wheatearlp
Well-known member
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.