Rare breeding birds in the UK in 2017

Mark Holling and the Rare Breeding Birds Panel

RBBP Night Heron at Avalon marshes.jpeg

Juvenile Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax, Avalon Marshes, Somerset.  

Alan Harris

Abstract This report documents the status of rare or scarce native birds that were recorded breeding, or showed signs of breeding, in the UK in 2017. The year will be remembered for the first breeding record of Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax in the UK and as a good year for several colonising European species nesting in England, particularly those associated with wetlands, such as Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis and Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus. For the first time ever, data were received directly from all recording areas.

This is the 44th report published by the Rare Breeding Birds Panel (RBBP), and includes details of 97 rare or scarce native taxa that bred, or showed signs of breeding, in the UK in 2017. Three others are likely to have bred in 2017 but no data were received (see Appendix 1), while Appendix 2 summarises the 2017 records of 15 rare non-native breeders. 

The area covered by the UK Rare Breeding Birds Panel includes the four countries of the UK (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland), plus the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. Using ‘UK’ as a shorthand reference, this is the same unit used by other national monitoring programmes, such as the BTO/JNCC/RSPB Breeding Bird Survey (e.g. Harris et al. 2019), and by Birds of Conservation Concern (e.g. Eaton et al. 2015). The RBBP species list can be downloaded at www.rbbp.org.uk/rbbp-species-list-full.htm. Changes to this list that became effective in 2017 were the addition of Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator (see p.717) and the removal of Cetti’s Warbler Cettia cetti (see Holling et al. 2018).

Review of the year 2017

Overall, 2017 was the fifth-warmest year since 1910, most notably in southeast, eastern and central England in spring and summer. The 2016/17 winter was warmer than average throughout most of the UK but especially in Scotland. Late winter and spring were generally dry through to mid May. Thereafter, the south and east of the UK was wet while the north and west had below-average rainfall totals. June was hot but also wet – it was the wettest June in Scotland since 1910. July was unsettled with localised heavy rain and flash flooding occurring at times. 

It was a particularly memorable year for rare breeding birds. A pair of Night Herons Nycticorax nycticorax in Somerset was the first ever confirmed breeding in the UK; Cattle Egrets Bubulcus ibis nested at four sites; there were six pairs of Black-winged Stilts Himantopus himantopus (a new record total); and the highest-ever totals for Eurasian Spoonbill Platalea leucorodia (29 pairs), Eurasian Bittern Botaurus stellaris (191 booming males and/or nests found) and Little Egret Egretta garzetta (1,523 pairs) were reported. Three pairs of European Bee-eaters Merops apiaster nested in Nottinghamshire, although poor weather when the young were in the nest eventually led to all the chicks being deserted. The phenomenon of species with a more southerly European distribution colonising the UK is explored further in this report by Malcolm Ausden (box 1). Other species reaching their highest-ever totals include Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus, White-tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla and Avocet Recurvirostra avosetta, and there were also high numbers (compared with recent years) of Common Scoter Melanitta nigra, Red-necked Phalarope Phalaropus lobatus, Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris and Savi’s Warbler Locustella luscinioides.

389 Spoonbills v2.jpg

389. Family of Eurasian Spoonbills Platalea leucorodia, Holkham, Norfolk, April 2017. 

Andrew Bloomfield

Complementing the successes of these expanding species, a diverse range of occasional and potential breeding species was recorded in 2017, including Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps (paired with a Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis), Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus, Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularius, Little Gull Hydrocoloeus minutus, Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis, Hoopoe Upupa epops, Great Grey Shrike Lanius excubitor, Iberian Chiffchaff Phylloscopus ibericus, Blyth’s Reed Warbler Acrocephalus dumetorum, Icterine Warbler Hippolais icterina and Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis.

