WLOL Masthead
Wildlife Online-

Wildlife information at the click of a mouse--


WELCOME TO WILDLIFE ONLINE

Content Updated: 3rd September 2016

SEASONAL UPDATE: September 2016

Red deer hind in New Forest mist

The final month of summer brought rather changeable conditions to the UK. A second wave of the so-called ‘Spanish plume’, a large area of high pressure over the European continent, was forecast to bring summer back to Britain last month, but a change in wind direction meant that it never materialised. The south of the country was generally warm and dry, while the north bore the brunt of low pressure systems brought to the UK by an abnormally low jet stream in the Atlantic. An unseasonably deep area of low pressure moved over the UK around the middle of last month, bringing rain and wind to most areas. Indeed, parts of the Lake District saw roads flooded and rivers burst their banks, while stretches of the Welsh coastline were hit by 60mph winds. The forecast is for yet more changeable weather in the UK as we move through September. We are, however, entering the autumn now, and storms are increasingly likely as the atmosphere starts to cool.

As always, the RSPB and Wildlife Trusts are running a series of outdoor events this month aimed at getting people involved with the nature that surrounds us. Similarly, the Forestry Commission has various events, including walks, talks and craft sessions, running this month. If you fancy spending your time making a difference, the Marine Conservation Society has loads of organised beach cleans happening up and down the country this month. If there’s no clean organised for your local beach, why not start one yourself? Alternatively, if a leisurely walk in the countryside is more to your tastes, let’s have a quick look at some of the wildlife that can be found this month.

New Forest Fallow deer rutMammals: Autumn is a busy time in the mammal calendar, with falling temperatures and shortening days driving changes in physiology and behaviour. Some of our deer are gearing up for their rut (breeding season) now and many of our woodlands, heaths and commons will soon be alive with the call of amorous cervids. Fallow are the first deer species to start rutting, with belching (click to listen) and clashing apparent by the middle of the month; Red follow a week or two later. Male deer compete with each other for the attentions of the females in spectacular fashion. They shout and lock antlers with each other in order to secure access to as many females as possible. Prior to actually locking antlers, though, they go through a series of highly patterned behaviours aimed at preventing actual physical contact. The deer belch/groan (Fallow) or roar (Red) at each other - the deeper the call, the larger the deer, and this alone is often enough to make a challenger think twice. If the roaring contest doesn’t do the trick, they will square up to each other and walk side by side, each periodically turning his head towards his challenger – this is called parallel walking and is an opportunity for each deer to size up the other and decide whether it’s worth taking the challenge any further. If the two males are evenly matched, they will turn and lock antlers, pushing and shoving, each with the goal of driving the other back. This is quite a spectacle for the observer, but for the deer it is a serious situation with the potential for significant injury or even death. Lacerations on a deer’s neck, flank and rump, inflicted by the pointed antlers of challengers, are common this time of year.

Fallow and Red deer behave rather differently in their rutting behaviour. Red deer stags typically try to hold on to a group of females (called a harem) and will ‘see off’ any other male who comes too close. As the rut progresses and the females start coming into oestrous, the number and vigour of the challenges increases. Fallow (above), by contrast, tend to opt for more of a ‘dating site’ approach, whereby they set up a profile of themselves (by strutting, scent-marking and groaning) in a good spot (called a lek) and wait for the females to come to them. There are instances of Fallow adopting a Red-like harem mating system, but this is less common that the ‘lekking’ behaviour. A trip to your local deer park should provide a great opportunity to observe this behaviour without disturbing the deer (who are used to the presence of humans in such places). Richmond Park and Bushy Park in London are probably the best places in the south-east for watching the Red and Fallow rut, while Petworth Park in Sussex has a large Fallow population. Ashton Court in Bristol has Red and Fallow, while Woburn Deer Park in Bedfordshire and Bradgate Park in Lincolnshire also offer excellent opportunities to observe both species rutting. If you do go out to watch the rut, keep an eye on the females and you should notice that it’s the Red hinds (females) that call the shots; if the matriarch of the harem decides to move, the stag can do little but watch them go. Also, watch out for Fallow bucks trying to break up fights between other males; this ‘policing’ behaviour is thought to make the intervening buck more attractive to the does (females).

