AMERICA has the bald eagle, France has the Gallic rooster and now Britain has the robin.
A nationwide ballot saw more than 200,000 people elect the robin as Britain's national bird, after it swooped away with 34 per cent of the vote.
It beat competition from the barn owl, which came second with 12 per cent, and the blackbird in third with 11 per cent, to claim the title.
People voted online, at ballot boxes in schools and even by postal vote following a campaign to name the country's national bird was launched by ornithologist David Lindo.
He began the project last year when he realised Britain did not have a national bird, unlike countries such as India, France and Japan.
Mr Lindo said he would speak to the Government once the public had voted to see if the winner can be awarded the title officially.
The red-breasted creature has long been a part of Britain's cultural tapestry, most notably with its image adorning Christmas decorations every year.
It was selected with nine others from a list of 60 birds in a preliminary vote and a ballot for the final 10 opened to the British public in March.
Other contenders included the wren, the kingfisher and the puffin.
A separate vote for children shored up the robin's victory, with it being declared the winner with 20 per cent of the vote in a ballot involving more than 11,000 young people.
Mr Lindo said: "The robin is Britain's most familiar bird so it's perhaps fitting that it has been chosen by the nation to be our national bird.
"The Vote National Bird campaign is in fact a victory for all our British birds. What has become the UK's biggest ever nature vote has reminded the British people how much they love the nature around us."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article