The news for some of our rarest species was less positive, however. Eighteen confirmed breeding pairs of Slavonian Grebe Podiceps auritus was the lowest total since our first report, in 1973, and numbers of both Montagu’s Harriers Circus pygargus(five pairs) and Spotted Crakes Porzana porzana (eight calling males) were the lowest since the 1980s. Numbers of the nominate race of Black-tailed Godwit Limosa l. limosa continue to decline, and in 2017 were at their lowest level since 1997. Measured populations of both Corn Crake Crex crex and Hobby Falco subbuteo have declined in recent years. There were records of two former regular breeders in 2017, Wryneck Jynx torquilla and Red-backed Shrike Lanius collurio, but little to indicate any change in their long-term status. There were again no records of Golden Oriole Oriolus oriolus in breeding habitat.

Annual reports of rare breeding birds are not all about the rarest species. This report provides status updates for more numerous species such as Common Pochard Aythya ferina, Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius and Dartford Warbler Sylvia undata. An example of the impact of a local study in furthering our understanding of more widespread species is provided for Long-eared Owl Asio otus in Co. Durham.

Analysis of the records of two of the commoner species on our list, Water Rail Rallus aquaticus and Firecrest Regulus ignicapilla, confirms that their populations are actually well above our threshold for annual reporting and these will be removed from the RBBP list with effect from the 2018 season. Balancing that change, we have added the Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur, the fastest declining-breeding species in the UK. Calculations based on previous estimates and the ongoing rate of decline (Harris et al. 2019) suggest that the UK population is now less than 2,000 breeding pairs; see http://www.rbbp.org.uk/downloads/species_webpages/turtle_dove.PDF.

Data sources and submission

The most important source of information for this report is the detailed submissions compiled by the UK’s county and regional bird recorders. As in 2016, this network provided over 70% of all data submissions in 2017. Bird recorders, all of whom are volunteers, are uniquely placed to understand the relevance and context of the records they receive from birdwatchers. The volume of original data received by recorders has increased substantially in recent years, increasing their workload but underlining the key role that they play. Of course, county recorders, and in turn the RBBP, are highly dependent on observers submitting records in the first place. It is vital that birdwatchers across the UK make their sightings available, not least for the value these records have for conservation, as outlined below. 

We are delighted that for 2017 we received data from all recording areas across the UK (although for the Isle of Man the return was incomplete, with data on some species not available) – the best-ever return rate. Moreover, in almost all cases, data from the recorder network was accompanied by at least a four-figure grid reference. A few contributors did not provide data until well after the deadline, causing a delay in preparation of this report. This report includes, for the first time, UK and regional population estimates for 17 species based on county recorder input; see Terminology below for more details.

Other important data sources include returns from Schedule 1 licence holders, the Nest Record Scheme, Raptor Study Groups, national surveys, and counts from RSPB reserves. Best efforts are made to capture all available (verified) information on rare breeding birds from other sources. The volume of data received was slightly higher than in recent years, at over 7,500 unique records. The three species with the highest number of reports were Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus, Little Ringed Plover and Water Rail, together responsible for 20% of all records.

Supplementary data for previous years are still extremely valuable additions to our archive. Birders should consider not only their local records but also ones from holidays elsewhere in the UK, especially to more remote areas such as north and west Scotland. Additions, amendments and corrections to published reports from 2005 onwards are available on the RBBP website (www.rbbp.org.uk). These files are updated regularly and those using the RBBP reports for reference or study should always check the online amendments.

Accurate grid references are critical, for a number of reasons, but especially to check each location, to improve knowledge of the type of site and habitats used, and to identify duplicate data, thus improving the accuracy of the report. In addition, RBBP data are used to support site and species conservation and the lack of a precise location hinders this work, for example in reviewing the effectiveness of Special Protection Areas and the identification of potential new ones. Site information is not published and these data remain confidential. Yet again, some records (about 300 in 2017) submitted via the Schedule 1 licence return system fail to include an accurate grid reference, despite it being a condition of the licences they were collected under. In most cases, we cannot eliminate the possibility of double-counting, making most of these records effectively worthless. Almost all relate to raptors and as a result our annual totals for species such as Osprey Pandion haliaetus, Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis and Peregrine Falcon are clearly underestimates. 

Recommendations and guidelines on data submission are available online, together with our recording standards and species-specific guidelines (www.rbbp.org.uk). Anyone with particular experience in monitoring a rare species is encouraged to share their expertise through the further development of these guidelines.

