1

Contents

Editorial Norman Lowe 1

Overview GMS 2016 3rd Quarter Evan Lynn 2

Getting started with moths Mary Laing 10

Scheme for Lending Moth Traps in the North East Mike Cook 11

GMS 2017 Conference Norman Lowe 13

Moth Wordsearch Nonconformist 13

Communications & links 14

GMS sponsors 15

Editorial – Norman Lowe

Another quarter, another newsletter, another tale of fewer and fewer moths. But it’s not all doom and gloom. We start as usual with Evan’s detailed analysis of goings-on in the quarter, packed as always with a wealth of interesting information. My heart goes out to the poor soul in the North West who had 514 Large Yellow Underwings in their trap this year, but even that is less than the 868 caught on one night be a recorder in North East England last year! From Scotland, Mary Laing tells us how she slowly realised that moths are actually quite nice, which is not surprising when she gets Kentish Glory in her garden. Then Mike Cook shares with us his experiences of obtaining and lending out moth traps in North East England. He tells us that about 50% of recipients do trap regularly, which fits with my own experience in Wales. We are now getting to the time of year when 2017 activities are staring to loom large, aided by the appearance of the New Year’s diaries in the shops. So make sure that when you get your new diary, put in the date of the GMS Annual Conference, It’ll be at Apperley Village Hall near Tewkesbury in Gloucestershire where the 2012 Conference was held and it’ll be on Sunday March 12th. Finally, the mysterious “Nonconformist” has contributed a Wordsearch for our amusement. I gave it a go and was able to find quite a lot of the vertical and horizontal words but I don’t think I’ve yet been able to find a single diagonal one. Must try harder!

GMS News

Late Summer 2016

Weeks 19-27

2

Overview GMS 2016 3rd Quarter – Evan Lynn Moth Numbers The all too familiar downward trend shown in the first two quarters continues. There were hopes that with the better weather catches would improve in the third quarter. Several people commented that while species were abundant, numbers were low. The histogram (Fig. 1) bears this out, the pattern for 2016 being similar in many respects to that shown for 2011 & 2012. 2013 has been mentioned in past quarterly reports as being the worst year since 2010 but its third quarter results are second only to 2010. As far as this third quarter is concerned it would appear that while moth numbers are reduced, contributing to the long term downward trend, in general the species are holding their own. Fig 1 GMS 2010 – 2016 Q3 Mean moth numbers & total number of species

Fig 2 GMS 2010 – 2016 Q3 Number of species caught The number of species caught per week during the quarter (Fig. 2) shows a drop after the first week with small variations for the rest of the quarter; it confirms comments that we have had consistent species numbers throughout.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Mothsper

garden

Moths per Garden Species Linear (Moths per Garden)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27Weeks

Species

3

Temperature The chart (Fig. 3) shows a weak correlation between minimum overnight temperatures and total moth catches which suggests that at times other factors, such as wind or moonlight, might be influencing numbers on the wing. Fig 3 GMS 2010 – 2016 Q3 Minimum temperatures and total moth catches

Bearing this in mind, here are the charts for the mean temperatures for July and August. Fig 4 Mean temperatures for July & August 2016 (with permission of the Meteorological Office)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

TempMoths

Weeks

4

Core Species Recently I was asked to explain why regional species were not used in the analysis of moth numbers. The answer is simply a matter of consistency when comparing regions. Most recorders assume that their form is the same for all the regions, which is not the case. The form sent to each region has 233 moths common to all regions (core species), but it also includes a number of commonly caught moths unique to the region. If all the species on the form were used then it would introduce a bias when attempting to assess the state of moth numbers throughout UK. Table 1 below shows the number of regional species for each form and how they vary too much for regional comparisons. Table 1 Number of regional species on each GMS form

Region CI EE EM IRL NE NW SC SE SW WA WM Y&H

Species 72 67 44 34 100 54 71 61 72 15 18 131

A chart of the mean number of moths caught in East England this quarter (fig. 5) demonstrates the dilemma. The blue columns show both regional and core species while the red ones show only core species. The large increase in week 22 was because one recorder counted over 1163 Water Veneers and these only occur in the Yorkshire & Humberside and East England Regions. Another factor is that not all participants wish to record regional species and so their forms do not include these extra species. Fig 5 GMS Q3 Comparison of Core and Regional Species in East England