While you’re in the woods, keep an eye out for small mammal caches (food stored by mice and voles) under rocks and logs, and listen out for the incessant squeaking of battling common shrews. You may also find dead shrews this month. Don’t worry, it’s not a plague. The breeding season has ended and most adults simply die from exhaustion. At the same time, a shrew’s scent glands make it distasteful to most predators, which results in their bodies lying around when those of mice or voles are readily snapped up by passing predators. Squirrels will also be busy this month as they start caching food to see them through the coming winter. Animals that don’t stash food, e.g. hedgehogs, bats and dormice, are in the process of feeding ravenously, trying to build up sufficient fat reserves to see them through hibernation. Despite the impending winter hiatus, it is not uncommon to find juvenile hedgehogs about in this month; these late-born hoglets (sometimes called ‘autumn orphans’) often struggle to survive the winter if they’re born too late in the year to lay down sufficient fat reserves. You can help by leaving out food and water for them and, if you happen to find a hedgehog out during the daytime or a hoglet in distress, please check out Natasha Harper’s Caring for Hedgehogs article on this site.

Finally, you might notice more racket at night as we head into autumn. One cause of this noise is that fox family life is starting to get more tense and there is more infighting as this year’s cubs reach maturity; the result is an increase in fox movement and dispersal during the next few weeks. Not only do the cubs often fight with their parents (who, in many instances, want them to leave), if they do disperse they often end up trespassing on another fox’s territory and this too leads to conflict. In urban environments, if it happens (and urban foxes are more likely to live in family groups than rural animals), dispersal is often later in the year; typically during December. Tawny owls are a second cause. The young have now fledged and the parents are keen to get them out of their territory, so there is much calling going on. As we progress through autumn the territoriality increases as the pair-bond between the male and female is re-established.

Barn owl in flightBirds: Most species have finished moulting and are now in their winter plumage as they move through the countryside in large flocks. A few to keep a lookout for this month are birds of prey including ospreys passing through and barn owls (left). September also sees barn swallows on telegraph lines waiting to migrate to their South African wintering grounds, and the iridescent splash of blue signifying a jay, which are busy caching nuts and seeds. A trip to a local estuary or ‘sticky-out bit’ (i.e. headland, mull or peninsula) is a must for any birder this month as the first of our winter visitors and migrants start to arrive. Ring ouzels, red-breasted flycatchers and the striking Union Jack waistcoat of the bluethroat are all highlights this month. Some of our resident bird populations are also bolstered by migrants from Europe during September, making this a good month to get out in the countryside and look for large flocks of finches working the stubble. Harriers, firecrests, wagtails and sandpipers are also around this month.

Reptiles and amphibians: As we move into autumn, reptiles and amphibians can become more difficult to spot. That said, there are still many smooth snake and slow-worm births during September, along with juvenile lizards, adders and grass snakes to be found. First thing on a frosty morning in early autumn can offer good reptile-spotting opportunities. Newts, which hibernate close to breeding ponds, are also on the move, so head out on a dark wet night to look for them. Most ponds are now home to far fewer frogs and toads than six months ago, with the adults and recently metamorphosed froglets/toadlets now spending much of their time on land in leaf litter, long grass and under logs. A walk in the New Forest last weekend revealed tiny frogs and toads in abundance.

Invertebrates: September heralds the beginning of a period of dread for arachnophobes, the time of year when spiders start appearing in our homes. Most of these lone spiders (generally of the Eratigena or Tegenaria, aka ‘house spider’, genera) are males in search of females with which to breed and have no interest in the human occupants. Unfortunately for the arachnophobic homeowner, some of these spiders can reach truly impressive proportions and pint glasses may be needed to catch and evict them! Cellar spiders (Pholcus phalangoides, sometimes called daddy-long-legs) are also commonly found in houses (often toilets) during the autumn; these skinny little arachnids are great to have around because they eat other spiders, even big house spiders! Cellar spiders are also among the most timid of the arachnids you’re likely to find in your house and if you approach the web they will vibrate rapidly, hoping that the blur makes them invisible. Garden spiders (Araneus diadematus) are also particularly noticeable this year; the juveniles have now dispersed and set up their own webs, which the low angle of the sun illuminates, making them easier to see. Craneflies are also about in force during this month and there are still some dragon- and damselflies around, although most will have laid their eggs by now. There also seem to be a few butterflies still about, making the most of the early autumn sun – species include specked wood, peacock, red admiral, and the brown hairstreak. There are also plenty of fiddle-shaped shield bugs known as ‘dock bugs’ and woodland dung beetles called dor beetles.