Conservation and other uses of RBBP data 

RBBP policy is to make data available for relevant conservation uses, with appropriate controls over the spatial resolution at which data are provided. Site-specific information is used by JNCC and the national statutory conservation agencies, and national datasets by the RSPB for survey and conservation planning. Over the 14-month period from July 2018 to August 2019 we received 13 specific requests for data or summary information. In addition, population totals published in the BBreports are widely used by conservation staff at RSPB, BTO, JNCC and the four national statutory conservation agencies. Projects supported with RBBP data in the last year have included site condition monitoring in the Humber Estuary SPA and specific enquiries on the status of Mediterranean Gull Ichthyaetus melanocephalus in the UK, Hobby in Scotland, Peregrine Falcon in Surrey and Golden Oriole in Avon. We are supporting a project assessing whether Wrynecks are being overlooked in highland Scotland, work on Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers Dryobates minor and the new ‘Birds in Wales’ project. Trends for selected species were also supplied for use in the UK, England and Scotland Wild Bird Indicators.

As an EU Member State, the UK Government is required every six years to produce a report under Article 12 of the Birds Directive (EU Directive on the conservation of wild birds 2009/147/EC). During the last year the JNCC has coordinated the UK’s response, a process which required updates to population estimates and trends for all UK breeding species; some of these were derived from RBBP data and so support the conservation of these species.

A regular review, The State of the UK’s Birds, is published by the RSPB on behalf of a range of conservation organisations. The most recent (Hayhow et al. 2017b) included a section on scarce and rare breeding birds, giving population estimates and trends based mainly on data collated by the RBBP. 

The Panel

The membership of the Panel is: Mark Eaton (Chairman), Helen Baker, Dawn Balmer, Ian Francis, Andrew King, David Norman, David Stroud and Mark Holling (Secretary). Members serve in a personal capacity, but some also reflect the interests and requirements of the funding partners. The Panel is funded by the JNCC (on behalf of the country conservation agencies) and the RSPB, with additional financial contributions from the BTO. Panel membership aims to achieve broadly representative geographic coverage and to include members who have active involvement in monitoring schemes and specialist research groups, or who participate in various external groups, to facilitate liaison between the Panel and researchers, nest recorders, ringers, surveyors and conservationists. See also Stroud (2019).

Box 1. 2017: a bumper year for colonists

Malcolm Ausden

It was an amazing year for colonists in 2017. The highest number of breeding Black-winged Stilts (six pairs) fledged a record number of young (13). There were ten pairs of nesting Cattle Egrets at four sites, only the second year of confirmed breeding, although breeding was suspected in two previous years. There were three pairs of European Bee-eaters and, perhaps most surprising of all, the first recorded breeding by Night Herons. These are all species whose main, or entire, breeding population lies to the south of the UK. The year also saw a continued increase in the breeding populations of several other birds that colonised, or recolonised, Britain during the last century, and which have since been extending their range northwards – Avocet, Mediterranean Gull, Cetti’s Warbler and Firecrest. Are these northerly range expansions due to climate change?

Climate change is expected to cause NNW to NE shifts in the breeding distributions of birds in Europe and, since the early 1990s, bird populations in Europe as a whole have shown changes consistent with these projections (Green et al. 2008; Huntley et al. 2008; Gregory et al. 2009). The winter distributions of waterbirds, and the geographical distributions of a range of other animal groups, have also shifted, in a N to NE direction, in recent decades (MacLean et al. 2008; Lehikoinen et al. 2013; Mason et al. 2015). Despite the overwhelming evidence of the overall effects of climate change on species’ geographical distributions, it is more difficult to link changes in the range of individual species to climate – many other factors could be involved.

Table 1 lists species that, since the early 1990s, have naturally established or re-established regular breeding in Britain, or show signs of doing so. This list reveals some striking patterns. Eleven of the 12 (Red-backed Shrike is the exception) have a breeding distribution lying mainly or entirely to the south of the UK. Nine of the 12 are wetland species and, of these, seven are colonially breeding herons and allies. This is extraordinary given that, before the mid 1990s, Grey Heron Ardea cinerea was the only colonial heron breeding in the UK. 

