What is a "British" bird?

[faz]

Aren’t they all European birds at the end of the day?

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by King Edward

There is one important category not on the poll, namely species present in the British Overseas Territories. These are not geographically British, but they are politically British and as such we have a responsibility to look after them (especially since many are endemic to the various islands concerned, and/or globally endangered).

Now thats a completely different kettle of fish!
In the survey I was really considering the species found in (or visiting) Britain (inclusive of the various islands which are geographically considered "The British Isles" - and Ireland for those who wanted to include it!).

...and yes, if "we" have any say in the governing of a territory, then we have a responsibility to the wildlife that lives there.

Originally Posted by faz

Aren’t they all European birds at the end of the day?

I take it you are referring to the original discussion - because even if you treat birds found in British Overseas Territories as 'British', they are mostly certainly not European!

It would be possible to disagree anyway - many of the species that occur in Britain are North American or Asian, and what about the migrants that spend the winter in Africa (including Common Swifts which may spend the greater part of the year in Africa)? Are these European birds at any point during the day, or just temporary visitors from other parts of the world?

[King Edward]

Again, it comes down to the purpose of the classification. If it's for regular birding/twitching then the species on the overseas territories are probably irrelevant, while the (very) rare vagrants may or may not be relevant depending on your level of fanaticism.

For conservation though it should be the other way around, with the overseas species given more attention than they receive at present. I remember reading somewhere that unfortunately the overseas territories fell through the funding gaps - ineligible for a lot of UK/EU funding due to not being actually part of the UK, and also ineligible for a lot of the international aid that might be given to e.g. small island nations since these are British territories rather than foreign.

[KentYeti]

Some hilarious C G stuff been posted.

But for the sake of the thread I'll try and keep to British Birds, rather than those wearing dirndls in Bavaria!

All I want at present is this strong wind to blow from what ever Northerly Direction is needed to get a Snowy Owl into Kent. No doubt at all about that bird being British in my mind as, (mentioned before), it is on the Schedule I list.

That will make for a very happy C G.

[STYRBJORN]

The melting of the Arctic ace-cap is severely endangering Ahk-luk, while Bigfoot has been reported as far North as the Aleutian Islands. Mythical beasts are just as much at risk from climate change as real ones!

Sarky remarks about climate change itself being mythical will be treated with the disdain they deserve.

Ric

[operanut1972]

Ah Ric, as always those whoose theorum doesn't quite hit the mark, tend to always respond thus!!!

Anyway, we have a duty of care for ALL animals surely? If this means policing what I bin, so be it.

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by King Edward

Again, it comes down to the purpose of the classification. If it's for regular birding/twitching then the species on the overseas territories are probably irrelevant, while the (very) rare vagrants may or may not be relevant depending on your level of fanaticism.

For conservation though it should be the other way around, with the overseas species given more attention than they receive at present. I remember reading somewhere that unfortunately the overseas territories fell through the funding gaps - ineligible for a lot of UK/EU funding due to not being actually part of the UK, and also ineligible for a lot of the international aid that might be given to e.g. small island nations since these are British territories rather than foreign.

Assuming that what you say about funding for British Overseas Territories is correct (and I have absolutely no reason to doubt that it is), this still doesn't make the bird species found in these territories British. The funding situation needs to be cleared up for the benefit of both the people and the wildlife that live there, so that (if necessary) they can get the same funding from the British government, and other organisation, that can be made available to other similar foreign 'nations'.
While the people living in these territories may consider themselves to be British (as do ex-pats who live in overseas countries that are not under British control - and often their descendants, who may also have British citizenship), the territories themselves are not part of Britain - they are foreign land which is under British political control. So although many of the species in these territories may need conservation measures, the issue is not whether the species are British, it is why the British government does not (apparently) take proper responsibility for the foreign territories that Britain still claims ownership of.

Originally Posted by KentYeti

All I want at present is this strong wind to blow from what ever Northerly Direction is needed to get a Snowy Owl into Kent. No doubt at all about that bird being British in my mind as, (mentioned before), it is on the Schedule I list.

That will make for a very happy C G.

It's not really winds that you want to increase the chance of a Snowy Owl reaching Kent - it's a 'failure' of the rodent population in the the regions where Snowy Owls are normally resident. Snowy Owls are an 'irruptive' species, rather than a true migrant, so the chances of a vagrant() Snowy Owl reaching any part of the UK are increased when low food availability causes larger numbers of them to move south.
As for being "on the schedule 1 list" showing that a species is "British" - it means nothing of the sort. Snowy Owl only made it on to that list because a vagrant pair remained to breed on Fetlar, with a second female (which could potentially have been one of the offspring) also attempting to nest in later years paired with the same male.
Short-toed Treecreeper (for which there are no breeding records, and have only ever been 23 accepted records in Britain + two more recent records in 2010 & 2011 which have yet to be published as accepted) is also on schedule 1 - perhaps because it was thought to be a potential colonist and was claimed to have bred in Dorset in 1974 (a record which is not now accepted as proven). They do breed in the Channel Islands, but that isn't part of Britain.
Gyr Falcon is also on Schedule 1 - again there have been no breeding records, and there are on average just under 4 records a year in Britain and Ireland (with just over 500 records in total in Britain and Ireland over the years).


Pallas's Sandgouse - with over 500 records in Britain and Ireland, including several breeding records and numerous flocks numbering in three figures (though very, very few records in recent years), Spotted Sandpiper -
with over 175 British and Irish records, including a confirmed breeding attempt in Scotland in 1974, and Citrine Wagtail - with a current average of about 10 records a year, and an all time British and Irish total of over 250 (all since 1954, before which the species may well have been overlooked), all have better claims for being classed as British species than the two schedule one species mentioned above (as do many others).

[KentYeti]

Thankfully Roy I'm following my own definition of British Birds for my still embryo web site. Basically, if I'm in Britain and it gets in my viewfinder, it's British! LOL! I finds that a very simple definition.

Back to the poll. I'm very pleased to see "self sustaining population" has moved up to number 2. And as my definition of self sustaining is being able to feed myself etc, I feel a bit more relexed about my position at present.

Right. I'm off North now. Yetis eat almost anything, and I'm gonna eat my way through all that Snowy Owl food so they have to come down to Kent this winter.

PS. Did I mention anywhere I had a "three owl" evening at Elmley last night. A report of a Short Eared back on the reserve, and sighting/hearing 2 Barn Owls and a Little Owl. Made for a happy Yeti last night. And they are all British birds under almost any definition.

Except maybe the Little Owls which were introduced many years ago....................

[htcdude]

Just reading through this thread from start to finish, I've concluded there is no clear cut definition of what a British Bird truly is

They're all British in my opinion most of them just moved abroad. I bet most of them speak Bird-English too

Nige

[solus]

Originally Posted by KentYeti

Back to the poll. I'm very pleased to see "self sustaining population" has moved up to number 2. And as my definition of self sustaining is being able to feed myself etc, I feel a bit more relaxed about my position at present.

However..... as your signature line now reveals you live in a cage that makes you a captive creature and thus no longer eligible for the British List: should you escape/be deliberately released you still won't qualify..... Yetis are introduced aliens and are doomed to lurk in Category C for eternity!!