Plants and fungi: September is very much a ‘fruiting month’. The seeds of horse chestnut, ash, beech, sweet chestnut and sycamore are starting to ripen, as is some of the impressive range of wild fruit the UK has to offer, including sloes, blackberries, and elderberries. Fungi is on the increase from September and a few to watch out for this month are woodland stinkhorn (Phallus impudicus), the giant puffball (Calvatia gigantea) in pastureland, red-cracking bolete (Boletus chrysenteron) in broadleaved woodland, yellow stagshorn (Calocera viscose) on rotten logs in conifer forests, pink waxcaps (Hygrocybe calyptriformis) on lawns and the wonderfully-named hedgehog mushroom (Hydnum repandum), sporting a pale cream-coloured cap with soft bristles underneath. Many people take the opportunity to harvest fungi during the autumn. If too many fungi are collected it can seriously impair the woodland's ability to recycle organic material. The rise of commercial picking (where a group of people are hired to go and collect all the fungi they can find and the edible is sorted from the inedible later for sale into the restaurant trade) is an increasing problem, as too is the rise in the number of people collecting personal harvests. To this end, the Forestry Commission have taken the unprecedented step of banning fungi harvesting in the New Forest National Park in Hampshire.

Pick of the Month – Discoveries from the Natural World

Rehabilitated foxes lose out
Red fox in vegetationGenerally speaking, the British people are considered a nation of animal lovers. The Pet Food Manufacturer’s Association estimated, in 2015, that there were some 8.5 million pet dogs and 7.4 million pet cats in Britain, with almost half of British households having at least one pet. On top of this, the British Trust for Ornithology estimates that we spend somewhere in the region of £200 million feeding the birds in our gardens every year. As well as admiring and attempting to interact with the wildlife around us, many people have devoted their life to rescuing and rehabilitating wildlife, with an estimated 71,000 wild animals taken to rescue centres in the UK every year. The goal of wildlife carers is generally to release the animals they fix up back into the wild, and a 2013 review of RSPCA data suggested that about 40% of the casualties are released. While release is always the preferred option, it remains unknown how many animals cope back in the wild after their spell in captivity. Rescue centres don’t have the resources to track their charges upon release, so most are just set free with the hope that they get on okay. Recently, scientists at Brighton University tracked foxes released in the city, and found evidence that they may not cope as well as many might hope.

Between April 2012 and 2014, a team of researchers at Brighton University and the RSPCA, led by Bryony Tolhurst, tracked foxes in eight urban areas of England and Wales. The tracked foxes were split into two groups: 13 wild-caught animals that were captured, had a radio collar fitted and were released immediately, and seven foxes that were rehabilitated by the RSPCA before being released between two and eight weeks post-admission. Of the 20 foxes tracked, 19 survived to the end of the study, with one animal (a rehabilitated male) dying of a suspected brain tumour five days after release. Excluding this unlucky individual, overall there was no evidence that the rehabilitated foxes were any less likely to survive ‘on the outside’ than wild-caught animals, which is good news. The tracking data did, however, show that rehabilitated foxes moved over larger areas and travelled further from the release site than the wild-caught foxes. This is what biologists refer to as erratic movement and indicates that the foxes haven’t settled. Indeed, by the end of the study only three of the rehabilitated foxes (43%) showed any signs of having settled in a home range, compared to 11 (84%) of the wild-caught foxes. Taken together, these data suggest that rehabilitated foxes lose their territory while they’re in captivity being treated for their injuries and when they’re released it’s equivalent to them leaving home and finding a place of their own all over again.

There are some gaps in the Brighton study. It only tracked wild-caught foxes in Brighton, for example, while rehabilitated animals were tracked in various towns in England and Wales, so their data might not be truly representative. The study does, however, provide a tantalising insight into how foxes react upon release back into the wild following treatment. It would be fascinating to know whether social living affects this. In areas where foxes living in family groups, are territories less likely to get taken over if the rest of the family are there to defend it while mum, dad, son or daughter is in the local wildlife hospital?