Climate change may well have played a role in the northward range expansion of many species in table 1, but other factors have been important for some. The changes for Glossy Ibis, Spoonbill, Great White Egret and Little Egret have, to a varying extent, involved recolonisation of parts of their former range. Earlier range contractions were undoubtedly caused by human persecution, and perhaps also a reduction in the quality and extent of wetland habitat. Egrets and Spoonbills were widely taken for food in medieval Europe (Bourne 2003; van Eerden et al. 2010), while in Victorian times egrets were hunted for their breeding plumes. Expansion and contraction of the breeding range of Glossy Ibis, Great White Egret and Spoonbill in Europe have all been well documented. Cattle Egrets, meanwhile, have been expanding their breeding range since the 1950s, long before the impact of climate change had become apparent (Voisin 1991). It is unclear what has driven their long-term range expansion.

Another factor contributing to the recent population increase of many waterbirds in southwest Europe has been the spread of Red Swamp Crayfish Procambarus clarkii. These were introduced to Spain from the USA and Mexico for aquaculture in the early 1970s, and have since spread throughout Spain, much of France and northern Italy (Geiger et al. 2005). These crayfish may form a large proportion of the diet of all the colonial herons listed in table 1 (Correia 2001; Montesinos et al. 2008; Tablado et al. 2010). Periods of drought in southwest Europe have also helped to drive the northward range expansion of several waterbird species. In particular, more Black-winged Stilts arrive in Britain in spring, and breed in the Netherlands, when conditions are dry in southwest Europe (Figuerola 2007; Boele 2012; Ausden et al. 2016). Several other waterbirds have extended their range northwards after periods of drought farther south (Ausden et al. 2014). 

Last but not least, all the wetland birds in table 1 have benefited from conservation measures. In western Europe, a large proportion of the breeding populations of all these species is in protected areas, and in Britain several species mainly use recently restored/created wetland habitats (Ausden et al. 2016, 2019). The herons and allies, apart from Cattle Egret, are all Annex I species*, and have undoubtedly benefited from greater habitat protection in Europe, particularly through the EU’s 1979 ‘Birds Directive’ (Donald et al. 2007).

* Annex I is a list of species (and some races) for which the EU Birds Directive requires ‘special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their survival and reproduction…’. Typically, these measures relate to the need to designate Special Protection Areas, but other non-site-based special measures may also be relevant (e.g. targeted agri-environment schemes).

The lack of colonists associated with farmland and other dry open habitats, woodland and scrub is striking, given the species found in these habitats that breed regularly in the northern half of France, and for which the climate in the UK is probably becoming more suitable (Huntley et al. 2007). For some of these, for example Black Dryocopus martius and Middle Spotted Woodpeckers Dendrocoptes medius, the likelihood of colonising the UK is probably reduced by their reluctance to cross the sea. Yet there is still little sign of other species colonising: Hoopoe, Western Bonelli’s Phylloscopus bonelli and Melodious Warblers Hippolais polyglottaand European Serin Serinus serinus. In fact, the number of Serins recorded in the UK has declined (White & Kehoe 2019b); while breeding populations have decreased by 42% across Europe since 1980 (PECBMS 2017), including a sharp decline in the Netherlands (SOVON 2019). For at least some of these species, any improvements in climate at the northern edge of their range appears to be negated by other factors – such as land-use changes in their breeding areas and, for migratory species, conditions in their wintering grounds or on migration.

In summary, while 2017 stands out as a spectacular year for colonists, the events of the year overall continue the recent patterns of change: continued range expansion of a variety of wetland birds, most of which have clearly benefited from conservation measures, contrasting with the struggles of many birds found in other habitats.

Table 1. Birds that since 1990 have naturally colonised, or recolonised Britain, or show signs of doing so.

Notes:

¹ Breeding for five or more consecutive years.  ² Has held territory in the UK for five consecutive years or more, but has only rarely been confirmed breeding. NB Breeding by Little Bitterns can be difficult to confirm.  ³ This attempted recolonisation (see Davies & Lock 2016) appears to be petering out.