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Weeks

Core & Regional

Core

5

League Tables The number of moths per garden in the third quarter in 2016 compared to that of 2015 is shown below (Table 2). There have been a number of steep declines such as shown by the Heart & Dart which had an exceptionally good presence in 2015. The increases shown include Lesser Yellow Underwing and Square-spot Rustic and there was just a small decline in Brimstone Moth which were certainly plentiful in our garden this year. Although it is tempting to draw conclusions it should be remembered that this is just a snapshot of the season and some of these moths may occur before and after our arbitrary 9 week period and that not everybody has sent in their records. As a continuation from the last quarter migration numbers of the Diamond-back Moth continue to be abundant this quarter. Table 2 GMS 2016 Q3 Top 20 moths

Position Species

2016 mean per trap

2015 mean per trap

% change

2016 2015

1 1 Large Yellow Underwing 134.5 152.3 -11.7

2 2 Common Rustic agg. 23 57.9 -60.3

3 3 Dark Arches 21.2 40 -47.0

4 12 Lesser Yellow Underwing 24.1 14.3 68.5

5 6 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 18.5 29.3 -36.9

6 11 Square-spot Rustic 16.8 14.4 16.7

7 10 Riband Wave 16.4 17.2 -4.7

8 16 Light Brown Apple Moth 15.1 10.5 43.8

9 5 Uncertain/Rustic agg. 14.2 32.4 -56.2

10 7 Garden Grass-veneer 12.6 27.3 -53.8

11 15 Setaceous Hebrew Character 8.7 12.5 -30.4

12 9 Common Footman 9.9 17.5 -43.4

13 14 Flame Shoulder 8.6 13.4 -35.8

14 18 Brimstone Moth 8.6 8.9 -3.4

15 8 Agriphila tristella 8.8 19.9 -55.8

16 13 Agriphila straminella 8.2 14.3 -42.7

17 4 Heart and Dart 7.8 32.9 -76.3

18 19 Willow Beauty 7.1 8.4 -15.5

19 20 Diamond-back Moth 5.1 0.5 920.0

20 17 Agriphila geniculea 6 9.1 -34.1

Overall mean 19.2 26.6 -27.8

Note: 2016 - 293 gardens 2015 – 351 gardens The mean per recorder of the top ten moths for each region is given below in Table 3, which shows some regions doing better than others. The figure in brackets is the number of recorders for that region. The Large Yellow Underwing features prominently for most regions except for the Channel Islands where its position is number 22.

6

Table 3 GMS 2016 Q3 Top ten moths in each region.

Scotland (13) Mean North East (17) Mean North West (40) Mean

Large Yellow Underwing 173 Large Yellow Underwing 253 Large Yellow Underwing 323

Dark Arches 31.6 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 21.2 Dark Arches 40.2

Lesser Yellow Underwing 29.8 Common Rustic agg. 20.8 Common Rustic agg. 29

Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 28.8 Dark Arches 19.2 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 25.9

True Lover's Knot 24.5 Lesser Yellow Underwing 14.5 Lesser Yellow Underwing 19

Common Rustic agg. 22.2 Heart and Dart 14.3 Riband Wave 14.9

Antler Moth 18.4 Diamond-back Moth 11.5 Light Brown Apple Moth 12.6

Dotted Clay 16.9 Riband Wave 11.2 Agriphila straminella 12.4

Triple-spotted Clay 16.5 Smoky Wainscot 10.8 Common Footman 9.8

Square-spot Rustic 14.8 Common Footman 8.2 Smoky Wainscot 9.8

Yorks & Humber (14) Mean Ireland (23) Mean East England (30) Mean

Large Yellow Underwing 294 Large Yellow Underwing 133 Setaceous Hebrew Character 43.6

Common Rustic agg. 55.5 Common Rustic agg. 49.4 Large Yellow Underwing 38.4

Square-spot Rustic 35.7 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 36.7 Uncertain/Rustic agg. 35.2

Dark Arches 32.7 Square-spot Rustic 34.9 Common Footman 28.6

Setaceous Hebrew Character 25.7 Dark Arches 29.2 Light Brown Apple Moth 28.1

Agriphila straminella 25.3 Lesser Yellow Underwing 24.7 Garden Grass-veneer 26.2

Riband Wave 24.9 Small Square-spot 19.5 Riband Wave 23.5

Common Footman 22.8 Agriphila tristella 16.1 Diamond-back Moth 23.4

Uncertain/Rustic agg. 20.6 Smoky Wainscot 12.8 Square-spot Rustic 22.8

Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 19.1 Riband Wave 12.4 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 20.5

East Midlands (27) Mean West Midlands (26) Mean Wales (43) Mean

Large Yellow Underwing 132 Large Yellow Underwing 104 Large Yellow Underwing 77.3

Light Brown Apple Moth 40.3 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 26.3 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 19.1

