, Skylark singing and 2 Chiffchaff as per Dave J
As above plus: Curlew 7, greylag pr, shelduck pr, peregrine 2, grey Wagtail.
Between steps and bridge - water rail , redwing 3, goldcrest

MOORS POOL
2 Shelduck, 4 Gadwall (2 pairs), 4 Mute Swan, 7 Shoveler (5m,2f), 12 Cormorant, 28 Tufted Duck, 8 Pochard, 3 GC Grebe, 4 Little Grebe - 2 in Broadmeadow + 2 at north end, 3 Moorhen, 14 Teal, 2 Snipe, 20 Greylag Goose, only 17 Lapwing, 37 Coot, Water Rail on muddy track by east hide, good numbers of Redwing and Fieldfare in field behind east hide, 5 Lesser Redpoll and 2 Siskin in North Moors plantation. Dave J reported female Cettis Warbler near the east hide (and one along the causeway yesterday)
As above plus :- Gadwall 3 prs, shoveler 11 (5prs + male), pochard 10 (8 male), tufted 40, snipe 50 jack snipe 4 poss 5 flew out and landed on 'pool island ' this evening, green sand in seasonal pool, then roosted on Amy's marsh. BHG c700, common gull 1st winter, c100+ thrushes incl 2 mistle thrush all behind east hide.
Today's Skylark plus 2 Rook that Gary had at the Flashes on the 10th take the month's list to 86.

Phil I have listed our sightings in redB :)
 
Not sure I have ever seen a Goldcrest photo from UW before; what a little stonker Chris :t:

Oh Pwleeez, UW flicker, even I've managed one 8-P
(I expect a better one from you now Phil, with your singing/dancing SX40;)
 

Attachments

  • crestwarren.jpg
    crestwarren.jpg
    153.9 KB · Views: 99
Last edited:
Oh Pwleeez, UW flicker, even I've managed one 8-P
(I expect a better one from you now Phil, with youre singing/dancing SX40;)

Ahh - but if I havent looked at the Flicker site I wouldnt have seen it ;)

Perhaps if you have a bit of spare time Mark you could post a list of the species that are on the Flicker site and John / Mike / myself can add details of the historic rarities we know have been captured on film to see what remains an Upton photographic first?
 
Today I had a conversation with a gentleman in the main Flashes hide regarding the clearance of the islands (undertaken at the March work party).

Whilst the Flashes may currently look a little barren as a result, the work is essential in ensuring one of the reserve's principle aims, a breeding ground for waders. With up to 15 pairs of assorted waders plus up to 70 pairs of Black-headed Gulls attempting to breed, space is at a premium. In recent years a number of nesting waders have abandoned their attempts as a result of tall vegetation growing up around them whilst those have re-attempted have chosen different sites, proving the need to provide as many potential sites as possible. Those species which may choose to hide in the vegetation eg Lapwing and Snipe, tend to use other areas of the Flashes such as the sewage meadow or the juncas between the second and third flashes respectively. Most nesting waders need a clear line of site when nesting to observe potential predators and the presence of the vegetation (which re-grows very rapidly anyhow) does not meet this criteria.

The cleared islands will also provide feeding / resting opportunities for passing migrants eg Wheatear and Yellow Wagtail, a species we would like to bring back to reserve as a breeding species. The vegetation is retained on the islands as long as possible into the winter to provide a food source for the wintering Linnet flock; there is always potential for it to also attract rarer buntings.

Whilst not a primary target, it is hoped that the Black-headed Gull colony (which we understand is not universally loved by all) will continue to attract breeding Common Terns and, eventually, Mediterranean Gulls, as well as a steady passage of Med and Little Gulls in the spring.

Phil it is getting pretty wearing now, that every time we do something somebody doesn't like it. After 30 years of organising work parties and researching the habitat requirements of targeted species, I think we might just have got the recipe right. I personally am getting tired of having to justify every move we make. We must put this in perspective, out of the 100's of people visiting the reserve every week, there are very few if any people that complain. Quite the opposite, these people complaining usually know very little if anything about habitat management.
In fact, not too long ago, I offered one of the 'chief protagonists' a habitat management manual to read. His reply was quite enlightening, and I quote" oh no I am not into that sort of thing, I am not interested".
BUT he still continues to criticise our work, at every opportunity. My reply to this criticism is this, if you are really that interested in Upton warren and its wildlife come on a work party, otherwise please let us continue and maybe now and again, give us some credit.
I am not going to give up on something I believe in and with a growing number of like minded people joining all the time, perhaps the time has come to IGNORE THOSE THAT SIMPLY MOAN FOR THE SAKE OF IT.
Constructive criticism and an open minded discussion is most welcome.
I rest my case:t:
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top