______________________________________________________________________

Terminology

Recording areas

The recording areas used in this report are the same as in previous reports (see Holling et al. 2007a and www.rbbp.org.uk). We attempt to collate all breeding records by recording area (usually ‘county’) wherever possible and urge contributors to submit records in the same manner, via recorders. 

To reduce the possibility of duplication with surrounding areas, records from the Greater London recording area, which covers all areas within a 20-mile radius of St Paul’s Cathedral, are reported as follows. Under the Greater London heading we list records from the Inner London area and the old county of Middlesex only. Records away from this area and within the counties surrounding London – Hertfordshire, Essex, Kent and Surrey – are listed under those county headings. 

Species banners

Shown for every species in the report, the species banners present key information on status, numbers and trends. A regular breeder is defined as a species that has bred (i.e. confirmed breeding has been recorded) at least once in the UK and which has bred (or was strongly suspected to have bred) for any five consecutive years within the last 25 (unless the last breeding was more than ten years ago). This definition is the same as used in the Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC) reviews (Eaton et al. 2015). Other species may be classed as an occasional breeder (a species which has bred at least once in the UK but is not a regular breeder); a potential breeder (one which has not bred previously in the UK but, in some years, shows signs that it may do so, e.g. presence of singing males holding territory or pairs in suitable breeding habitat); a colonising breeder (a new colonist which first bred in the UK in the most recent five years (2013–17, or subsequently, if known at the time of writing), or one which may have occasionally bred in the past but for which breeding now appears to be becoming more regular); or a former breeder (one which bred regularly in the past but for which there has been no confirmed breeding record in the last ten years).

For all regular breeding species, the species banners give additional information, as follows:

1. The population status (Red, Amber or Green) as determined by BoCC4 (Eaton et al. 2015); see below.

2. An indication of population status in one of four categories: Very rare (mean of <30 breeding pairs (bp) per annum); •Rare (30–300 bp per annum); •Scarce (301–1,000 bp per annum); •Less scarce (>1,000 bp per annum).

3. Published estimate or RBBP 5-year mean. If a recent estimate from a published national survey is available, this is used and referenced. Otherwise the estimate is based on RBBP data, using the mean maximum population size from the last five years (in this report, 2013–17). If annual RBBP coverage is poor, the best available national population estimate is used. The unit varies, but is most frequently ‘breeding pairs’ (bp). We acknowledge that, for some species, estimates based purely on RBBP data may be contrary to other estimates, especially where RBBP coverage is moderate or low (see below). 

4. A population trend, where one can be calculated; this is presented as a 25-year trend where possible. For species that were added to the RBBP list in 1996, a 15-year trend is given. Trends are calculated by comparing the five-year mean in 2017 with that for either 25 or 15 years earlier (1992 or 2002). Trends are categorised into five bands, based on thresholds of rate of change used to classify species trends in the Wild Bird Indicators (e.g. Defra 2019), and shown in the table below. Most trends are derived from RBBP data, although in some cases trends from periodic surveys are used if they are more robust.

5. The degree of coverage (in 2017), defined as follows: •Near-complete (RBBP reports present more or less complete annual totals); •High (a good estimate of the number of pairs breeding annually, though an unknown (but thought to be small) proportion has not been recorded/reported); Moderate (a less accurate estimate of the number of pairs breeding annually, which is nonetheless thought to be a significant proportion of the total population); Low (the volume of the data received is such a small proportion of the total population that RBBP totals are of little value for conservation or status reviews; however, maintaining an archive of known sites is useful, and this information can be used in the design of future targeted surveys).

Coverage categories (reassessed in this report) are based on comparisons between the 5-year mean and the most reliable population estimate, where possible, taking into account known factors in the monitoring and detectability of the species.

The BoCC4 status can be Red, Amber or Green. The majority of Red- and Amber-listed species on the RBBP list are categorised as such because of some criteria related to their breeding status, whether it be population size (rarity or recent/historical decline), breeding range (localisation or decline) or international importance of the UK breeding population. Some species, which do not have regular breeding or wintering populations in the UK, are not classified. The only species in this report which is Amber-listed for criteria that are not related to the breeding population is the Eurasian Wigeon Mareca penelope, which owes its status to the localised distribution and international importance of its wintering population.

