OUR garden has been graced by the presence of a spotted flycatcher. His presence was revealed one evening as he launched himself spectacularly from a wall in a highly acrobatic fly-catching flight.

Since then, I've noticed him performing similar sorties from the roof of a nearby garage and from the branches of a cherry tree. Then, as if to complete his day's activities, he took a dip in our bird-bath. He had a thoroughly enjoyable time, splashing water far and wide before flying off and disappearing behind some silver birches.

The spotted flycatcher arrives in this country during May and remains until the autumn, probably leaving in September. It is a small greyish-brown bird, not quite as large as a house sparrow, and it has a speckled white breast, those speckles being elongated rather like small streaks. It is somewhat unobtrusive, being difficult to see among the thick foliage, but its presence is revealed when it darts from its perch to catch a passing fly, and then returns to await another.

It nests in this country, often selecting a ready-made site such as a convenient hole in a wall or even a discarded piece of kitchenware such as a kettle, provided it is in a sheltered place and not readily seen by predators or even passing human traffic. On occasions, a spotted flycatcher will make use of a nest box with an open front, provided it is discreetly hidden among vegetation.

We have two nest boxes, both of which were installed early in the spring. One is being used by a family of blue tits but the other, with a larger oblong opening. has not yet attracted any tenants. It has been inspected by various species, robins and pied wagtails included, and indeed, I thought I saw this spotted flycatcher sitting on its roof.

That nest box was rather exposed on an east-facing wall, but in recent days a clematis has entwined it with foliage and flowers, and so the box is now almost hidden. I am wondering if our visiting flycatcher might now find it appealing!

On the subject of nesting birds, our pied wagtails, which spent a lot of time refurbishing last year's nest in our ivy, seem to have abandoned that project in favour of another site, oddly enough very close to the nest box just mentioned. This is not surprising because, as they were building or even as the female was preparing to lay, we had a big family gathering with lots of children galloping around the garden and playing on a bouncy castle, followed by three days of hammering and banging as new windows and patio doors were installed above and beside the patch of ivy in question.

I'm not surprised the wagtails opted for a more peaceful site but at least they have remained in the garden. We are now watching their new site with continuing interest.

Many educated

The dreadful effects of the foot-and-mouth outbreak have been infinitely more far-reaching and damaging than most of us could ever have envisaged but if there is a positive side, it has propelled information about the plight of farmers, country people, their livestock and their way of life, into a much wider arena.

In so doing, it has educated many into the reality of country life and hopefully, those who wish to enjoy the countryside will now have a wider and more sympathetic understanding of the British countryside and those who are its custodians.

There is little doubt that the disease has brought the best out of some who would normally visit the countryside - in respect for the farming community, and in the knowledge that the disease must be controlled and eradicated, they have kept away from high risk areas, especially those which are so dependant upon livestock. The moors near my home are just one example.

Having said that, I have received reports of some ramblers installing fake "footpath open" signs upon paths which had been closed as a preventative measure. A number of such signs were erected within the Yorkshire Dales national park area while in the North York moors area, some "footpath closed" signs have been removed, thus giving the false impression that public access had been reinstated.

Apart from the sheer vandalism of this behaviour, it does confuse the public, most of whom have been most co-operative throughout the progress of the current outbreak. I find it difficult to understand how adult people can behave in such an irresponsible way.

Hefted headlines

One small but important item of rural knowledge which has reached a wider public owing to foot-and-mouth disease is the term "hefted sheep". The plight of the country's hefted sheep became headline news and the result was that this odd word heft was suddenly thrust into a prominence it had never expected. The great British public was beginning to learn something of sheep farming!

In the North York moors and dales, we refer to moorland ewes as "heeaft yows" while others say hefted sheep. Hefted sheep are those which have lived upon one part of the landscape for generation after generation. New-born lambs inherit from their mothers an instinct which means they live on that land without the need for boundary fences or walls.

Each new generation of sheep knows that this patch is its home and thus they do not stray. But suppose the present generation of hefted sheep was wiped out? If a new generation was introduced to that landscape, how long would it take to ensure each new animal was hefted? And at what cost?

The origin of the word is obscure and in fact, it has also been used to indicate a human abode or home area. Some authorities believe it has German origins, possibly referring to an attachment to a particular place, while other subscribe to the idea it has a Scandinavian source, meaning a piece of home ground.

In his Dictionary of North Riding Dialect, Sir Alfred Pease reports a Newton Dale man saying of his new wife: "She's heft o' t'moors" while in 1835 the wife of Thomas Carlyle, the poet, wrote: "I am wonderfully well hefted here."

These reports make me wonder if only the female gender can be hefted!

Cuckoo land

A Thirsk correspondent has taken me to task for suggesting we could cope without the presence of the cuckoo. This unpleasant bird destroys untold thousands of other smaller birds by removing eggs from selected nests and substituting its own; the foster parent is then faced with the chore of feeding a greedy monster which is a giant by comparison.

We do not know how many smaller birds are lost through the behaviour of the cuckoo but the figure must reach many thousands. My correspondent points out that the female cuckoo appears to be incapable of rearing its own offspring and suggests that the practice of inflicting its offspring upon other innocent foster parents is the only means of continuing the species.

Some humans behave like that, but it doesn't make it acceptable!

She also compares its behaviour to birds of prey who kill others in order to live and refers to the Bible by suggesting that all creatures have the right to live without the human race trying to interfere with their lives.

I found the latter quite interesting and wondered if the cuckoo is mentioned in the Bible. I did find reference to a cuckoo in Lev 11.16 and also in Deut 14.15.

The passages discuss the eating of animals and birds by mankind and list a range of creatures which are described as abominations, and therefore not fit for human consumption.

Among the birds is the cuckoo, but experts are not sure of its true identification. Some authorities believe it was a bird of prey - and the cuckoo does look like a bird of prey - but not every biblical "abomination" bird is a bird of prey.

Many of those described as abominations are birds of prey, however, but the list also includes little owls, night hawks, cormorants, swans, storks, herons and even lapwings.

So is the cuckoo of biblical times the same as our cuckoo? If so, it was known as an abomination even in the time of the Old Testament.