Reference: Tolhurst, B. et al. (2016). Effects of temporary captivity on ranging behaviour in urban red foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 181: 182-190.

========================================================================================

Life in the slow lane: Greenland sharks grow old…slowly
Many of us dream of a living a long life, taking steps to eke out as much time on this earth as possible by staying healthy and getting regular medical checks. Even with a combination of good health and good genes, the average human in the UK is will only reach about 80 years old and the oldest verified person made it to 122 years old. Compare that to some deep sea sponges and corals that live for centuries, if not millennia. Vertebrates (those animals with backbones) don’t generally live anywhere near as long as these sponges and corals – Galapagos tortoises and bowhead whales were among the longest lived at about 150 and 211 years old, respectively. Recently, however, even these impressive longevities have been surpassed – by the humble Greenland shark (Somniosus microcephalus).

Greenland sharks (below) are a poorly studied species. Despite their impressive size (typically reaching lengths of about 5m/16.5ft, although there is a report from 1885 of Lieut. C. Trolle catching a shark he said measured 7m/23ft in length) we know little about their biology. Tracking studies have shown us that Greenland sharks have the widest depth range of any known shark species, from the surface right down to 3km/2 mi. off the Canary Islands. Tracking studies have also indicated that this species grows very slowly. In 1963, Danish fishery biologist Paul Hansen published the data he collected having tagged 411 Greenland sharks in the North Atlantic. The sharks were measured at the point of tagging and again if they were re-caught. Hansen’s data revealed one animal had grown 15cm (6 in.) in the space of 14 years, an average of just over a centimetre per year (less than half an inch). Another individual had grown only 8cm (3 in.) in the 16 years since it was tagged, and a third grew a centimetre during the two years it was at large. So, even this early data suggested that Greenland sharks were slow growers, at 0.5-1cm per year, and indicated that it must take a considerable time for them to reach lengths of 5m. Until recently, nobody knew just how long.

Greenland sharkIn a paper to the journal Science last month, a team of biologists led by Julius Nielsen, at the University of Copenhagen, presented the results of their radiocarbon dating of the eye lenses of 28 female Greenland sharks caught as bycatch off Greenland between 2010 and 2013. The lens of your eye is composed of layers of tissue that are laid down throughout your lifetime – peel these back and you end up with the tissue laid down when you were a baby. As time passes your body absorbs elements such as carbon from the atmosphere and deposits them your growing tissues. Now, the nuclear bomb tests during the 50s and 60s put lots of radioactive particles into the atmosphere; these made their way into food webs and, eventually, into animal tissues. This radiocarbon can be measured in tissues and a distinct ‘bomb pulse’ of radioactive carbon can be seen in animals born after these nuclear tests. The scientists found that the two smallest animals (less than 1.5m/5ft long) had the highest radiocarbon levels in their eye lenses, suggesting they were born at some point after the early 1960s. Estimates for the two largest animals, both females around 5m long, turned out to be much older; one was 335 and the other 392 years old. There is an element of uncertainty around the radiocarbon dates, but even accounting for that, statistically, the sharks were at least 260 and 272 years old, respectively. Greenland sharks reach sexual maturity at about 4m/13ft and the individuals of equivalent size in this study were aged at 156 years (at least 134 years, when you account for the uncertainty of measurement). So, if this species reaches 5m long at about 265 years old and grows at even a centimetre per year, Trolle’s 7m specimen could’ve been pushing 500 years old!

Reference: Nielsen, J. et al. (2016). Eye lens radiocarbon reveals centuries of longevity in the Greenland shark (Somniosus microcephalus). Science. 353(6300): 702-704.

========================================================================================

It’s good to talk: orang-utans offer clues to the origins of human speech
Orang-utan with babyMany of us enjoy nothing more than a chat with a friend over a drink or something to eat, but I doubt many of us have devoted much of our time to wondering how human came to speak in the first place. This is, however, a question that has fascinated evolutionary biologist Adriano Lameira for many years. Earlier this year Lameira and his colleagues published their findings from a captive orang-utan that suggests our initial thoughts on the subject may be wrong and human speech may have its origins longer ago than we realised.