Species accounts

The headline figure for 2017 (number of sites, breeding pairs, singing males, territories, etc.) is indicated in bold for easy reference. Any regular breeding species classed as Very rare (see above), plus occasional, potential, colonising and former breeders, receive more detailed text describing the records by county. For all other species (with only a few exceptions, generally where available data are limited), the data are tabulated, with each line representing a county or RBBP region. Within the tables, note the use of the following abbreviations:

S = sites

T = territories

CP = confirmed breeding pairs

TP = max. total breeding pairs (typically possible, probable and confirmed breeding)

SM = singing males

MM = males

I = individuals or singles

YF = min. no. young fledged

In recent years, recorders have been asked to supply their best estimate of the populations (as well as the total of known pairs) for a small number of species (17 in 2017). These are species which occur across large parts of the UK and which we believe are under-recorded. For 2017, two-thirds of recorders provided estimates for these 17 species. Such estimates are presented in the species tables at regional level (number in parentheses after the region name) and at the UK level (in parentheses after the UK total). In a few instances, no breeding records for a given species were submitted for a county where it is known that the species breeds regularly. If an estimate was provided by the recorder, this is shown by an ‘e’ in the table.

Definitions of breeding evidence

The definitions of ‘Confirmed breeding’, ‘Probable breeding’ and ‘Possible breeding’ follow those recommended by the European Bird Census Council (EBCC) (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997), but precise definitions are species specific, as defined on www.rbbp.org.uk. Thus, for some species, e.g. Whooper Swan and Eurasian Wigeon, records of summering birds are excluded if we can be sure breeding was not attempted. Where tables show the number of occupied territories, these are the sum of confirmed and probable breeding pairs, as territorial birds are classed as being probably breeding, unless a nest has (at least) progressed to the stage where eggs have been laid, in which case the pair is classified as a confirmed breeding pair. It is important to note that confirmed breeding is not the same as successful breeding; nests that fail with eggs or with young still fall into the confirmed category. A successful breeding pair is one that fledges at least one young bird from a nesting attempt. Note that in all cases the identity of the birds has been confirmed; it is only breeding status that is possible/probable/confirmed. The report does not routinely include breeding records of hybrid individuals but where young are hatched, they will be noted in an Appendix. Mixed pairs are, however, included where one of the parents is a species or race on the RBBP list.

Definition of numbers used

Within each species account, numbers given in the format ‘1–4 pairs’ indicate (in this case) one confirmed breeding pair and a maximum total of four breeding pairs (thus also including possible and probable breeding pairs). In the tables, ‘n/a’ indicates that no data were received from that county, but the species normally breeds there.

27 sites: 24–33 pairs. This is another new peak, fuelled by the continued increase of the main breeding population, in Shetland (fig. 1). Since 2002, Shetland has contributed over 40% of the total every year except 2012. The site in Ayrshire has been occupied annually since 1991 and at least 38 young have fledged over the 27-year period (Shaw 2018). Pairs classed as probably breeding are largely pairs on territory that did not breed in 2017. As well as these birds there seems to be an increase in summering, with at least nine in Argyll (two sites) and 14 in Norfolk (one site), plus single summering birds in several counties (some of which were injured). No apparently naturalised pairs were reported. 

England, E

Norfolk One site: two pairs bred; one fledging two young while the other pair failed on eggs.

Scotland, S

Ayrshire One site: one pair was present on a loch close to the traditional site, having abandoned that one owing to forestry work. 

Scotland, N & W

Argyll One site: one probable breeding pair. Caithness One site: one pair bred but the clutch was abandoned. Highland Three sites: one pair bred, fledging one young; two probable breeding pairs. Orkney Two sites: one pair bred, but failed early; one probable breeding pair. Outer Hebrides Two sites: two pairs bred, one fledging four young. Shetland 14 sites: 11 pairs bred, at least three successfully, fledging at least five young in total; three probable breeding pairs.