Riband Wave 32.7 Riband Wave 25.3 Riband Wave 17.2

Uncertain/Rustic agg. 25 Common Rustic agg. 24 Common Rustic agg. 14.8

Common Rustic agg. 24.5 Light Brown Apple Moth 23.6 Light Brown Apple Moth 14.5

Square-spot Rustic 24.3 Uncertain/Rustic agg. 20.8 Uncertain/Rustic agg. 14

Garden Grass-veneer 23.3 Agriphila straminella 20.6 Agriphila straminella 12.7

Dark Arches 22.6 Square-spot Rustic 20.1 Square-spot Rustic 11.9

Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 19.9 Garden Grass-veneer 18.5 Garden Grass-veneer 11.6

Marbled Beauty 15.1 Agriphila tristella 17.9 Agriphila tristella 11.4

South East (34) Mean South West (25) Mean Channel Islands (1) Mean

Uncertain/Rustic agg. 45 Large Yellow Underwing 72.7 Dingy Footman 45

Large Yellow Underwing 38.6 Common Rustic agg. 30.2 Spotted Magpie 39

Riband Wave 38.3 Uncertain/Rustic agg. 30 Rusty-dot Pearl 35

Dark Arches 37.8 Flame Shoulder 24.7 Buff Ermine 33

Square-spot Rustic 36 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 22.9 Diamond-back Moth 33

Light Brown Apple Moth 35.4 Common Footman 22.1 Shuttle-shaped Dart 33

Garden Grass-veneer 32.6 Brimstone Moth 19.9 Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 31

Common Rustic agg. 28.4 Garden Grass-veneer 19.1 Uncertain/Rustic agg. 30

Brimstone Moth 22.1 Square-spot Rustic 19 Small Magpie 29

Lesser B-b Yellow Underwing 19.9 Riband Wave 18.7 Rush Veneer 28

7

Large Yellow Underwing The Large Yellow Underwing is a prominent visitor to the moth traps during the summer months. Some recorders do not welcome its overbearing presence in some weeks but the large numbers could be seen as a good sign that our moth world is still alive and well. It is interesting to see that numbers vary between the GMS regions (Table 3), due possibly to variations in habitat and/or migration from the Continent. Possibly this is the reason for the large catches in 2010 and 2015 (Fig 6.) Fig 6 GMS Mean numbers of Large Yellow Underwings and the highest annual single catch 2010 – 2016 in the third quarter

The largest daily catch between 2010 and 2016 was 868 Large Yellow Underwings caught at Alnwick, NE England on 31/08/2015. The large numbers recorded weekly can vary from a few individuals to several hundred per trap. The largest numbers recorded by individual regional recorders on any one day this quarter appears below (Table 4). My congratulations and commiserations to them. Table 4 GMS Q3 Largest number of Large Yellow Underwings caught in one day by individual regional recorders

Region SC NE Y&H NW IRL EE EM WA WM SE SW CH

Number 387 369 298 514 105 60 276 122 192 89 138 5

Rank 2 3 4 1 9 11 5 8 6 10 7 12

Date Aug-11

Aug-12

Aug-24

Jul-08

Jul-18

Sep-02

Aug-24

Aug-26

Aug-25

Sep-27

Sep-27

Aug-25

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Max catchon any

one day

LYUper

garden

LYU

LYU max

8

The flight season of any moth does not always coincide with our neatly defined yearly quarters and to illustrate this Figure 7 shows the number during the second and third quarters. The second quarter section is enclosed within a box. An update to this graph will follow in next quarter's report. Fig 7 GMS Total numbers of Large Yellow Underwings caught during the 2nd & 3rd quarters 2016

Although large numbers of the Large Yellow Underwing have been recorded almost everywhere, Figure 8 below shows that the variations between regions and VCs shows an interesting pattern. In general the highest numbers caught by individuals seem to occur in northern England (including the Isle of Man), southern Scotland and Northern Ireland, with smaller numbers elsewhere.