For many years we were under the impression that human speech is a learned behaviour and the ability to control vocal folds, allowing the production of the consonant and vowel sounds that make up our languages, was an expressly human trait. In other words, it’s something that evolved after we split from our last common great ape ancestor, about two million years ago. We thought that the other great apes (orang-utans, gorillas, chimps and bonobos), by contrast, couldn’t learn to produce new sounds, their sounds being driven by arousal over which they had no control (like the sound you make when you laugh, for example). The paper from Lameira and his coworkers, published in the journal Nature in July, casts doubt on this, thanks to an orang-utan called Rocky who lives at the Indianapolis Zoo. In the paper, the biologists explain how they trained Rocky to play the ‘do as I do’ game, whereby they presented him with a series of ‘wookie’ vocalisations of varying frequencies and got him to mimic them. In other words, the researcher made some random sounds with her voice, varying in pitch and tone, and Rocky was then challenged to imitate the noise. The researchers recorded Rocky’s response and then compared the noises he made with a library of calls made from more than 12,000 hours of observation on 120 wild and 15 captive orang-utans, to see if any matched.

To everyone’s surprise, Rocky was able to copy the pitch and tone of the noises made by the researcher and none of the noises could be found in the database, suggesting both that orang-utans can mimic noises, and learn to make new noises and have some control over their vocal folds to allow them to change the frequency (how high or low) the noise they make is. Indeed, Lameira and his colleagues wrote:

Notably, the orang-utan subject skilfully produced “wookies” … [he] instantaneously matched human-produced wookies as they were randomly modulated in pitch, adjusting his voice frequency up or down when the human demonstrator did so…”

This may not sound like anything special; just a haired ape mimicking a hairless one. It is, however, very significant to those people trying to figure out how language evolved in humans, because it suggests that speech may have evolved in early hominids before, rather than after, the orang-utan lineage split and modern humans evolved.

Reference: Lameira, A.R. et al. (2016). Vocal fold control beyond the species-specific repertoire in an orang-utan. Sci. Rep. 6: 30315.

========================================================================================

As always, I love hearing from readers; any queries or comments regarding the information on the site can be sent in using the addresses on the Contact page. (Note: So: Some website questions are answered on the FAQ, while many animal-related questions are covered in the Q/A). Photos can be e-mailed to a dedicated e-mail address - please keep them coming and don't forget to check out my Photos Needed page. I'm also interested in hearing any reports of unusual behaviour in any of the animals featured on this site, or interactions between humans and wildlife. Thanks as always for your continued patience and support.

==========================================================================================================================

WildlifeonlineOkay, for those of you that are new to the site, let's take it from the top!

What is Wildlife Online?
Essentially, WLOL is an educational website about British wildlife. The site contains profiles of various British animal species, with new articles in preparation all the time. The site also has articles looking at wildlife-related subjects, including hunting and animal emotions. This site is purely a hobby of mine; it does not generate any money or contain any advertising and, for the time being at least, I am happy for it to stay that way.

What does Wildlife Online aim to achieve?
The ultimate goal of the website is to be useful. My intention has always been to provide un-biased, accurate information that’s accessible to anyone with an Internet connection. Increasingly people are coming into contact with their local wildlife and whether such interactions are positive or negative, they generally inspire a desire to learn more about the species. Moreover, there are still a great many misconceptions surrounding our wildlife (fox behaviour springs immediately to mind) and these are brought up time and time again during discussions in the media. Each article aims to provide a reasonably comprehensive overview of the species in question by drawing on information from the media, books, TV programmes and the scientific literature. I feel that this combination of sources, along with my own observations and those of my friends/colleagues/readers provides a unique online resource of British wildlife information. My hope is that the information provided here will go some way to changing people's perceptions of the creatures with which they share their parks and gardens.