Northern Ireland

Co. Londonderry Two sites: (1) six pairs bred, with between one and six young fledging; (2) one probable breeding pair.

RBBP fig. 1 Whooper Swan.png

Fig. 1. Breeding Whooper Swans Cygnus cygnus in the UK, 1998–2017, showing number of confirmed pairs, maximum total number of pairs and the number of pairs in Shetland.

71 sites: 18–104 pairs. Confirmed breeding in Scotland is unusual (Forrester et al. 2007), so a successful breeding pair in Orkney is notable, following a similar record (on the same island) in 2015.

234 sites: 504–1,202 pairs. The total of 1,202 pairs is the highest recorded, which may reflect increased awareness of the need to report all pairs in breeding habitat. The 5-year mean indicates stability and the county estimates suggest that most pairs are being recorded. It is likely that the population is in the order of 1,200–1,300 breeding pairs.

91 sites: 38–209 pairs. The majority of breeding Wigeons occur in northern England and north and west Scotland, and tend to be under-recorded. Confirmed breeding is unusual in the south and there is a possibility that the female seen with four ducklings in Bedfordshire may have bred with a Gadwall M. strepera; such mixed pairings have been reported in this county in the past.

In Highland, the long-staying male remained at Strontian throughout 2017 but appeared not to be paired with any of the local Mallards A. platyrhynchos.

21 sites: 6–34 pairs. Away from the islands of north and west Scotland, Pintails are only sporadic breeders. In 2017 breeding was confirmed at just three locations, all in Scotland.

England, SE

Kent Five sites: five possible breeding pairs.

England, E

Lincolnshire One site: two possible breeding pairs. Suffolk One site: one probable breeding pair.

England, N

Cumbria One site: one possible breeding pair.

Scotland, S

Dumfries & Galloway Two sites: two possible breeding pairs. 

Scotland, Mid

Angus & Dundee One site: one possible breeding pair. 

Scotland, N & W

Argyll One extensive site: four pairs bred and six probable breeding pairs. Caithness One site: one pair bred (four young). Orkney Six sites: (1) one pair bred (six young); (2)–(5) eight probable breeding pairs. Outer Hebrides Two sites: (1) one probable breeding pair; (2) one possible breeding pair.

190 sites: 427–752 pairs. The numbers reported have increased steadily since 1990, and over that period the locus of breeding has shifted south; only four confirmed pairs in 2016 and two in 2017 were found north of a line between Morecambe Bay and the Tees. This increase is in contrast with the decline in wintering numbers (Frost et al. 2019). As for Shoveler, regional estimates suggest that most pairs are being reported to the RBBP, and that the UK population is around 800 pairs.

14 sites: 10–52 pairs. This is the highest total number of pairs since the national survey of 2007 when 52 pairs were also located. Four broods (ten young in total) were reported from three lochs in Highland and Perth & Kinross. The Flows of Caithness and east Sutherland (Highland) are treated as one extensive site and two broods (seven young) were recorded there. * Eaton et al. 2008.

62–66 breeding females. Counts from the main breeding area, in the catchment of the Spey and Dee rivers, are samples based largely on nestbox projects; other pairs go unrecorded there and so reported totals are now far short of the actual population size. * Musgrove et al. (2013).

89 sites: 58–167 pairs. Humphreys et al. (2016) suggested that the current population lies between 1,373 and 1,754 pairs, and this species was added to the RBBP list for the 2017 season. Over 90% of the UK’s Red-breasted Mergansers nest in Scotland, mainly in the north and west, where they occur in sheltered sea lochs, estuaries and some inland waters. Nesting also occurs in northwest England, the south Pennines, Northumberland and in North Wales. Bird Atlas 2007–11 (Balmer et al. 2013) showed that the breeding range has contracted (fig. 2).

Reporting levels were inevitably low during this first season, and estimates by recorders provide little extra information. Red-breasted Merganser is not on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981) and is not the subject of any study group; and since it occurs mainly in remote areas, it is likely to be under-recorded. We encourage all birdwatchers to submit records of Red-breasted Mergansers in breeding habitat. * Humphreys et al. (2016).