Large Yellow Underwings in the trap

9

Fig 8 GMS Q3 2016 Distribution of Large Yellow Underwings

10

Moth catches & work effort Table 5 below is split into two sections The first rounds up the statistics for each region, where the first four columns give the general picture of each region while the fifth is split into minimum and maximum. These refer to individual recorders where for example in the South East one recorder counted only 65 moths while another recorder managed to capture 1667 in the same quarter. It should be emphasised, though, that each set of records is of equal value, whether small or large numbers were recorded. This is a monitoring scheme in which all records including nil returns, contribute to the overall picture. The second part refers to trap effort. Ideally every night should be recorded but work, holidays etc prevent this. Still when you look at the number of days missed compared to the number of recorders it shows a very good attendance rate. Table 5 GMS 2016 Q3 Regional Data

Region Gardens Moths Moth Catches

Moth Trap Nights

Total Mean Min Max

Possible Actual Percent

SC 13 7883 606 228 1589

117 113 97

NE 17 10576 622 40 2941

153 141 92

Y&H 14 14907 1065 214 2230

126 121 96

NW 40 30097 752 222 2000

360 339 94

IRL 23 15888 691 65 1667

207 190 92

EE 30 24892 830 168 2653

270 258 96

EM 27 19195 711 205 1557

243 236 97

WA 43 20403 474 82 1308

387 363 94

WM 26 16987 653 92 1941

234 221 94

SE 34 29752 875 76 2578

414 385 93

SW 25 17930 717 217 1538

225 214 95

CH 1 1734 1734 n/a n/a

9 9 100

Table 6 shows the preference for which night recorders have when setting traps. It shows the total number of nights the traps were set throughout the GMS region as shown in the “Actual” column of table 5 above. Friday is the official night but this is not always possible, and the scheme can cope with this. Again, recorders should not feel obliged to stick to Fridays as long as there is a good reason (NOT weather conditions, unless appalling weather makes it impracticable), for using a different day. Table 6 GMS 2016 Q3 Night preference for setting traps

Night Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon

Days 59 108 290 1635 253 144 101

Percent 2 4 11 63 10 6 4

11

Getting started with moths – Mary Laing How does one go from being a child who was afraid of moths to putting out a moth trap two or three times a week? I retired six years ago to the village I love - Dinnet in Aberdeenshire- and started taking snapshots of the wildlife in the garden, just to have a record of the birds and red squirrels that came to the feeders. The photographs were pretty dreadful to begin with and so I joined the local Camera Club and then had to upgrade my camera equipment. Wandering the moor beside my house I started taking pictures of butterflies and then noticed that some of the day-flying moths were attractive as well; I’d never thought of moths as being anything other than brown, fat and squishy! A friend from the Camera Club offered to put out his moth trap in my garden one night and I was not only astonished but keen to try it out for myself. Joining the Garden Moth Scheme and seeing the photographs that others post on the Facebook page has kept me keen to trap more regularly than I might otherwise have done. It’s nice that my area has the really special Kentish Glory and I had one in the trap last year and one this year to make up for all the special moths I’ll never see in Aberdeenshire!

Kentish Glory larva – Dinnet Moor

Kentish Glory moths – Dinnet garden

12

Scheme for Lending Moth Traps in the North East – Mike Cook This article is based on a talk I planned to give at the 2015 GMS Annual Conference. In the event, the programme ran late and only one Regional Coordinator had the chance to give a talk (how about telling us about it at the 2017 conference? – Ed). It’s all about how we created and extended a scheme to lend out moth traps in the North East. The aim of the talk would have been to try and encourage similar schemes in other regions. Firstly some background. After attending a Field Studies Council course on Moths and Butterflies, run by David Brown at Preston Montford in August 2009, Christina and I were inspired to build a moth trap. And by the end of October we were running a Skinner trap with a 40W Actinic electric set bought from Paul Batty. In 2010 we joined the GMS and a year later we built a new bigger moth trap, because we wondered if the small size of the previous one could be the cause of what seemed to be an excessive number of very worn moths. At the end of the 2011 GMS I was asked if I would be willing to take over from Tom Tams as North East England Coordinator. My first task was to allocate two moth traps that had been donated to the GMS by Anglian Lepidopterist Supplies (ALS). The terms were that on completion of a year’s trapping, and the submission of a valid data set to the GMS, ownership of the trap would be transferred to the recipient. I thought at the time that this was not an efficient way to try and encourage people to trap moths, but, being only months into the job, I did not want to rock the boat. To see if a year’s loan of a trap might be enough to hook people on moth trapping, we bought a second electric set and, in February 2013, lent our old trap to friends, Lynda and Joe. By the autumn of 2013, they had submitted a valid data set and bought their own moth trap. Encouraged, we applied for a small grant from the North East Environmental Records Centre (ERIC North East) to buy a second loan trap. We were not awarded the grant but were encouraged to re-apply the next year, when we were successful. We lent our loan trap to another friend, Clive, for 2014, but unfortunately the experience was not what he expected and he did not complete the GMS. In the winter of 2014/5, we bought a second loan trap with the ERIC grant. We publicised the availability of loan traps via three organisations, the Northumberland and Tyneside Bird Club, the North East branch of Butterfly Conservation and ERIC North East. We received four applications, two of which received the loan traps for 2015. Of these one has purchased a trap and is still trapping. A side benefit of the publicity is that two people contacted me who had traps that they never used. Encouraged by the ID help available, they joined the GMS and are still participating in it. In the autumn of 2015, we publicised the availability of loan traps in the same way as the previous year. As a result, Anne contacted us. She did not want to borrow a trap but wanted to know if anyone would be willing to sell her a second hand trap. We told her that second hand traps rarely come onto the market, but that we would ask anyway. To our amazement and delight, Barry, one of our GMS participants, offered to give her a trap on the condition that when she was finished with it, she either returned it to him or gave it to someone else with the same condition attached. Kath, who has participated in the GMS since 2013 decided trapping moths was too time consuming and was giving up. She offered her trap as a third loan trap, at least for 2016. We were contacted by Sue, a widow whose husband had trapped moths. She offered us a Heath Trap to lend someone (number 4). She also said that she thought there was another