Why create a website when there are books and TV programmes about your subjects?
Books can be a fantastic resource and I can't imagine being without my library. Not all libraries are, however, equally well stocked, and not everyone has the funds to splash out on what are often very expensive wildlife books (especially those written by scientists). More importantly, much of the scientific research never makes it out of the journals into books and TV shows. Similarly, many of the early books -- which contain some of the pioneering work on the species -- are now long out of print and can be difficult or expensive to track down. Books have the 'luxury' of being able to devote their entire contents to a particular species, covering all aspects of its life history. Television, by contrast, is a much more limited and variable medium: the programme editor(s) has to create a show that is likely to hold the viewers' attention and appeal to a very wide audience. The result is that, although some reach this compromise very well, many documentaries focus heavily on the 'wow factor' (multitudinous slow motion shots of Great whites leaping out of the water in pursuit of seals, for example) and this often comes at the inevitable expense of the information about the animal. Finally, both books and TV programmes go out of date quite quickly; new research is being conducted all the time. Consequently, a website is an ideal and dynamic intermediate - it offers the opportunity to provide a decent amount of information about the subject that can be updated at the metaphorical drop-of-a-hat as any new research is published.

Why include so much information?
I honestly believe that if a job is worth doing, it's worth doing well. There are hundreds of websites with brief species profiles and if that's all WLOL offered there would be little point to it. I understand and appreciate that some people find being confronted with large volumes of text very daunting while others are of the 'too long; didn't read' mind-set and will thus be turned off by the amount of text facing them. I have tried to remedy this as far as possible via two avenues: there is a Speed Read section with a brief profile of each species featured in a main article; and each article has been 'virtually split', with the aid of hyperlinks, into sections that allow people to easily jump to the information they're looking for. Ultimately, I want to provide as much information as is feasible in order to provide the reader with the clearest appraisal of each species or topic; I hope that most readers approve of this approach.

Why haven't you included a complete bibliography?
My intention with WLOL is to provide the information in an accessible format, which means that anyone should be able to read an article and understand the information in it. Consequently, I didn't want to format it as a scientific paper because the current format allows for a much more informal approach and writing style which, I hope, will appeal to a wider audience. Most people should find enough information in the article (I typically provide the name or one or more of the authors and the journal and year) to track down the original scientific paper. When I take information from books, I always give the name of the author(s) and the full title of the book for easy reference. I am also happy to provide full details of any of the references upon request.

Are you really qualified to do this?
I'm certainly not an expert on any of the subjects presented on this site. The articles stem from my varied interests in natural history and biological sciences. In terms of qualifications, I trained as a scientist (studying natural sciences at degree and postgraduate level) and all I really do is interpret information, blend it with associated research and personal observation, and present it in what I hope is an accessible format. Unless specifically stated, I do not claim any of the information on this site to be my own research. I have built relationships with some of the many diligent researchers who have produced the data that I use, and I am happy either to recommend an expert or provide my own opinions on a subject.

As a final note, I want to make a quick reference to the quality of the material on the site. The great French philosopher and mathematician, Rene Descartes, once said: "If you would be a real seeker of truth, you first must be willing to doubt as far as possible all things." This is very sage advice, especially when it comes to believing what you read on the Internet. Most Internet sites (indeed, some books and TV shows too), including this one, have no form of peer-review (i.e. nobody with experience of the topic checks the site for accuracy); consequently pretty much anyone can have their own little corner of cyberspace and information can make it onto websites that is either misguided, or downright false! When creating material for this site I take every care to ensure that the information I present is accurate. Invariably errors will creep in; typos are almost inevitable (although each article goes through several levels of proof reading before it appears online) and research is always underway on the species featured here, so the data can go out of date almost overnight. Each page has regular (ish!) reviews, however, during which I update the information, adding details of new findings and taking out that which is now thought highly unlikely. You can see most of the books I have used in the preparation of this site on the Recommended Reading page and I have provided links to some of the most interesting sites I came across during my research – these can be found under the appropriate sub-heading on the Links page.

Anyway, I digress.... I hope you enjoy looking around the site and I hope equally that you get something worthwhile out of it. Any comments, suggestions or (constructive) criticisms are welcome via e-mail - appropriate addresses can be found on the Contact page.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DISCLAIMER: All the photographs and artwork on this site are either my own work or have been donated by readers. All images remain property of their authors and, if you wish to reproduce any of the pictures, consent must be granted by the appropriate person - requests can be directed via myself or see FAQ. For more details on the content of this site, please see the full WLOL Disclaimer.

Return to TOP