13

trap somewhere that she’d look for. This meant that we were able to lend traps to four of the six people applicants for 2016. By the start of April, we also received the second trap from Sue (a Skinner). It was too late for anyone who borrowed the trap to produce a valid GMS data set (too many consecutive weeks missed) but we loaned it anyway, rather than let it sit in the garage all summer. From this small sample, it looks as though if a trap is loaned for a year, there’s about a 50% chance that the recipient will become hooked and will buy their own trap at the end of the loan period. If the five traps given to recipients in 2013 had been loaned in this way, there might be five extra GMS participants by now. I’m a GMS Regional Coordinator, but that does not mean that someone other than the Coordinator could not start a similar scheme in another region. It cost us £60 for an electric set to recommission our original trap, but with that trap now with its fourth recipient, we consider the money well spent. Why not investigate small grants available in your area? There are other sources than your Local Environmental Records Centre, for instance in the North East, Northumbrian Water make small grants available to the community. Finally, a note to other coordinators. I contacted 13 former participants who had been out of the GMS for 4 or more years. So far 4 have agreed to participate again in 2016. You’ve nothing to lose, why not email ex-participants and ask?

GMS 2017 Conference – Norman Lowe

The 2017 GMS Annual Conference will be returning to Apperley Village Hall near Tewkesbury in Gloucestershire where the 2012 Conference was held. So, a date for your diary, the 2017 Annual Conference will be held there on Sunday March 12th. We will shortly be starting to put together the programme, so if anyone would like to give a presentation, or could suggest someone else, please let me know. Last year’s programme seemed to be well received and there is always plenty of discussion and chat. So if you haven’t been to one before, give it a try, and if you have, come again! In order to pay for the room hire etc and to raise a small amount of funding, a small charge will be made.

Moth Wordsearch - Nonconformist There are fifty words of 3 or more letters hidden in this square which relate to the vernacular names for moths. No scientific names for a change. Simple ??? (No - I’m finding it harder than I expected! - Ed) The words can be horizontal, vertical or diagonal. See how many you can find and don’t forget, no cross words this time. Good searching!

14

Communications & Links. Garden Moth Scheme website: http://www.gardenmoths.org.uk/ For all your GMS contact information; download section for forms, instructions, newsletters and identification guides; links to UKMoths for individual GMS species. Garden Moth Scheme Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/GardenMothScheme Almost 1000 ‘Likes’; shares general information on the GMS and other moth-related topics. Garden Moth Scheme Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/438806469608527/ Currently over 1800 members (not all active GMS participants); the best place to post your messages and photos; files section containing forms, instructions, newsletters and identification guides. Garden Moth Scheme Yahoo Group https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Gardenmoths/info Members-only forum for discussion; files section containing forms, instructions, newsletters and identification guides.

15

GMS Sponsors

Atropos, the journal for butterfly, moth and dragonfly enthusiasts. www.atropos.info Provides resources for moth recorders, including the online Flight Arrivals news page. Mail order book service offers key titles for moth recorders at competitive prices: www.atroposbooks.co.uk The Boat House, Church Cove, Lizard, Cornwall, TR12 7PH 01326 290287 enquiries@atropos.info

For all your equipment requirements from moth traps and pots to nets – quality products at affordable prices. www.angleps.com Station Road, Hindolveston, Norfolk, NR20 5DE 01263 862068 sales@angleps.com

MapMate is a biological recording system designed for enthusiasts to record, map, analyse and share their natural history sightings. It was originally developed for moth recording and has now expanded to include most of the UK fauna and flora. It is being used by some 20,000 individuals and institutions in the UK including very large groups like the Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland. www.mapmate.co.uk